In the contemporary scenario of global-recession it is important to study the life and struggle of workers of semi-organized and unorganized sectors of developing countries. In my personal opinion, one concept (i.e.-to consider class as one of the main basis of study organizational and societal process) and two approaches (i.e. - a bottom-up 'agentic' process of organizing and performing resistance; and application of subaltern studies framework to understand/organize the marginalized people) may be useful in this regard. These concept and approaches are not mutually exclusive; rather they may be applied in combined (partially or fully) form [as and when necessary].
Some of the social scientists have argued that, in this phase of New Economy and in the era of Information age, the traditional class based approach of understanding organizational processes is no longer relevant. On the contrary, scholars like Cloud (2001) emphasized on the importance of the role of power, structure and class in the present organizational context. She further stressed on the traditional approach/ understanding of class in order to establish ‘control over political and economic institutions’ by the workers. Therefore, instead of surface level make-up/ polishing approach we may adopt more fundamental approach (based on class) of structural transformation to ensure long-term change in favor of working communities.
Many organizational communication literatures advocate workplace civility, work culture (along with idea of democracy and CSR) within an organization; which essentially legitimize a top-down approach. But, scholars like Machiavelly and Clegg recognized and stressed on the transformative and resistive potential of the agencies. Both in case of day-to-day practice of micro-resistance (including collective bargaining) and for collective (material) revolution, the bottom-up organization process (engagement of agency) is useful. Thus a constant interaction with power and structure is essential for an agency to legitimize (and organize in favor of) the issues in order to achieve the demands.
Again, in contrast to managerial (organization level) or administrative (state or policy level) point of view, a subaltern studies approach gives us the opportunity to understand issues/problems from a perspective of marginalized population (or person). Legitimization (and reflexive representation) of subaltern voices (through academia, media or other means) is crucial because it creates alternate discursive spaces (socio-cultural, political and economical) (Kim and Dutta, 2009). Apart from the discursive opportunity within organization, the legitimization process is helpful for creating awareness, and thereby it opens up the possibility of alternate and broader organizing and solidarity.
Therefore, realization of importance of the roles of class and potentials of agency, and application of a bottom-up and/or subaltern studies approach may create alternate spaces and opportunities of revolution and resistance (in favor of workers) in the contemporary neoliberal world.
Some of the social scientists have argued that, in this phase of New Economy and in the era of Information age, the traditional class based approach of understanding organizational processes is no longer relevant. On the contrary, scholars like Cloud (2001) emphasized on the importance of the role of power, structure and class in the present organizational context. She further stressed on the traditional approach/ understanding of class in order to establish ‘control over political and economic institutions’ by the workers. Therefore, instead of surface level make-up/ polishing approach we may adopt more fundamental approach (based on class) of structural transformation to ensure long-term change in favor of working communities.
Many organizational communication literatures advocate workplace civility, work culture (along with idea of democracy and CSR) within an organization; which essentially legitimize a top-down approach. But, scholars like Machiavelly and Clegg recognized and stressed on the transformative and resistive potential of the agencies. Both in case of day-to-day practice of micro-resistance (including collective bargaining) and for collective (material) revolution, the bottom-up organization process (engagement of agency) is useful. Thus a constant interaction with power and structure is essential for an agency to legitimize (and organize in favor of) the issues in order to achieve the demands.
Again, in contrast to managerial (organization level) or administrative (state or policy level) point of view, a subaltern studies approach gives us the opportunity to understand issues/problems from a perspective of marginalized population (or person). Legitimization (and reflexive representation) of subaltern voices (through academia, media or other means) is crucial because it creates alternate discursive spaces (socio-cultural, political and economical) (Kim and Dutta, 2009). Apart from the discursive opportunity within organization, the legitimization process is helpful for creating awareness, and thereby it opens up the possibility of alternate and broader organizing and solidarity.
Therefore, realization of importance of the roles of class and potentials of agency, and application of a bottom-up and/or subaltern studies approach may create alternate spaces and opportunities of revolution and resistance (in favor of workers) in the contemporary neoliberal world.
Comments