This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by O'Doherty, D. Articles by Willmott, H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Debating Labour Process Theory: The Issue of Subjectivity and the Relevance of Poststructuralism

Manchester School of Management UMIST

Hugh Willmott

Manchester School of Management UMIST

This paper locates labour process theory in broader sociological debates concerned with the action-structure dualism before examining three broad programmes for research that have emerged in response to the question of subjectivity and agency. Whereas the `orthodox' school tends to re-assert the structuralist and economistic features of Marx, the `anti-realist' or deconstructionist position invites the abandonment of analysis that has traditionally been orientated by the polarities of `structure' and `agency'. We identify and develop a third, `hybrid position', one that is informed by poststructuralist insights but does not neglect or reject established traditions of `modern' sociology and labour process research. Critical examinations of two recent studies of `subjectivity and the labour process' - Mike Sosteric's (1996) case study of a night club and Douglas Ezzy's (1997) paper on `good work' - are undertaken to show how poststructuralist insights may offer an instructive way of understanding how subjectivity is co-implicated in the accomplishment and reproduction of capitalist employment relations.

Key Words: capitalism • labour process • poststructuralism • praxis • resistance • subjectivity

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Tourish Themed book reviews: Communication, discourse and leadership Human Relations, November 1, 2007; 60(11): 1727 - 1740. [PDF]

				P. H. Sawchuk 'Use-Value' and the Re-thinking of Skills, Learning and the Labour Process Journal of Industrial Relations, November 1, 2006; 48(5): 593 - 617. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Delbridge Extended Review: The Vitality of Labour Process Analysis Organization Studies, August 1, 2006; 27(8): 1209 - 1219. [PDF]

				S. Fleetwood Ontology in Organization and Management Studies: A Critical Realist Perspective Organization, March 1, 2005; 12(2): 197 - 222. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Jones and A. Spicer The Sublime Object of Entrepreneurship Organization, March 1, 2005; 12(2): 223 - 246. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Ford and N. Harding We Went Looking for an Organization but Could Find Only the Metaphysics of its Presence Sociology, October 1, 2004; 38(4): 815 - 830. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Learmonth The Violence in Trusting Trust Chief Executives: Glimpsing Trust in the U.K. National Health Service Qualitative Inquiry, August 1, 2004; 10(4): 581 - 600. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. L. Friedman Strawmanning and Labour Process Analysis Sociology, July 1, 2004; 38(3): 573 - 591. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Conrad Organizational Discourse Analysis: Avoiding the Determinism- Voluntarism Trap Organization, May 1, 2004; 11(3): 427 - 439. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. EDWARDS and M. COLLINSON Empowerment and Managerial Labor Strategies: Pragmatism Regained Work and Occupations, August 1, 2002; 29(3): 272 - 299. [Abstract] [PDF]