Bewitched, bothered and bewildered: The meaning and experience of teamworking for employees in an automobile company

Recent managerial discourses share similar assumptions about organizations and the means to their greater efficiency. One of these is a faith in teamworking as a method of ensuring that human resources are effectively mobilized to achieve the unquestioned benefits of any specific technology or prescriptive programme. In this article we will explore what teamworking means for employees' lives within an automobile manufacturing company. We question the taken-for-granted assumption within managerialist accounts that teamworking will simply be welcomed by, and is beneficial for, employees. We also offer a ray of hope to those critics who warn of the normalizing effects of teamworking. We argue that, just as there is no single form of teamworking, there is also no single experience of teamworking. We broadly identify the reactions of three types of employees as a heuristic device. First, there are those who seem `bewitched' by the discourse of teamworking and who internalize its norms and values. Second, there are those who are `bothered' by the ideology in the sense that they are disturbed by its incessant intrusion into their lives and by the reactions of colleagues who seem enthralled by the team discourse. Finally, there are employees who are `bewildered' by teamworking mainly because of its attack upon established ways of doing things. There are, of course, overlaps and variations between and within these categories but we believe that they provide a useful way of presenting a complex set of research findings. Overall, we argue that employees are not nearly as convinced by the discourse of teamworking as its advocates presume or its critics fear

[1]  David Knights,et al.  Corporate Strategy, Organizations, and Subjectivity: A Critique , 1991 .

[2]  J. Parnaby Competitiveness via total quality of performance , 1987 .

[3]  Paul Stewart,et al.  The Nissan Enigma: Flexibility at Work in a Local Economy , 1992 .

[4]  David Knights,et al.  MANAGEMENT, MASCULINITY AND MANIPULATION: FROM PATERNALISM TO CORPORATE STRATEGY IN FINANCIAL SERVICES IN BRITAIN* , 1993 .

[5]  J. Barker Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Control in Self-Managing Teams , 1993 .

[6]  A. Sinclair The Tyranny of a Team Ideology , 1992 .

[7]  David L. Collinson Managing the Shopfloor , 1992 .

[8]  Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld,et al.  Japanese Team-Based Work Systems in North America: Explaining the Diversity , 1994 .

[9]  Peter Turnbull,et al.  The ‘Japanisation’ of production and industrial relations at Lucas Electrical , 1986 .

[10]  Hugh Willmott,et al.  Accounting for Teamwork: A Critical Study of Group-Based Systems of Organizational Control. , 1998 .

[11]  E. Shils,et al.  The Methodology Of The Social Sciences , 1949 .

[12]  G. Sewell,et al.  `Someone to Watch Over Me': Surveillance, Discipline and the Just-in-Time Labour Process , 1992 .

[13]  A. Friedman Industry and Labour: Class Struggle at Work and Monopoly Capitalism , 1980 .

[14]  R. Delbridge SURVIVING JIT: CONTROL AND RESISTANCE IN A JAPANESE TRANSPLANT , 1995 .

[15]  S. Parker,et al.  Dimensions of Performance Effectiveness In High‐Involvement Work Organisations , 1994 .

[16]  D. McCabe,et al.  “Something’s gotta give”: trade unions and the road to team working , 1997 .

[17]  David Knights,et al.  ‘How would you measure something like that?’: Quality in a Retail Bank , 1997 .

[18]  David Knights,et al.  Changing Spaces: The Disruptive Impact of a New Epistemological Location for the Study of Management , 1992 .

[19]  D. Wells,et al.  Choosing Sides: Unions and the Team Concept , 1988 .

[20]  David Knights,et al.  Job Redesign: Critical Perspectives on the Labour Process , 1985 .

[21]  Frank Mueller,et al.  TEAMS BETWEEN HIERARCHY AND COMMITMENT: CHANGE STRATEGIES AND THE ‘INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT’* , 1994 .

[22]  Alan Harrison,et al.  New wave manufacturing strategies , 1996 .

[23]  Barry Wilkinson,et al.  Pushing back the frontiers: management control and work intensification under JIT/TQM factory regimes , 1992 .

[24]  Jos Benders,et al.  Leaving Lean? Recent Changes in the Production Organization of some Japanese Car Plants , 1996 .

[25]  Peter Wickens,et al.  Lean Production and Beyond: the System, Its Critics and the Future , 1993 .

[26]  W. Diebold,et al.  The Second Industrial Divide , 1985 .

[27]  Daniel T. Jones,et al.  The machine that changed the world : based on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5-million dollar 5-year study on the future of the automobile , 1990 .

[28]  G. Sewell The discipline of teams: The control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance. , 1998 .

[29]  P. Ackers,et al.  The New Workplace and Trade Unionism , 1995 .

[30]  M. Foucault The Subject and Power , 1982, Critical Inquiry.

[31]  J. Klein A Reexamination of Autonomy in Light of New Manufacturing Practices , 1991 .

[32]  Barry Wilkinson,et al.  The Japanization of British industry , 1988 .

[33]  Andrew L. Friedman,et al.  Industry and Labour , 1977 .

[34]  R. H. Waterman,et al.  In Search of Excellence , 1983 .

[35]  C. Berggren Lean Production—The End of History? , 1993 .

[36]  D. McCabe The best laid schemes o'TQM: strategy, politics and power , 1996 .

[37]  Paul Thompson,et al.  Redesigning production through teamworking: Case studies from the Volvo Truck Corporation , 1996 .

[38]  P. Drucker The new society of organizations. , 1992, Harvard business review.