Analysis of Herzbergs Two-factor Theory

Analysis of Herzbergs Two-factor Theory Guided by the question what employees in the information society of the twenty-first century perceive as relevant for their personal motivation in comparison to Herzberg’s two-factor theory this dissertation presents a qualitative study conducted with a group of German knowledge workers. The participants reject Herzberg’s two factor theory as an adequate motivational theory for their workplace motivation. According to the participants view a cultural bias can be found in Herzberg’s theory. Furthermore the underlying assumption of Herzberg’s theory that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction depend on different factors is doubted. Instead it is suggested by the participants the difference needs to be made between motivation and job satisfaction. The theory does not reflect the German cultural tendency towards a team-based approach and the importance of safety needs for motivation. The motivator factors proposed by Herzberg only partially meet the perception o f the group of participants. A mentally challenging work, visionary leadership and psychological safety are the key motivators in the researched organisation. Differences in the nature of the job and the cultural environment are suggested as reasons why earlier studies on Herzberg’s theory resulted in ambivalent findings concerning the validity of Herzberg’s theory. Implications of a possible misunderstanding of Herzberg concerning the relationship between job satisfaction, job dissatisfaction and motivation on the two-factor theory and other relevant motivational theories get discussed. Revaluating Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory A 45th Anniversary Honour where honour is due: in order to last for 45years without being disproved and maintain a place under the most influential of its kind an academic theory has to be a truly outstanding specimen. This is the case for Frederick Herzberg’s two-factor theory of workplace motivation, published in â€Å"The Motivation to Work† (Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman) in 1959. In its essence the theory relates motivation and job satisfaction with a set of work-related factors and job dissatisfaction with a set of factors in the organisational environment. Since its introduction in 1959 it can be said that the two-factor theory has had considerable influence on the body of science on workplace motivation. Despite existing criticism it can be stated that the two-factory theory fulfils all four criteria of a valuable academic theory (Whitsett and Winslow 1967), it has resolving and explanatory power, has generated a vast amount of further research (Herzberg 1993) and is a useful base for prediction on the topic of workplace motivation. In addition Herzberg (Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman 1959) introduced a new research method to generate his findings, the so-called â€Å"critical incident technique† that caused great sensation and dispute in academic circles at that point in time. In this way Herzberg’s theory has lost nothing of its attractiveness to and influence on academics and manager’s alike over the past decades. In contrary it can still be found on the â€Å"manager’s motivational toolbag† for â€Å"managing into the new millennium† (Buhler 2003:20) and in modern academic textbooks (Mullins 2002, Rollinson and Broadfield 2002). The same holds true for Herzberg’s original research design, which is still used by current researchers all around the world to conduct studies on workplace motivation (Ruthankoon and Ogunlana 2003, Tamosaitis and Schwenker’s 2002, Timmreck 2001). What makes Herzberg’s theory such an outstanding specimen amongst the various motivational theories are its underlying thoughts on organisational behaviour in general that draw largely on A.H. Maslow’s (1943) famous hierarchy of needs theory on human behaviour. His findings in the field of motivation led Herzberg to become one of the trailblazers of the job enrichment movement during the late 1960s and 1970s that is now highly connected to his name and contributed much to Herzberg’s later fame (Clark, Chandler and Barry 1994, Hackman 1975, Reif, Ferrazzi and Evans 1974). With his ideas on job enrichment Herzberg introduced a change that still can be found in our modern job design. Nevertheless paradigms have changed during the last 45 years. The new millennium has seen the coming of the information society and the knowledge era (Van Beveren 2002). Thus forcing change on the social and organisational environment (Mullins 2002). Writers such as Senge (1990) and Edmonson (1999) stress the importance of organisational learning and new team based approaches to keep pace with changes forced onto organisations by the growing degree of globalisation and the rapidly increasing body of knowledge. Table 0.1 highlights the changes in management during the last centuries. Table 0.1 Comparing the paradigms 19th century 20th century 21st century Theory of personhood Interchangeable muscle and energy A subordinate with a hierarchy of needs Autonomous and reflexive individual Information and Knowledge The province of management alone Management-dominated and shared on a limited basis Widely diffused The purpose of work Survival Accumulation of wealth and social status Part of strategic life plan Identification With the firm and/or with the working class Identify with a social group and/or the firm The disenfranchised self Conflict Disruptive and to be avoided Disruptive but tolerated and can be settled through collective bargaining A normal part of life Division of labour Managers decide, employees execute Managers decide, employees execute thoughtfully Employees and managers decide and execute Power Concentrated on the top Limited, functional sharing/ empowerment Diffused and shared Source: Mullins, Laurie J. (2002) The radical changes in the organisational environment also made it necessary to develop new methods of analysis. Under the impression of the growing complexity of influences on organisations business research balanced its traditional static methods of quantitative research with the more flexible and dynamic research tools of qualitative research (Bryman and Bell 2003). Thus providing new ways of conducting research and revaluating the results of already existing findings. This papers presents the results of a qualitative study conducted in a branch of a German software company in order to explore the perception of modern knowledge workers on their own workplace motivation and to compare these perceptions to Herzberg’s two-factor theory. Chapter one summarises Herzberg’s work on motivation and job enrichment as well as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory as an important predecessor to Herzberg’s work. Chapter two summarises the criticism on both Herzberg’s and Maslow’s work, provides a brief survey of Hofstede’s cultural framework and presents further literature relevant to the research. Chapter three introduces the company where the research was conducted and the participants. It also contains the methodology and method sections. Chapter four presents the findings of the research, while chapter five contains the discussion. Chapter six finally closes the paper with the conclusions, the limitations of the research and issues for further research. Chapter 1: Herzberg, Maslow and Human Needs This chapter highlights Herzberg’s two-factor theory of workplace motivation and his consecutive work on job enrichment as well as A.H. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory of motivation. The relations between the two theories are discussed. 1.1 Herzberg’s two-factor theory It was in fact Herzberg’s psychological background that lead to the insights, which became the basis of his first research published in 1959 his well-known book â€Å"The Motivation to Work† (Herzberg 1993, Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman 1959). During his time working at a public health school Herzberg came to the conclusion that â€Å"mental health is not the opposite of mental illness† (Herzberg 1993:xii). The idea that things usually believed to be each others opposite do not need to be diametrically opposed if they are determined by different factors became the foundation of Herzberg’s theory on workplace motivation. Herzberg argued that if job satisfaction was determined by different factors than dissatisfaction with the job, job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction were not precisely each others opposite and had to be treated as different aspects of work (Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman 1959). In order to prove this hypothesis Herzberg made use of t he â€Å"critical incident method†.. Herzberg conducted his initial research with a sample of 203 engineers and accountants asking them to describe one situation (critical incident) where they felt good in their job and another situation where they felt bad at work (Herzberg 1993, Rollinson, Broadfield and Edwards 1998). The analysis of the interviews was conducted by a team of researches that had been trained to understand and categorise similar statements by the participants in the same way, so that the experiences described could be grouped under a set of generic terms (Herzberg, Mausner, Boch Snyderman 1959). After this coding procedure the results became quantified, simply by counting how often each generic term had been named in connection to job satisfaction or in connection to job dissatisfaction (Herzberg, Mausner, Boch Snyderman 1959). By this means Herzberg and his team were able to extract two sets of factors from the interviews, one that was repeatedly mentioned in connection to job satisfaction or a good feeling about the job and one that was linked to job dissatisfaction or a bad feeling about the job. Job satisfaction, according to Herzberg, is mainly a result of the actual work conducted and a series of issues that contributed to the positive perception of the work, such as recognition, achievement, the possibility of growth, advancement and responsibility (Herzberg, Mausner, Boch Snyderman 1959, Tietjen and Myers 1998). Herzberg concluded that these factors not only cause job satisfaction, but to have a positive and lasting influence on motivation, if they are present. Therefore these factors became known as â€Å"motivators†. Dissatisfaction on the other hand was caused by factors in the job environment that did not directly contribute to the work itself (Herzberg, Mausner, Boch Snyderman 1959, Mullins 2002). The positive handling of these factors, according to Herzberg, could have only a short-term effect on motivation, while these factors caused severe dissatisfaction with the job, if they were handled badly. Herzberg referred to this factors as â€Å"hygiene†. Herzberg regarded his findings as prove for his initial hypothesis that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction were unrelated matters (Herzberg, Mausner, Boch Snyderman 1959). Hence he regarded the opposite of job satisfaction to be no satisfaction and the opposite of job dissatisfaction to be no satisfaction. Thus the presence of motivator factors would cause satisfaction and motivation and their absence only no satisfaction. The hygiene factors on the other hand would mainly lead to dissatisfaction and would in a positive case only cause a zero state of motivation or satisfaction (Mullins 2002). Motivator and Hygiene factors are contrasted in table 1.1. Table 1.1 Motivators and Hygiene Factors Motivators Hygiene Factors Achievement Company policy and administration Recognition Technical supervision Work itself Salary Responsibility Interpersonal relations – supervision Advancement Working conditions Possibility of growth Status Interpersonal relations – subordinate Interpersonal relations – peers Private Life Job security Source: Tietjen and Myers 1998 Herzberg (1968, 2003) further elaborated his perception of workplace motivation in his famous article â€Å"One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees† that has become the most reprinted article of the Harvard Business Review of all times (Herzberg 1993). By comparing the two terms motivation and movement, Herzberg rejects the classical carrot and stick approach of management. Herzberg rather follows the notion that financial incentives, a pleasant social environment or the offering of status symbols as well as punishment and disciplining by management may move or drive employees towards the fulfilment of a certain task, but will not make the task itself more interesting or motivating (Herzberg 1968). In his later work Herzberg compared hygiene to heroine, stating that more and more hygiene improvements are necessary to achieve less and less motivation (Dowling 1971). According to Herzberg (1968) only well-designed jobs, challenging tasks and the acknowledging awareness of m anagement and colleagues will fill employees with enthusiasm for their jobs and intrinsically motivate them to carry out their tasks. Management is requested not to push employees towards organisational goals, but to provide sensible and challenging tasks that allow their subordinates to grow while working towards the organisational goals. Goal fulfilment needs to be recognised by management in an appropriate manor. Despite Herzberg’s emphasise on the fact that motivation can only be achieved by the motivators, he stresses that a proper management of the hygiene factors is equally important in order to make work not only a motivating but pleasant experience (Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman 1959, Mullins 2002). 1.2 Herzberg’s Contribution to Job Enrichment Herzberg did not restrict his 1968 article to be a mere summary of his earlier work on motivation. Instead he additionally presented a list of what he called â€Å"principles of vertical job loading† (Table 1.2) that indicated how jobs needed to be modified in order to show off the motivators of his two-factor theory to their advantage (Herzberg 2003:93). Table 1.2 Principles of vertical job loading Principle Motivators involved A. Removing some controls while retaining accountability Responsibility and personal achievement B. Increasing the accountability of individuals for own work Responsibility and recognition C. Giving a person a complete natural unit of work (module, division, area, and so on) Responsibility, achievement, and recognition D. Granting additional authority to employees in their activity, job freedom Responsibility, achievement, and recognition E. Making periodic reports directly available to the workers themselves rather than to supervisors Internal recognition F. Introducing new and more difficult tasks not previously handled Growth and learning G. Assigning individuals specific or specialised tasks, enabling them to become experts Responsibility, growth, and advancement Source: Herzberg 2003 Herzberg’s approach to create more a more fulfilling job experience by giving jobs more motivating contents and hence more meaning became known as the job enrichment movement (Hackman 1975, Reif, Ferazzi and Evans 1974). The job enrichment idea was taken up by several other writers, who partially developed rivalling concepts to the one of Herzberg, such as sociotechnical systems, participative management and industrial democracy (Herzberg 1974). Although the theories on job enrichment overlap in certain aspects, it will be sufficient for the purpose of this paper on Herzberg’s motivational theory to focus on Herzberg’s own approach that became known as â€Å"orthodox job enrichment†, as this concept is most strongly linked to Herzberg’s motivator-hygiene theory (Herzberg 1974). In his paper â€Å"The wise old Turk† Herzberg (1974) presents are more complete approach to job enrichment compared to his principles on vertical job loading mentione d above. Job enrichment, he argues, is based on the relationships between ability, opportunity and performance reinforcement. The more ability an employee possesses to do his or her work, Herzberg points out, the easier this employee can be motivated to do a good job. This principle is of significance for the organisation’s policies on recruitment and selection as well training and development, as a person who is lacking the necessary competence is far more difficult to motivate. Ability on the other hand is of no use, if the job does not offer the opportunity to make full use of one’s own abilities, or as Herzberg (1974:71) puts it â€Å"managers cannot motivate a person to do a good job, unless there is a good job to do†. Finally the employee’s readiness to grow with his work needs to be reinforced. Appraisal systems do not only need to appreciate the employee’s growth, they need to reward growth with the potential for further growth and advancem ent, as â€Å"there is no sense in providing training without opportunity, no sense in offering opportunity without training, and no sense in offering both training and opportunity if the reinforcement is solely by hygiene procedures† (Herzberg 1974:71). Herzberg (1974) continues by presenting eight features a â€Å"good† job should include, direct feedback, a client relationship, a learning function, the opportunity for each person to schedule his own work, unique expertise, control over resources, direct communications and personal accountability. Direct feedback can consist of the immediate response of the supervisor to the results of the subordinate or even better the opportunity for the subordinate to independently verify his or her efforts him or herself. The relationship to a specific client gives the employee the opportunity to better understand the needs and problems of his or her customer and participate in their solution. Herzberg (1974) recommends to organise internal supplier-client relationships for back office employees in order to increase their interest in the overall work processes. New learning refers to possibilities for the employee to grow psychologically in order to keep his or her job meaning or purpose ful. It further allows the employee to constantly update his or her knowledge in order to maintain the necessary competence in a fast changing economical environment. Scheduling is supposed to grant the employee the freedom of how to structure his or her tasks. While the deadlines are still set by management the employee becomes free to set his or her own pace to keep them. Unique expertise aims at giving each employee a more or less individual field of competence in order to increase his or her identification with the task. Control over resources is meant to allocate the means for a project to the lowest possible level of hierarchy in order to increase the responsibility of the lower ranks. Direct communications authority allows employees to address their colleagues in other parts of the organisation in formal matters directly without having to involve the hierarchy. Thus saving time and improving the social relations within the organisation. Personal accountability finally frees t he employee from doing single in itself meaningless tasks and provides responsibility for a coherent set of tasks with which the employee can identify. Although these factors are closer to reality than the principles of vertical job loading in table 1.2 it is still fairly obvious how their implementation can contribute to including the motivators of Herzberg’s two-factor theory mentioned in table 1.1 into the employees’ daily work. In 1979 Herzberg published an even more refined view on job enrichment, based on a model that highlighted the central importance of the client relationship for orthodox job enrichment. The relationship to a client, according to Herzberg, would improve an employees opportunity to constantly update his knowledge of the customer’s needs and requirements thus enabling to stay in touch with the latest developments, increasing his knowledge and contributing to the employee’s unique expertise. Herzberg’s model of job enrichment is depicted in figure 1.1. Figure 1.1 Herzberg’s Model of Job Enrichment Control Over Resources Direct Feedback New learning Client Relationship Unique Expertise Self- Scheduling Direct Communications Authority Personal Accountability Source: Herzberg 1979 1.3 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory Published in 1943 A.H. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory is in fact not only a predecessor of Herzberg’s two-factor theory, but its basis as it will be pointed out later (Mullins 2002, Rollinson and Broadfield 2002). Maslow (1943) suggests that motivation is a result of five different sets of human needs and desires, namely physiological, safety, love, esteem and self-actualisation needs (Mullins 2002, Rollinson and Broadfield 2002, Clark, Chandler and Barry 1998). Physiological needs refer to the most essential issues of human survival such as food and drink, air to breath, sleep, reproduction and so on. Safety needs include physical safety, but also the human desire for predictability and orderliness. Love needs consist of all sorts of social affiliation and their advantages. Esteem needs include self-esteem and the confidence in one’s own abilities as well as the recognition and admiration by others. Self-actualisation needs finally refer to the ultimate expe rience of self-fulfilment and the idea of becoming the person one always wanted to be. Although Maslow (1943) only wrote about a hierarchy, his levels of needs usually are pictured as a pyramid (Figure 1.2). Figure 1.2 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Self- Actualisation Esteem Lovee Safety Physiological Source: Mullins 2002 People, according to Maslow (1943), process through these levels of needs in a hierarchical order, as one level of needs gets satisfied it loses its motivating effect making the individual long for the satisfaction of the next set of needs. Without at least a certain degree of satisfaction in one level of needs, however, people will not be interested in the satisfaction of the higher levels and hence no motivation will be triggered by those higher needs. Maslow (1943) gives the example of the starving person that cannot be motivated by any other means than food. If this person had enough to eat, food will cease to be a motivator and given the fact that physiological needs in general are perceived satisfying the person’s motivation will turn to the realisation of the next higher set of needs. Maslow (1943) himself pointed out the hierarchical order in which he arranged the needs was not a strict one. Instead several issues can have an influence on this order. First of all a set of needs does not need to be entirely satisfied in order to allow the individual to proceed to the next level, already a certain degree of satisfaction can be enough for the individual to aim for another set of needs. In this case, however, the unsatisfied parts of the earlier level will remain motivators. Additionally the structure of the hierarchy may vary according to personalities. Some people may have a stronger interest in esteem than in love and therefore want to satisfy the esteem needs earlier. Psychotic persons may have no interest in specific satisfaction of certain levels of needs such as love at all, while highly idealistic persons may sacrifice everything in pursuit of just one single need. Another group of persons may be satisfied with settling in one level of the hierarchy without b eing interested in satisfying any higher levels. Furthermore it has to be kept in mind that definitely most actions taken by individuals serve more than just one set of needs. A dinner with friends in a luxurious restaurant for example will not only satisfy physiological needs but may also satisfy aspects of love and esteem. Although Maslow’s theory initially was not meant to be applied to the work context it soon became influential in the analysis of workplace motivation as well (Mullins 2002, Rollinson and Broadfield 2002). Steers and Porter for example elaborated real-life incentives within the work environment that could be used to serve all of the employees’ needs as shown in table 1.3. Alderfer further extended Maslow’s thoughts in his ERG theory (Mullins 2002, Rollinson and Broadfield 2002). Table 1.3 Application of Maslow’s Theory to the Work Context Needs levels General rewards Organisational factors 1. Physiological Food, water, sex, sleep a Pay b Pleasant working conditions c Cafeteria 2. Safety Safety, security, stability, protection a Safe working conditions b Company benefits c Job security 3. Social Love, affection, belongingness a Cohesive work group b Friendly supervision c Pro

Discuss Marxist’ Theory of Alienation

OUTLINE AND ASSESS MARX’S CONCEPT OF ALIENATION When considering the concept of sociology and its definition, one immediately thinks of trying to understand the world in which we live. However, for Karl Marx we should not only understand the world, but also seek to actively change it (Macintosh, 1997). The concept of alienation differs in terms of its sociological meaning in relation to that of the psychological definition and has been used to describe many other phenomena’s over the last four centuries.The aim of this essay is to assess the concept of alienation according to Karl Marx and explore his theory relating to four differing perspectives assigned to this, whilst also researching its historical roots and any relevance in today’s society. The concept of alienation in relation to sociology was developed by Karl Marx (1818-1883), a German philosopher, political economist, revolutionary and the founding father of Communism. His ideas for this theory originat ed in the writings of Feuerbach, who along with George W.F Hegel, were major influences on Marx. However, unlike Feuerbach, who believed that religion had a negative impact on human experience and that man was alienated from god, Marx considered man to be alienated from man in a social context. Indeed, Marx criticised Feuerbach’s work entitled ‘The Essence of Christianity’, which was published in 1841 for not developing the concept of alienation further by linking it to economic production strategies.In it, Feuerbach insists that visions of god being similar to their own image allow for them to alienate themselves from this fictionally created character. Therefore, issues regarding low self esteem and other social or personal problems can be diluted by visiting places of worship. He insists that guidance, leadership and solace can be found within the church. Indeed, Feuerbach argued that the church was used by the government as state apparatus to control society (Hughes et al, 1995 pp. 29-30).Marx took these points onboard and rather than relate them to religion, embraced it to include the notion that alienation was an objective condition associated with the social and economic attributes of capitalism, thus leading to alienated labour. For Hegel, human thoughts were continuously developing and advancing throughout history, thus providing a more knowledge and rational understanding of society (Hughes et al, 1995, pp. 25-26). Unlike, Marx, who states materialism and economic power, shapes our thinking, Hegel insists it is the other way round and that mind shapes matter.In other words, our knowledge shapes the need and inventiveness needed to shape future materials. Historically, according to Hegel, by exploring previous economic processes, then the material base on which societies, institutions and ideas are built are in evidence due to rational logic and natural progression. Marx however, disagrees with this theory. He believes that such ab stract ideas did not exist and therefore provided limited explanations relating to the social world. The true nature of human experience therefore and life were totally under emphasised.His theory of historical materialism was constructed further in future writings. ‘The first historical act is . . . the production of material life itself. This is indeed a historical act, a fundamental condition of all of history’ (Marx & Engels, 1976). His many writings, which spanned four decades, underpin what has become known as Marxist theory and are used to develop our understanding of many areas relating to social life (Abercrombie et al, 2000). However, Marxist theory is primarily based around the class conflict of the bourgeoisie, i. . ruling class who own the mode of production and the exploitation of the proletariat, i. e. working class who are forced into selling their labour. The 3 stages relating to the industrial revolution have led to his alienation theory being supporte d by many sociologists. First came the agricultural revolution (1700-1800), followed by the industrial revolution (1800-1950). The final stage of these phenomena was the service revolution from the 1950s to the present day. Economic and surplus values are at the heart of Marxist theory.For Marx, alienation is an objective condition associated with the social and economic attributes of capitalism and results in alienated labour. The main use of Marx’s theory relating to this concept is in relation to the form of labour in any given capitalist society. However, he also talks of ‘alienation’ in the sphere of social and economic relations (Turner, 1999) Marx argues that humans are denied their basic natural essence, and as such was only realised in their labour. This allowed for a creative activity which was carried out in unison with others.Marx was of the opinion that people transformed a world outside themselves. Now the processes relating to production were one o f ‘objectification’. By this he means that man now produces material objects that embody human creativity, yet leaves them feeling detached and separated from the creator. Once the product is objectified, man no longer recognises himself in the product and autonomous manufacturing techniques leave him feeling alienated. Within capitalist societies Marx identified four levels of separation resulting in the concept of alienation. 1) Within a capitalist society the worker has no control over the fate of their production, therefore alienating them from the results of their labour. Although having been involved actively in the production of such commodities the worker is left feeling subdued, unattached and emotionally removed from the end product. This is now controlled by others, and as increased production multiplies, so does the division and separation of the labour process. (2) The worker is alienated from the act of production. For Marx, no individual satisfaction is a chieved as the worker’s own creativity is alienated from production.Furthermore, external constraints forced upon the worker removes any attachment from the’ fruits of their labour’ and in doing so, the product ceases to be an end in itself with work becoming merely a commodity. To the worker, the saleability of the product is their only concern. (3) The worker is alienated from their ‘specific being’ or human nature. Marx states that the individual’s human qualities are deprived. This is due to the first two levels of alienation, as outlined above, reducing the workers creative production activities and thus removing themselves from their natural self being and converting them into social animals. 4) The worker is separated from other humans. The emergence of capitalism has transformed human social relations into market relations. According to Marx, people are now judged, not be their human qualities and attributes but rather by their positi on within the market (Giddens, 1970). For example the separation of labour is also the separation of man from man in relation to class conflict and competition and also lends theory to their alienation of the products of their labour.Capital itself can also be seen as a source of alienation because its accumulation generates its own needs which reduce people to the level of commodities (Haralambos, 1998). The above four levels of separation and alienation of man is intrinsically linked and can be used to identify phenomena in regards to any society. Many pro-capitalist economists agree with Marx’s theory that all humans are treated as commodities that can be rented and that everything can be traded for monies. For Marx, this ensures that the gap between rich and poor widens, with both lasses pushing in opposite direction. However, he attacks other economists’ interpretations of the causes of capitalism and believes that they do not distinguish between both capitalists and the workers. Marx argues that competition is seen as an enforcement mechanism of the capitalist’s mode of production (Reiss, 1997). According to Marx, as all aspects of feudalism are connected, then so too are all aspects relating to capitalism. He is quoted as saying, ’’the worker becomes the poorer the more wealth he produces’’ (Marx, 1976).In other words, as the worker increases production, this only enriches their bosses whilst they still remain poor. Capitalist economists however, view each aspect of feudalism as an accidental corruption in relation to capitalism. Marx also explores the historical development of alienation and its intrinsic link to the division of labour. As society changes and tribes and villages continue to expand, so too does the division of labour (Rius, 1996). For society to survive trade and exchange must occur.This leads to more growth in exchangeable goods which in turn leads to an upsurge in use-value and exchange -value commodities. When considering use-value, this relates to how in demand a commodity may be of use to the individual. However, exchange-value relates to what commodities can be traded for other objects. For Marx, commodity fetishism has attributed to the alienation of man from the fruits of their labour (cowling, 1989). There are many examples of alienation in today’s society. The term Fordism originates from Henry Ford and the techniques he initiated to instil mass production.Indeed, his ideas and practices are still dominant in today’s society and are at the forefront of all technological mass production facilities and businesses. To enable production on such a large scale, Ford redesigned the whole manufacturing capabilities of his workforce. Unlike industrialists of the nineteenth century where skilled labour and handmade crafts were a necessity in the making of goods, Ford recognised an ability to mass produce by giving individuals a particular task in relati on to their labour duties.This would be made possible by re-designing all machines to carry out one specific purpose, rather than numerous functions (Watson, 2003). As such, there was now no need for skilled persons in which to operate machines. Individuals were now taught how to use particular machines which they would now carry out monotonously for the rest of their employment. This de-skilling technique ensured minimum waste and maximum output as the machine only had one way in which to operate. Ford realised that once you standardise the design of the car, you can standardise the whole production system.Thus, with the standardisation of machinery producing standardised parts, it now allowed for mass reproduction as all parts are identical therefore interchangeable. Although production of Fords automobiles had increased rapidly, the initiation of Frederick Winslow Taylor’s (1856-1915) scientific management system would ensure mass production on an even larger scale. Taylor was the man who introduced ‘time and motion’ studies to the workplace. He carried out an experiment on a pig iron gang at work. By observing their working habits, Taylor was able to redesign their work pattern.Like Ford, his task was to break a job down into standardised parts. He initially listed a set of rules to which the workers must comply to and then instructed them when to start, walk, lift and stop. Once the experiment was complete Taylor found that their productive output had increased by 400%. Taylor’s results would now allow for managers to command instructions to staff who would carry out tasks they specifically assigned to. This would undoubtedly lead to a separation of labour and also man’s alienation from man, as people who had previously worked side by side where now given specific tasks (Hughes et al, 1995).Ford would eventually instil Taylor’s scientific management technique into his workplace to generate even more productivity. T o do this Ford introduced the assembly line. Before this point, many of his employees worked unsupervised and at their own pace. However, with the emergence of assembly lines, workers now had to work in unison with the speed of the production line, and not that of the individual. This technique has greatly enhanced fords production levels and as such, Fords’ automobile plant in River Rouge USA, is now the largest in the world.By the 1990s over 10,000 people were employed there and over 90,000 cars and trucks were being produced each year (Watson, 2003). . Other examples which support Marx’s theory on alienation include multi-national companies such as McDonalds and Burger King, who epitomise our need for fast food productivity and back up his argument of commodity fetishism. Regardless of which outlet of McDonalds visited, the consumer will receive identical foodstuff and levels of service due to the standardisation of the product (Huczynski, 1991). Also, such companie s are immediately recognisable due their uniforms and company logo.Mass reproduction is applied to give the consumer a standardised food source which consists of various items such as burger, bun, relish and tomato. A time scale is also in place and many of the products on offer are controlled by a timer which goes off when certain items such as French fries and burgers are deemed ready. The main objective is to get the product to the consumer as quickly as possible with the minimum fuss. This is made possible by the way each McDonalds’ outlet is designed. By using both Fordism and Taylorist techniques workers can produce vast amounts of food that can then be passed onto the consumer within seconds.Marx’s concept of alienation is evident here as there is no need for skilled workers such as cooks and chefs to be employed due to the nature and resulting end product of such businesses (Huczynski, 1991). A critique of Marxist theory would be to suggest that if alienation i s produced and enacted by humans, then surely they also have the ability to change and reverse it. It is also contradictory as individuals opinions of alienation differ in relation to each person’s objective situation and consciousness.Although it cannot be denied that workers within capitalist societies do contribute to the common wealth as stated by Marx, the emergence of flexi-time, paid holidays and overtime empowers the worker and enables them to generate extra sums of money for themselves (Watson, 2003). Also, working for someone else may perhaps lessen the burden experienced by others, such as those who own small businesses. It is easy to engage Marx’s suggestion that workers lack rights, and there is much evidence to support this with the emergence of sweatshops and low paid immigrant workers (Rattansi, 1982).However, trade unions play a significant part in readdressing these issues by way of fair representation. Many jobs available to the masses today, do in f act, alienate workers and help establish capitalist theories, but humans have the freedom to change jobs or start their own businesses and trade unions are also in place to protect and represent employees (Giddens, 1971) His ideologies can also be construed as outdated as most of his concepts and terminologies are from over 100 years ago.Man may have been separated by man in relation to labour over centuries, but although this may be true in some aspects, technology and working conditions have rapidly improved over the same period. We also have the ability to influence each other rather than work in isolation. It appears that his concepts of alienation, although significant in his earlier political works and in lending credibility to research at that particular time, are rarely given a second thought in his later writings.For this reason it could be argued that Marx no longer held the opinion that the alienation of man and the collapse of capitalism was a foregone conclusion. BIBLIO GRAPHY Abercrombie, N. Hill, S and Turner, B. (2000) Dictionary of Sociology Penguin Book Cowling, M & Wilde, L. (1989) Approaches to Marx, Open University Press Giddens, A. (1971) Capitalism and Modern Social Theory, C. U. P. Giddens, A. (1970) Marx, Weber and the development of capitalism Haralambos, M. (1986) Sociology – a new approach, Causeway Press LtdHuczynski, A. Buchanan, D. (1991) Organizational Behaviour, Prentice Hall Hughes, J. A. , Martin, P. J. , & Sharrock, W. W. (1995) Understanding Classical Sociology, London: Sage Macintosh, I. (1997) Classical Sociological Theory. Edinburgh University Press Marx, K. , & Engels, F. (1976 [1845-46]) the German Ideology, Part 1 London: Lawrence & Wishart. Rius, E. (1996) Introducing Marx, Icon Books Turner B, (1999). Classical sociology. 1st ed. Uk: Sage. Watson, Tony J. (2003) Sociology, Work and Industry Routledge

American Independent Cinema: Representational Analysis of Women

â€Å"The Hollywood film industry itself has been (and continues to be to a large extent) male-dominated. Hence, male directors, producers, writers, and cinematographers all use the camera as an instrument to look at women. † (Benshoff, pg. 235) Gender also plays a large responsibility in the film industry when pertaining to what females can and can not do in films. Male characters are usually main characters and â€Å"in charge† within films, whereas the female characters are usually limited to just looking pretty while still remaining passive and somewhat outside of all the action within the story. Women today feel a large amount of pressure to look and behave like these female actresses portrayed on the big screen. With the preparation of these films women usually take a very long time in hair and make-up for the sole purpose of looking attractive and gaining more male attention in the films. Many females fail to realize how much time and preparation really goes into the looks and costume designs of the characters that are being portrayed within the film industry. In today’s society female’s feel as though they have to be beautiful and live up to a certain stereotype and â€Å"look† that is extremely unrealistic. Related essay: Pestle Analysis for Odeon Cinema Real Women Have Curves (2002)† was a film directed by Patricia Cardoso that challenges the representation of all women in society. Although the film is about a first generation Mexican-American female struggling with her family’s beliefs, her future, culture, and body, it reaches all female viewers with the same powerful message. The message is that all females can be empowered and should be proud of who they are and where they come from. Most importantly females should be proud of their bodies and not try to live up to the unlikely images that our American culture has welded for us today. Another film and director that challenged the male dominated movie industry was Susan Seidelman with her 1985 low-budget ($5million) film â€Å"Desperately Seeking Susan. † â€Å"†¦Seidelman doesn’t glamorize women at the expense of men. In fact, her strongest affinity is with desperate, aggressive women who never stop hustling. † (Levy, pg. 356) Her film â€Å"Desperately Seeking Susan† looks at contemporary issues of fame, self fulfillment, and social relationships, as well as personal identity. The film is about a petite New Jersey housewife named Roberta, who is bored, unsatisfied, and tired of her marriage routine life at home. She then begins to read the personals section of the New York newspaper for vicarious thrills and entertainment. Her favorite classified to read is one that features the romance of Jim who is a struggling musician and Susan who is a free-spirited single woman living her life in Soho New York. Susan had just recently escaped her ex boyfriend who was a mobster and stole a pair of very expensive Egyptian earrings. One bored day when Roberta reads the classified section she sees the ad â€Å"Desperately Seeking Susan† and decides to follow Susan and Jim. The reasoning as to why Roberta decided to take this extreme measure is because this was a way for her to escape her daily average life and become someone else for a day. The film then takes an unexpected turn and becomes all about reinvention as the housewife Roberta unknowingly with amnesia transforms herself into the wild and care-free character of Susan. There were a number of different codes within the film â€Å"Desperately Seeking Susan (1985)† that made it easier to understand its viewpoint. Some of the cultural codes recognized within the film include cultural, narrative, artistic, cinematic, and intertexual. The film took place during the 1980’s in a small suburban town in New Jersey as well as New York City. The characters of Roberta and Gary Glass are individuals being represented as members of an upper middle class society living in New Jersey. We know that they are upper middle class because of the context clues and dialogue that we see within the movie. We hear Mr. Glass tell his wife â€Å"what are we poor? † when he tells her that she bought a used jacket that used to belong to Jimi Hendrix. Roberta is a bored, full-time housewife and he is a hardworking husband. As the film continues we meet the other main character who is a fun loving, care-free, gold digging, woman named Susan from New York. The film is told through the eyes of the main character, which is a repressed and bored housewife named Roberta. The story is also partially told through the eyes of Susan the carefree and stylish woman from New York. The story is also told through the eyes of Roberta’s worried husband Gary and her love interest Dez. The film â€Å"Desperately Seeking Susan† was very creative and original. Some of the artistic codes within the film include the music in which is exceedingly upbeat and perfect for the time period of the 80’s. The clothing design within the film is extremely important and relevant to the development of Robert’s character. â€Å"Susan’s individualized pyramid jacket signifies her unconventional personal style and her fluency in innovating her own look. The jacket binds the two women together. Susan’s trading of looks shows her competence in putting together an always evolving and eccentric look, while Roberta’s purchase of the (second hand) jacket is part of her adventure and escape. † (Street, pg. 1) The costumes in the film stated the socio-economic status of the main characters and the time period. At the beginning of the film we acknowledge Roberta well dressed with a suburban flare and we also noticed Susan dressed as a stylish, upbeat, rocker. (Complete Opposites! ) The genre of the film â€Å"Desperately Seeking Susan† was comedy, drama, and romance because of its portrayal. The film portrays comedic humor with the mistaken identity of two polar opposites Roberta and Susan. Their journey is a comedic mystery and we never know what will happen next as Roberta searches for adventure and Susan hunts for the stolen Egyptian earring. The film also depicts drama with all of the confusion and an intense romance between Roberta and Jim. In conclusion, the film industry is particularly male dominated. However, there are more female directors, producers, etc. like Susan Seidelman and Patricia Cardoso who are making a remarkable change. These females are making films with predominately female casts, and with messages of strength, personal identity, social relationships and self- fulfillment. They’re challenging the film business and changing perceptions of women everywhere.

Facts About Sea Cucumbers