Shepard 1973

Pacific Sociological Association
Technology, Division of Labor, and Alienation

Author(s): Jon M. Shepard
Source: The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Jan., 1973), pp. 61-88
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1388654 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 19:47
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Sage Publications, Inc. and Pacific Sociological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to The Pacific Sociological Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TECHNOLOGY,DIVISIONOF
LABOR,AND ALIENATION
JONM. SHEPARD
of Kentucky
University
In recentyears social scientists

have shownincreasing
interestin alienation as an empiricallymeasurableconcept.
Seeman's (1959) contribution was to distinguish severalusesof
the concept alienationfromthe mass of sociologicalliterature
and to state themin a moreempiricallyusefulform.Sincethe
variantsof alienation isolated and developed by Seeman are,
with modifications,adopted here, it seems appropriateto
brieflynote some criticismsSeeman'sapproachhas attracted.
First, both Browning(1961) and Israel (1971: 215) fault
Seeman forfailingto interrelate his fivevariantsof alienationin
a theoreticalcontext.Both suggestthatalienationmay be best
viewedas a process.WhileIsraelis unsureof the propercausal
sequence of powerlessness,meaninglessness,isolation, and
self-estrangement,Browningis not. This importantpoint has
been pursuedelsewhere(Shepard,1972).
Second, accordingto Israel (1971: 214-215), Seeman and
those of scientifickin ignorethe issue of discrepancybetween
AUTHOR'SNOTE: Thedataanalysisappearshereforthefirsttime.Some
partsof thepaperhavebeenadaptedfromAutomation andAlienation
by
JonM. Shepardbypermissionof theMIT Press,Cambridge,Massachusetts
@ 1971. Theprojectwasfundedby a grantfromtheOfficeofManpower
Researchin the ManpowerAdministration of the U.S. Departmentof
Pacific Sociological Rev., Vol. 16 No. 1, Jan. 1973 W1973 Pacific Sociological Assn.
[61]

[62] PACIFIC SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW / JANUARY 1973
individualexpectationsand social realitiesand, of course,the

consequencesof such incongruities. Developmentof thisaspect
of theproblemis also underway(Shepard,n.d.).
Third, Israel (1971: 207) chargesSeeman and otherswith
attemptingto maintainthe trappingsof Marx's concept of
alienationwhile abandoninghis concernwith social criticism
and social change.Contemporary, empiricallyorientedsociol-
ogistsdealingwithalienation,arguesIsrael,acceptsocietyin its
current form and focus on "micro-problems"which are
compatiblewiththeirmethods.Whileit is truethatresearchers
in thisarea havenot proposedwide-ranging societaltransforma-
tions, some are beginningto propose solutions to specific
problemareas(Blauner,1964; Shepard,1969, 1970, 1971).
Fourthand finally,in Israel'sview,contemporary, empirical-
ly orientedsociologistsresearching alienationare not actingas
sociologistsat all. That is, theyhave forsakenMarx'ssociolog-
ical emphasis on social process for a social-psychological
emphasis on individualexperience(Israel, 1971: 213). The
perspectiveof the presentstudyis social-psychological-dimen-
sions of alienation,measuredvia attitudescales,are relatedto
distinctlydifferent typesof productiontechnologyand man-
machinerelationships.
TECHNOLOGY AND FUNCTIONAL SPECIALIZATION
Historically,in the factoryand morerecentlyin the office,

the predominantphilosophyholds thatspecializationof func-
tion is the most desirableformof work arrangement.'This
Labor.Anypartmaybe reproduced bytheU.S.government. Appreciation

is extendedto WilliamA. Faunceforhismanycontributions to thispaper;
informaldiscussionscannotbe reflected, but use of ideas containedin
someof hispublishedworkis apparent.Walter Abbott,A. Lee Coleman,
and JohnStephenson offeredmanyvaluablecriticalcomments on earlier
draftsof the manuscript.RichardClayton,JohnO'Donnell,and George
Wilber wereespeciallyhelpfulin thedataanalysis.Thisis a revisedversion
ofa paperreadat the1972 Southern SociologicalSocietymeetings inNew
Orleans.

Shepard/ TECHNOLOGY, DVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [631
philosophy of job design is based on the convictionthat

specializationof functionleads to the greatestefficiencyand
economy. Accompanyingtheseassumedbenefitsof functional
specialization,however, has been the appearance of some
unsalutary effectsin workers.
social-psychological
Criticshave deploredthehistoricaltrendtowardhigherlevels
of differentiationin the divisionof labor at work,contending
that a loss of meaningin workhas been a significant negative
consequence of mass-productiontechniques (Bell, 1947;
Swados, 1962). That theirconcernis not withoutfoundationis
evident in much social science research.Investigationscon-
ducted among blue-collarworkersemployed in mechanized
worksettingspointto functionalspecializationas a contributor
to negativeattitudestowardwork (Walker,1950; Walkerand
Marriott, 1951; Walker and Guest, 1952; Blauner, 1964;
Chinoy, 1955; Davis, 1966). Friedmann(1961), presenting
evidencethat,beyondsome point,functionalspecializationhas
diminishing returns,contendsthatbothmanagement and social
scientistsare becomingawareof thisfact.
Anotherfactorrepresenting a trendaway fromfunctional
is
specialization automation, heralded as a formof production
technologythatwill returnto the workerthe meaningin work
that mechanizationseems to preclude. It has recentlybeen
argued (Blauner, 1964; Faunce, 1965) that automated tech-
nologyrepresentsa dramaticchangein productiontechnology
characterizedby a less-specializeddivisionof labor. Moreover,
researchdone in both semi-automated (transfertechnologyor
"Detroit" automation) and automated (continuous-process)
work settingsrevealsimprovedattitudestowardwork among
productionpersonnel(Walker,1957; Faunce, 1958; Mann and
Hoffman,1960).2
If the extent of differentiation in the division of labor
contributes to work attitudes among factory workers,it
constitutesan importantdimensionaround which to centera
study.Faunce (1965) associatesa characteristicformof division
of labor with each of three stages in the application of
technologyto industrialproduction.This associationis due to

[64] PACIFIC SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW /JANUARY 1973
the presenceof a unique man-machinerelationshipattending,

each type of production technology.These man-machine
relationships representvaryingdegreesof differentiation in the
divisionof laborat work.
Most workersin craftproductionsystemsare skilledartisans.
The division of labor is not highlydifferentiated because
workerseitherfashionthe total productfromraw materialsor
makesubstantialcontributions to a product.
In mechanizedproductionsystems,manyworkersbecome
special-purpose machineoperatorslaboringundera highdegree
of job specialization.The workerwho makes only a minute
contribution to a productas it comes to his workstationon a
conveyor is the prototype,but factorymachineoperatorsof all
kindsalso representthisman-machine Walkerand
relationship.
Guest (1952), in theirclassicstudyof theautomobileassembly
line, enumeratesix characteristics of the averagemass-produc-
tion job: mechanicalpacing of work,repetitiveness, minimum
skill requirements, predetermination in the use of tools and
techniques,surfacementalattention,and minutesubdivision of
labor. From theirdiscussion,it is apparentthat the primary
factor,of whichmostof the othercharacteristics appear to be
consequences,is theminutesubdivisionof labor.
Anotherfundamentalchange in the man-machine relation-
ship is contained in automated production systems. The
operator in a continuous-process plant is a monitorof an
integratedproductionsystem.Essentially,he makes periodic
readingson instruments thatrelayinformation on whetherthe
is
productionprocess functioning normally. Automation pro-
ducesjob enlargement in the sensethatcontrolroomoperators
are responsiblefor a largershareof the productionprocessas
the number of job classificationsis reduced and formerly
discretestepsin the productionprocessare integrated. Remain-
ing operatingjobs are enlarged,comprisedas theyare of several
combined functionswhich, prior to automation,were per-
formedby separateoperators.Automationfromthisperspec-
tive reversesthe trend toward functionalspecializationin
industrialmanufacturing.

Shepard/TECHNOLOGY, DIVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [65]
Several pieces of research do indicate that automated

technologyresultsin a diminution in separatejob classifications
(Walker, 1957: 61; Mann and Hoffman, 1960: 72; U.S.
Departmentof Labor, 1956: 16). Further,a numberof studies
permitthe conclusionthatjob enlargement-responsibility fora
largerspan of the productionprocess-is a concomitant of
automation(Faunce, 1958; Bright,1958; Mann and Hoffman,
1960; Blauner,1964).
An importantassumptionin the presentstudyis that the
typeof technologyemployedin a productionsystemnormally
acts as a major determinant of the mannerin whichlabor is
divided.This is not necessarilythe case,onlythe currentnorm.
Job enlargement3 and job rotationprogramsattestthattasks
can be assigned differentlyunder a mechanized mode of
production.
An equallycrucialpresupposition is thatthemannerin which
labor is divideddeterminesa numberof otherjob character-
istics.To illustrate,extremefunctionalspecializationcreatesa
job that is repetitive,requires scant skill, and permitsno
discretionin theselectionof tools and procedures.
DIMENSIONSOF WORK-RELATEDALIENATION
Much of the alienationresearchassumesthelargersocietyas

the social referentfromwhichalienationis measured(Nettler,
1957; Seeman, 1959; Middleton,1963; Strueningand Richard-
son, 1965; Simmons,1966; Nisbet, 1953; Kornhauser,1959:
Dean, 1961; Neal and Seeman,1964). Clark(1959) was thefirst
to relate alienation(powerlessness)to a specificorganizational
setting. It is his argumentthat alienation should not be
measuredin termsof a societalreferent.Rather,he opts fora
single-unitapproach-"selectingforstudyonly those whomwe
can establishto be involvedin a single,well-defined unit,for
instance,a social system"(Clark, 1959: 850). Clarkarguesthat
alienationfroma global social referent is less meaningfulthan
measuring alienation from a specifiable social system or

subsystem.An importantpoint is that integrationinto social

life is not an all-or-nothingproposition.Man is anchoredto
differentsegmentsof his social environmentwith varying
degrees of intensity.The scales attemptingto tap various
aspectsof work-related alienationincludepowerlessness,mean-
inglessness,self-evaluative
involvement in the work role,isola-
tion fromorganizationalgoals, and instrumental workorienta-
tion.4
POWERLESSNESS
In the changefromguildhandicraftproductionto manufac-

turingin largefactories,freedomand controlwere takenfrom
workers.In the worksituation,powerlessnessoccurswhen the
workerfeels thathe is an object dominatedand controlledby
other people or by a technologicalsystemof productionand
thus,as subject,he cannotalterhis conditions(Blauner,1964:
32). Powerlessnessrefersto the perceivedlack of freedomand
controlon the job. These itemsformthe powerlessness scale:"
(1) To whatextentcanyouvarythestepsinvolvedindoingyourjob?
(2) To whatextentcanyoumovefrom yourimmediateworking area
duringworkhours?
(3) To whatextent howmuchworkyouproduce?
canyoucontrol
(4) To whatextentcan youhelpdecideon methods andprocedures
usedinyourjob?
(5) To whatextentdo youhaveinfluenceoverthethings
thathappen
toyouatwork?
(6) To whatextentcanyoudo yourworkaheadandtakea short rest
breakduringworkhours?
(7) To whatextentareyoufreefromclosesupervision whiledoing
yourjob?
(8) To whatextentcan you increase thespeedat which
or decrease
youwork?

Shepard/TECHNOLOGY, DIVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [67]
MEANINGLESSNESS
The meaninglessnessvariant of alienation refers to the

inabilityto understand theeventsin whichone is engaged.With
respectto work,meaninglessness sets in whenindividualroles
are perceivedas lackingintegrationinto the total systemof
goals of an organization(Blauner, 1964: 2-3). Whenworkers
know only theirown specializedtasksand do not,in thecourse
of theirwork,come to know the tasksof theircoworkers,the
functionof otherdepartments, or how theirwork contributes
to the company product(s),they feel a loss of purposeand
function.Meaninglessness is operationalizedwithitemsreferring
to the lack of perceivedrelationshipof one's job to thejobs of
othersand to thelargerorganization:6
(1) To whatextent doyouknowhowyourjob fitsintothetotalwork

organization?
(2) To whatextentdo you knowhowyourworkcontributes to
company products?
(3) To whatextentdoesmanagementgiveworkers enoughinformation
aboutwhatisgoing oninthecompany?
(4) To whatextent do youknowhowyourjob fitsintotheworkof
other
departments?
(5) To what extentdo youknowhowyourworkaffects thejobsof
youworkwith?
others
(6) To whatextent do youknowhowyourjob fitsinwithother jobs
inthecompany?
(7) To whatextentareyoulearning a greatdealaboutthecompany
whiledoingyourjob?
(8) To whatextentdoesmanagementgiveworkers enoughinformation
aboutwhat isgoingoninyourdepartment?
INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION
as "thedegree
Seeman (1959: 790) definesself-estrangement
of dependenceof the given behaviorupon anticipatedfuture
rewards,that is, upon rewardsthat lie outside the activity

itself" Self-estrangement is said to exist when an activityis

viewed as an instrumental ratherthana consummatory activity.
Examples of this are those who work merelyfor money or
studentswho enduretheiracademictraining merelyforthesake
of a degreethatwillgetthema "good" job.
Afterdefiningself-estrangement, Seeman (1959: 789) points
out that it is difficultto specifywhatone is alienatedfrom:"to
speak of 'alienationfromtheself'is afterall simplya metaphor,
in a way that 'alienationfrompopular culture,'for example,
need not be." Consequently,the latter can be concretely
specifiedwhile the formerpresentsgreaterdifficulties. A more
descriptiveconceptual label for Seeman's definitionof self-
estrangement is that of instrumental orientation.Instrumental
workorientationis conceptualizedas the degreeto whichwork
is valued primarilyas a meansto nonworkendsratherthanfor
its intrinsicrewards.This substitutionof instrumental orienta-
tion for self-estrangement is sound for two reasons. First,
Seeman recognizedthe difficulty in measuringalienationfrom
the "self." Second, it avoids confusionof thisdimensionwith
anothervariantof alienationnot dealtwithby Seeman-thatis,
self-evaluativeinvolvement.Four items comprisethe instru-
mentalworkorientationscale:7
youhavetodo toearna living;

(1) Yourjob issomething mostofyour
realinterests outsideyourjob.
arecentered
forworking.
reason
(2) Moneyisthemostrewarding
evilto providethingsyou and yourfamily
(3) Workingis a necessary
want.
(4) You are livingforthe day whenyou can collectyourretirement
toyou.
thatareimportant
anddo thethings
SELF-EVALUATIVE INVOLVEMENT IN THE WORK ROLE
Self-evaluativeinvolvementrefersto the degree to which a

persontests his self-esteemin termsof the statuscriteriaof a
particularsocial unit of which he is a member.Self-evaluative
involvementin work is concernedwiththedegreeto whichone

Shepard /TECHNOLOGY, DIVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [69]
evaluatesoneselfwith regardto the work role. The fiveitems

formingthe self-evaluativeinvolvementin the work role scale
were designedto reflectwhetherwork or nonworkactivityis
the mostimportantin self-evaluation:8
(1) You wouldlikepeopletojudgeyouforthemostpartbywhatyou

spendyourmoneyon,rather thanbyhowyoumakeyourmoney.
youdo awayfromthejob ismoreimportant
(2) Successinthethings
toyouropinionofyourself
thansuccessinyourworkcareer.
(3) To you,yourworkisonlya smallpartofwhoyouare.
(4) Ifyouhadto chooseyouwouldmuchprefer thatothers
judgeyou
by the kindof job you hold,ratherthanby youroff-the-job
accomplishments.
ofwhoyouarewouldbebasedonthekindof
(5) Thebestdescription
job youhold.
ISOLATION FROM ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS
Seeman (1959: 789) definesisolation as the assignmentof

"low rewardvalueto goals or beliefsthatare typically
highly
valued in the given society."' As noted earlier, the social
referentin the presentstudy is work-relatedactivity,not the
total society. Blaunerwritesof social isolation as the lack of
identificationor commitmentwith the work role and the
absence of loyalty to one or more of the networkof social
relationsderivedfroma workorganization(forexample,fellow
workers,management,organizationalgoals). Items in the scale
of isolation fromorganizationalgoals pertainto the degreeof
subscriptionto some of the goals and values of the work
0
organizations:'
(1) The reputationof this companyin the communityis very

toyou.
important
(2) Successful of thiscompany
competition withotherfirmsis not
toyou.
important
(3) Theonlyreasonthecompany's areimportant
profits toyouisthat
theyaffect
theamountofmoney youmake.

[70] PACIFIC SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW / JANUARY 1973
thecostsofthiscompany
(4) Cutting isoflittleimportance
toyou.
(5) Thequalityofthiscompany'sproductsis veryimportant
to you.
(6) Thiscompany has therightidea aboutwhata fairday'swork
should
be.
SAMPLESAND RESEARCHINSTRUMENTS
The total sample consists of 305 blue-collarproduction

workersdrawn froman oil refinery,representing automated
production systems and an automobile factory containing
workersin craftand mechanizedproductionsystems.In theoil
refinery,an attemptwas made to interviewall operatorsin the
two plantsof the complex.A total of 92 monitorsor control
room operatorswas interviewed.This includes63% (n = 20)
of the operatorsin plant numberone and 94% (n = 72) of
table of random numberswas used to draw froma union
membership lista sampleof 150 finalassemblylineworkersand
a sampleof 150 journeymenmaintenancecraftsmen. Fromthe
original sample of assemblers,30 were eliminatedon the
grounds that they were either in militaryservice,female,
trainees,retired,or no longer employed at the factory.The
remainingsampleof 120 represented17% of the total number
of finalassemblersin the factory.Of these 120 assemblers,96
wereinterviewed. Sevenof the 150 maintenancejourneymenin
the originalsample were excluded because they were either
retired,no longeremployedin the factory,or deceased. The
143 retained in the sample constituted25% of the plant
population of maintenancecraftsmen.Of this sample, 117
consentedto interviews.
An interviewschedule, composed of fixed-response items,
providedthe data on which this paper is based. Oil refinery
workerswere interviewedon the job. The UAW local union
providedhome addresses,and interviewswere carriedout in
workers'homes.

HYPOTHESES
The followinggeneralquestionis exploredin thisstudy:Do

workers'relationshipsto technologyand divisionof labor at
workinfluencein a predictableway theirdegreeof work-related
alienation?On the basisof Blauner'sfindings,theexpectationis
that assemblerswill exhibitthehighestlevelsof alienationfrom
work,while craftsmenand monitorswill be considerablyless
alienated. Specifically,curvilinearrelationshipsbetween the
phases in the man-machinerelationshipand each alienation
dimension are predicted: craftproduction-loweralienation;
mechanizedproduction-higheralienation;automatedproduc-
tion-lower alienation. The predictionof curvilinearrelation-
ships is based on conceivingthe threeman-machinerelation-
ships as historicalstages in the developmentof technology
(from nonmechanizationto mechanizationto automation).
Whileall threetypesof productionsystemsexistsimultaneously
today, they still represent stages in the development of
technologyas appliedto industrialmanufacturing.
FUNCTIONALSPECIALIZATIONAND ALIENATION
POWERLESSNESS
Powerlessnessis related to the division of labor in that

extreme functional specialization normally occurs under a
mechanized production system characterizedby mechanical
pacing of work and predetermination in the use of tools and
techniques. Rationalizationprecludesworkerdecisionsregard-
ing methodsand proceduresused in a job and does not allow
for much variationin the mannerof completingone's task(s).
Who does what and how is verymeticulouslyengineered.It is
difficultto vary the way in which one does a job when the
numberof operationsis limitedto one or,at best,a few.
Maintenancecraftsmenin factoriesare exposed to a variety
of work situationsrequiringapplication of the manual dex-
terity,knowledge,and skills they have acquired. It is within

theirpowerto controlthe quantityof worktheydo. Theyare

free to choose the appropriatetools, materials,and work
methodsfroma backlogof experience.Such decisionsaremade
often to match the frequentlychangingjob assignments.
Maintenancecraftsmenare generallyissued an assignmentor
perhapsa list of jobs at the day's beginning.From thatpoint,
theyenjoya highdegreeof freedomfromdirectsupervision and
have wide latitudein thedispensationof theirworktime.Their
work implementsare manuallycontrolledtools which permit
themto determinetheirworkpace and to regulatethedegreeof
pressureto suit theirpersonalneeds except underemergency
conditions.
Continuousprocess technologyreturnssome freedomand
controlto industrialworkersin the formof controloverwork
pace, some latitudein the selectionof work procedures,and
movementfrom the immediatework area. At set intervals
duringthe shift,each operatorin the oil refinery(hereafter
referredto as Circle Oil) checks a panel of indicatorsand
recordsthesereadings.At one time,theoperatorwillcheckthe
instrumentpanel in the control room. After a designated
period,he will leave thecontrolroomto monitortheindicators
on the productionunitoutsideforwhichhe is responsible.At
Circle Oil, operatorsmade readingseverytwo hours in the
controlroom, and once everyhalf-hour or hour theychecked
the productionunit outsidethe controlroom. From thisbrief
description,it is evidentthat monitorsare subject to little
mechanicalpacing. They can performtheirtasks at a speed
suitedto theirnatureor temporary mood. Freedomor control
withregardto methodsand proceduresis permitted throughthe
operator's discretion in making and recording Dials
readings.
and gaugescan be read withconsiderablevariationin time.An
operator,for example,may take his readingsearlyin orderto
eat at a timemoreattunedto his appetite,or he maychoose to
eat firstand delay a scheduledreading.Further,taskscan be
accomplishedwithvariationin the sequencein whichtheyare
done.

MEANINGLESSNESS
The effectsof the divisionof labor are most clearlyseen in

the experienceof meaninglessness. Severalelementscontribute
to the factthatmaintenancecraftsmen knowa greatdeal about
the operation of the larger plant and consequentlyhave
considerableperceptionof how theirwork is relatedto the
work of others and to the larger organization.First, they
exercisetheirskillsin the performanceof jobs that requirea
number of operations,and they are oriented toward the
completionof a total job. Second, maintenancecraftsmen are
called upon to workin manyareas of the plantand may even
have a numberof separatejobs on anygivenday. Consequently,
theircoverageoftheplantis considerable.Third,a particular job
oftendemandsmenfromseveralcrafts,whetherfortechnicalor
craftboundarymaintenancereasons.Observationof men from
other craftsat work increasesthe knowledgeof interconnec-
tionsamongjobs.
Blauner reiteratedthe argumentthat, as mechanization
evolved in the factorysystem,the divisionof labor became
increasinglysubdivided,thusleavingthe factoryworkerwitha
job largelydevoidof purposeand function.Performing one or a
few smalloperationsout of the entireproductionprocessrobs
machineoperators,in thiscase assemblylineworkers,of a sense
of the connectionof theirjobs to thejobs of othersor to the
purposesof the largerorganization.They know onlytheirown
limitedtasks and need not know the tasks of otherworkers,
jobs performed in otherdepartments, or how theirworkrelates
to the operationsof thelargerorganization.
Severalfactorsrelatedto the divisionof laboraccountforthe
expectationof low meaninglessness amongcontinuous-process
operators. First,the of
fulfillment each man'sresponsibilityis a
unique contribution to the smooth functioning of the total
system.While an assemblercan attach a headlightwith little
thoughtto the total product,operatorsin a continuous-process
productionsystemmustreferto thetotalproductionsystem.A
malfunction in one operator'sarea of responsibility
affectsthe
entiresystemor subsystem.

A second factor promotingworkerattentionto the larger

productionsystemin a continuous-process operatingjob is the
physicaldanger involved in the processing volatileproducts.
of
The expense of spoilage, which may run into astronomical
figuresratherquickly,is a thirdfactor.
A fourthfactoris that continuous-process technologyre-
duces the numberof separatejob classifications.Thisreduction
is due to the integrationinto a continuousflow of many
discretetasksformerly performed by individualworkers.
SELF-EVALUATIVE INVOLVEMENT, INSTRUMENTAL WORK

ORIENTATION, AND ISOLATION FROM ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS
Some ideas derived from social psychologicaltheory'

permitthe propositionthatfailureto achievestatusrecognition
withina status structurepromotessocial-psychological with-
drawal from that status structure.The presentstudy takes
withdrawalfrom work as one special case of the broader
theoreticalframework. In thestatusstructure of theworkplace,
freedomand controland knowledgeof interrelationships among
jobs are viewed as status criteria.There are perhaps more
important status criteriasuch as skill and income. However,
such statuscriterialie outsidethealienationframework. At any
rate,worksituationsthatpromotefeelingsof powerlessness and
meaninglessness impede the achievement of statusrecognition
in the work statusstructure.Such a lack of statusrecognition
contributesto social-psychological withdrawalfromwork. At
this point, an inferenceis necessary.Curvilinearrelationships
were predictedbetweenthephasesin theman-machine relation-
ship and powerlessness and meaninglessness. It follows that
self-evaluativeinvolvement in work,instrumental workorienta-
tion, and isolation fromorganizationalgoals should be related
to the phases in the man-machinerelationshipin a similar
pattern.'2

Shepard/TECHNOLOGY, DIVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [751
RESULTS
PHASES IN THE MAN-MACHINERELATIONSHIP AND

WORK-RELATED ALIENATION
and significantly
That each alienationscale is curvilinearly
related to the phases in the man-machinerelationshipis
apparentin Table 1. On each scale assemblersshow a higher
percentageabove the median than do craftsmenor monitors.
Except for powerlessness,oil refinerymonitorsare less alien-
ated thancraftsmenin theautomobilefactory.
INCOME, EDUCATION, AND AGE AS TEST FACTORS
A furtherstep in the analysis is to introduceincome,

education, and age as test factors.Age is introducedas an
antecedentvariablein orderto providea measureof exposure
time to the independentvariable (Hirschi and Selvin, 1967:
86-87). It may be expected that,withadvancingage, workers
will become more alienatedsince prolongedexposure should
TABLE 1
ALIENATIONSCALES BY PHASES IN THE MAN-MACHINE
RELATIONSHIP
Phases in the Man-MachineRelationship
Craft Mechanized Automated
(n=1 17) (n=96) (n=92)
Powerlessness 19%b 93% 43%c
Meaninglessness 42 73 34d
involvementa
Self-evaluative 52 43 61e
Isolationfromorganizational
goals 48 78 24f
Instrumentalworkorientation 48 69 299
a. This scale is scored in the reversedirectionfromotherscales.
b. Each percentagerepresentsthe percentageabove each scale median forthe entire
sample.Chi-squaretestsof significancewere used.
c. p<.001
d.p<.001
e. p<.05
f. p<.001
g.p<.001

1761 PACIFIC SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW /JANUARY 1973
make it more difficultto deny negativeaspects of work.

Workerswithhighincomeand educationare presumably better
equipped (financiallyand culturally)to turnto nonworkroles
whentheirworkoffersnegativeexperiences.Also, morehighly
educated workersshould have higherexpectationsregarding
work,thusbecomingalienatedmoreeasilyand moreintensely
than less-educatedworkers.Consequently,it is expected that
more affluentand moreeducatedworkerswill be morehighly
alienated than the less afluentand less educated when both
experienceworkas depriving freedom,control,meaning,and so
forth.
Looking first at the interrelationships among these test
variables,it is apparent from Table 2 that age and incomeare
positivelyrelated(r = .81) and,whileage is negatively relatedto
education (r = -.54), it is surprising to findno relationship
betweeneducationand income.
The relationshipsbetween these controlvariablesand the
phases in the man-machine relationshipare containedin Table
3. Ninety-onepercentof the assemblershave annual family
incomesbelow $8,000. Only 21% of the craftsmen and 22% of
the monitors fall in this category. Similarly,94% of the
assemblers are 35 years of age or younger. Among the
craftsmen,85% are older than 35 years, as are 67% of the
monitors.In short,assemblersare muchmorelikelyto be under
35 years of age and to have an annual familyincome under
$8,000. Monitorsand craftsmen are more likelyto havea gross
family income above $8,000 and be over 35 yearsof age. With
respectto educationallevel,differences appearedbut were less
marked. Monitorsare the best educated (90% had at least
finishedhighschool), followedby assemblers,with77% in this
category.Craftsmen havethesmallestproportion(61%) who had
TABLE 2
TEST VARIABLEINTERRELATIONSHIPS(gammas)
Age Education
Education -.54
Income .81 -.05

TABLE 3
AGE, INCOME,AND EDUCATIONBY PHASES IN THE
MAN-MACHINE RELATIONSHIP
Phases in the Man-MachineRelationship
Craft Mechanized Automated
Age
35 or younger(n=138) 15%a 94% 33%
36 or older (n=167) 85 6 67b
Income
Less than $8,000 (n=132) 21 91 22
$8,000 or more (n=173) 79 9 78c
Education
Less than highschool (n=228) 39 23 10
Highschool or more (n=77) 61 77 90d
a. Each percentage represents the percentage above each scale median for the entire
sample. Chi-square tests of significance were used.
b.p<.001
c. p <.001
d.p<.001
finishedhighschool as would be expectedfromtheirolderage

characteristic.
Empirically,then,age, income,and educationare relatedto
the independentvariable-phasesin the man-machine relation-
ship-by virtueof thecharacteristics of the three samplesdrawn
to represent each phase.
It is apparent from Table 4 that education, contraryto
expectation,is not relatedto each alienationscale. Onlyin the
case of the instrumental workorientation scale did a significant
differenceappear. Equally clear is the unexpectednegative
relationships betweenincomeand each dimensionof alienation.
Also unexpectedly,age is negativelyrelatedto the powerless-
ness, meaninglessness, and isolationfromorganizationalgoals
scales. Althoughnot statistically significant at the .05 level,the
direction of relationshipbetween age and the two other
alienationscalesis negative.
Twenty-three of the thirtycontrolledtestsremainedsignifi-
cant at least at the .05 level and in all but two instanceswere
maintainedat either the .01 or .001 levels. In addition,the
curvilinearpatternfound in the uncontrolledtests failed to

0o
TABLE 4
AGE, INCOME, AND EDUCATION BY EACH ALIENATI
AlienationS
Power- Meaning- Self-Evaluative
lessness lessness Involvement Org
Age
35 or younger (n=138) 75%a 65% 50%b
36 or older (n=167) 29c 36d 53e
Income
Below $8,000 (n=132) 76 65 41
$8,000 or more (n=173) 29h 37i 603
Education
Less thanhighschool (n=228) 46 48 52
Highschool or more(n=77) 51m 50n 520
a. Each percentage represents the percentage above the scale median for the entire sample. Chi-squa
b. This scale is scored in the reverse direction from the other scales.
c. p <.001, Y -.76 g. NS, Y= -.20 k. p <.001, = -.52
d. p <.001, = -.54 h. p <.001, 7= -.76 i. p <.001, 7= -.51
e. p=
NS, -.07 i. p <.001, y= -.52 m. NS, 7= .11
f. p <.001, 7 -.49 j. p <.001, .17 n. NS, .03
'= '=

Shepard /TECHNOLOGY, DIVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [791
appear in only fourof the thirtycontrolledtests.In threeof

thesefourinstances,craftsmen had a percentageabove the scale
medianon a par withassemblersor craftsmen. Threeof the four
tests that did not show the predicted curvilinearpattern
occurredon the self-evaluative involvement scale alone. Similar-
ly, four of the seven relationships that were not statistically
appearedon
significant thissame alienationscale.
Thus far,discussionof the relationshipsbetweenthe phasesin
the man-machinerelationshipand work-related alienationhas
been done via the chi-squarestatistic.This mode of analysis
permitted examination of the existence of differencesin
alienation levels among workersin the three phases of the
man-machinerelationship.Directionalityhas been dealt with
crudelyin termsof curvilinearity because it is importantto
know if alienationis lower amongthose laboringin the latest
technologicalsystemof production.
An alternativemode of analysislies in the use of gamma
coefficients.Computationof gamma assumes that both vari-
ables have some intrinsicprogressiveorder.Consequently,the
gammasin Table 5 werecomputedwiththe followingrearrange-
ment of the phases in the man-machinerelationship-craft
(lower degreeof differentiation), automated(moderatedegree
of differentiation),mechanized (higherdegree of differentia-
tion). Gammas add several important dimensions to the
analysis. Because gamma is a measure of the degree of
associationand because it providesa firmerbase fordetermin-
ing directionality,the findingscan be moreeasilydiscussedin
the languageof causal analysis.
In the case of the powerlessnessscale, the relationshipis
specified-comparedto the zero-ordertests,gammastend to
increaseamong younger,less-affluent, and less-educatedwork-
ers and decrease among workers on the otherside of thesetest
factordichotomies(Table 5).
For the otherfouralienationscales,Table 5 revealsthatage
and income are distortervariables. While the degree of
relationshiptends to increaseamongyoungerand less-affluent

00 TABLE 5
O
ALIENATION AND AGE, INCOME, AND EDUCATION (gam
Uncon- Age Income

trolled 35 or 36 or Less than $8,0
Tests younger older $8,000 or m
Powerlessness .83 .89 .53 .93 .5
Meaninglessness .38 .49 -.30 .50 -.1
involvementb
Self-evaluative -.11 -.37 .12 .03 .0
Isolationfromorganizationalgoals .34 .57 -.30 .51 -.1
Instrumentalworkorientation .24 .62 -.21 .11 -.0
a. Gammas are based on this rearrangement of the phases in the man-machinerelationship:craft
specialization,mechanized-highspecialization.
b. This scale is scoredin the reversedirectionfromthe otherscales.
TABLE 6
ALIENATION AND AGE, INCOME, AND EDUCATION (gam
Age Income
Zero- 35 or 36 or Less than $8,
order younger older $8,000 or m
Powerlessness .54 .75 -.20 .81 -.2
Meaninglessness .48 .43 .38 .47 .
Self-evaluative
involvementb -.23 -.40 -.14 -.22 .
Isolationfromorganizationalgoals .64 ..70 .46 .62 .
Instrumentalworkorientation .49 .69 .33 .36 .
a. Gammas are based on this rearrangement of the phases in the man-machinerelationship:autom
specialization;mechanized-highspecialization.
b. This scale is scoredin the reversedirectionfromthe otherscales.

workers,the degreeof relationshipdecreaseson the otherside

of the age and income dichotomies,and the directionof
relationshipswitches from positive to negative. Education
appears to act as a distortervariable on the self-evaluative
involvement scale whileit specifiesthe relationshipin thesame
way on meaninglessness, isolation fromorganizationalgoals,
and instrumentalwork orientation,as was the case for
powerlessness-thedegree of association tends to increase
slightlyamongless-well-educated workersand decreasesamong
thosewithhighschoolor above.
The rearrangementof the phases in the man-machine
relationshipfor calculationof the gammasin Table 5 (crafts-
men-low specialization;monitors-moderate specialization;as-
semblers-highspecialization) makes intuitive sense. Gammas
were calculated with another rearrangement based on the
empiricalfactof consistently loweralienationamongmonitors:
automated-lowerspecialization;craft-moderate specialization;
assemblers-higherspecialization. Table 6, containingthese
gammas,revealsthat distortionappearsonly in these cases: on
the powerlessnessscale when controlledfor age and income;
and on theself-evaluativeinvolvement scale whencontrolledfor
income. In all other instances,the relationshipwas specified
when age, income, and education were introducedas test
factors.The formof specification, withone exception,showed
the degree of association to be higheramong younger,less-
affluent,and less-educatedworkers.In sum,thisrearrangement
of the phases in the man-machinerelationshipremovedthe
consistentdistortionpatternof the firstrearrangement but
generallyshowedthesamepatternof specification whichwould
have appearedin the firstrearrangement had not the direction
of relationship
changed.
These variationsrevealedby the use of gammaare consistent
and important.The need forfurther researchusingincome,age,
and educationis quite apparent.However,whilethealterations
resultingfromthe introductionof these test factorsmust be
considered,they should not be permittedto obliteratethe
generally consistent and statisticallysignificantcurvilinear

relationshipsbetweenthe phases of the man-machine relation-

shipand each scale of work-related
alienation.
The implicationswhich follow certainlyhold for younger,
less-affluent,and lower-educatedworkers.Furtherresearch,
however,may well demonstrate, as the presentstudysuggests,
that with higherincome,advancingage, and highereducation,
effectand producesa
technologyexercisesa less differentiating
somewhatdifferent patternof relationshipin levels of aliena-
tionamongworkersin theseman-machine relationships.
IMPLICATIONS
THE PRACTICAL SIDE
The findingshave two practicalimplications.First,the thesis

that automationreversesthe historicaltrendtowardincreased
alienation fromwork among factoryworkersappears to be
supported.Continuous-process technologymayprovidefactory
workerswith jobs characterizedby more freedom,control,
meaning,and self-involvement than predictedby some writers,
who have extrapolatedfromthe experienceof mass-production
technology.
Second, thatalienationwas loweramongcraftsmen and mon-
itorswhosejobs are not highlyspecializedthanamongautomo-
bile workersin highlyspecializedjobs lends furthersupportto
the use of job enlargementas a meansfordecreasingalienation
among factoryworkers.The reductionof job specialization,in
thiscase throughthe creationof new man-machine relationships
in the factory,appears to exercise salutaryeffectson work
attitudes.This conclusion fits well with other researchmen-
tioned at the outsetwhichalso pointsto the favorableeffectof
job enlargement on workattitudes.
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAN-MACHINE RELATIONSHIPS
A central argumentadvanced by Blauner is that industries

vary by the natureof theirtechnologicalproductionsystems;
each industrypossesses a characteristicform of production

technology.On this basis, Blauner proposed a subfield of

industrialsociologyto be called the "sociologyof industries."
The idea is to place emphasison the importanceof individual
industriesand groupsof similarindustriesas unitsof economic
and social organization.In thisway,a systematic, comparative
approach can supplant the previouslyheld notion of the
industrialworkenvironment as an undifferentiatedmass.
Internally,however,a factorymost likelyapplies different
types of technologyto various aspects of the production
process. This raises the question of internaltechnological
differencesby industryand even by firm.Blaunerrecognizes
that complete homogeneityin any given industryor firmis
seldom the case. If man's relationshipto technologyat work
contributesto the predictionof his work attitudes,thenit is
importantnot to combinedifferent man-machine relationships
into one categoryas one mightdo whenmakinginterindustry
comparisons.For example, a sample of automobileworkers
could conceivablycontaincraftsmen, assemblers,laborers,and
each
janitors, with a different to
relationship technology.
The presentstudy focused on man-machinerelationships
ratherthan industries.Factory workersin each of the three
man-machine relationshipswere partof a largerworkorganiza-
tion containingworkerswithrelationships to technologyquite
differentfrom their own. Differencesin alienation were
manifestedconsistentlybetween craftsmenand assemblers,
althoughthey were in the same industry, company,and local
union. Thus, strongercredence is given to the impact of
technologyand job contentupon workattitudes.Moreresearch
is needed comparingworkers within industriesand firms
laboringunderdifferent man-machine relationships.
The changefroma consistentpatternof distortion to one of
the
specificationupon rearranging phases in the man-machine
relationshipsuggeststwo things.First, gamma must be used
with care in lightof its sensitivityto alterationsin ordering.
Second, and more importantin the presentstudy,the gamma
analysis and the consistentlylower alienation (except for
powerlessness)among monitorsthan craftsmenprovidessome

[841 PACIFIC SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW / JANUARY 1973
empiricalreason to reconsiderthe orderingof the phasesin the

man-machine relationship.To date, thesephases have not been
thoughtof ordinallybecause of the assumptionthatboth the
craftand automatedphasesentaillow specialization.Of course,
reorderingthe phases in the man-machinerelationshipon the
basis of alienation levels alone is inappropriate.Research is
needed on the comparativenatureof craftand automatedjobs.
At present, we have insufficientknowledge and therefore
assume that craftjobs are less specializedthanautomatedones.
This assumptionrequires examinationboth because of the
resultspresentedhere and because craftwork is increasingly
conducted in bureaucraticsettingsand job size is limitedby
union-imposedcraftboundaries.Practicinga craftin a large
bureaucraticorganizationmay be quite different fromexercis-
ing skill as a traditional"independent,"multi-skilled artisan.
Moreover, independent artisans are disappearingmuch like
independentsoldiers,inventors, and scientists.
WORK AND LEISURE
Anotherimplicationrelates to the question of meaningin

work versusmeaningin leisure.Some observershave suggested
that work is no longer an importantarena for intrinsic
satisfactionand feelingsof personalworth.Dubin (1956), for
example,concludedthat,forthe majorityof industrial workers,
nonworkactivityhas eclipsedworkas a centrallifefocus.There
may have been an overrepresentation of functionally
specialized
workers in Dubin's sample, or, if skilled workershad been
excluded, the percentageabandoningwork as a centrallife
interestmighthave been greater.An importantimplicationof
the presentstudyis thatproportionsof workersregarding work
as a central life interestare likely to vary by man-machine
relationship.
Pursuitof self-fulfilling
experiencesduringnonworking hours
may not be the sole alternative.Changesin man's relationship
to technologyat work may resuscitateworkas an integralpart
of lifeformanyindustrialworkers.Assumingthevalidityof the

Shepard /TECHNOLOGY, DIVISION OF LABOR, ALIENATION [851
findingsreported here, automation creates a man-machine

relationshipfavorableto workroleattachment.Enlargement of
mechanizedand nonmechanizedjobs that are not or cannotbe
automated is crucial, since the bulk of the labor force is
employedin industries not yetaffectedby automation.
NOTES
1. Extremefunctional specialization denotesa minutesubdivision oftaskssuch

thateachworker is assigned to perform oneora fewsmalloperations outofthetotal
production process.Functional specialization,minutesubdivision oflabor,anda high
degreeof differentiation inthedivision oflaboxareusedinterchangeably throughout
thispaper.
2. These earlierstudiesof automatedfactoriesinvolvedcomparing worker
attitudes priorto automation withattitudes justafterthechangeover. A changeover
factorwasnotinvolved inthepresent study.
3. Jobenlargement refersto theredesigning of minutely subdivided jobs such
thata worker makesa number ofcontributions to thetotalproduction processrather
thanmerelyone or two. Evidencefroma numberof studieson job enlargement
suggests thatsuchprograms not onlyimproveworkerattitudesbut lead to better
organizational performance (as measured byincreased productivity,
improved quality
of work,and reductions in absences, turnovers, andrequests fortransfers).For some
examples,see Davis,1956, 1957, 1966; Davis andWerling, 1960; Kilbridge, 1960;
Paulet al., 1969.
4. Itemschosento measure powerlessness andmeaninglessness eachcontained a
characteristicof work.For each characteristic, each respondent was to answerto
what extent the characteristic existed in his job. Responsesrangedfrom 1
("minimum") to 7 ("maximum").Scoreson eachiteminanygivenscaleweremerely
summed.For example,eightitemsformedthe powerlessness scale.Possiblescores
rangedfrom8 (forpersonsanswering "minimum" to alleightpowerlessness items)to
56 (forpersons responding "maximum" to all eightitems).
The self-evaluative involvement, isolationfromorganizational goals,and instru-
mentalwork orientationscales were formedfromstatements which could be
answeredwithstrongly agree,agree,undecided, disagree,or stronglydisagree.Scale
scoresweredetermined by addinga respondent's numerical responseto each scale
item.The instrumental workorientation scale,forexample,contained 4 itemsso that
possiblescoreswentfrom4 to 20.
Each itemforeach alienationscalewas correlated withthe sumof thescoresof
all theotheritemspotentially to be includedin each particular scale.Anystandard
regarding the value of a product-moment correlationcoefficient sufficientfor
inclusionis arbitrary. Witha fewexceptions, each itemwhichshoweda correlation
withthe sumof the otheritemsbelow .30 was excluded.For chi-square analysis,
scale"scores"of 0 to 1 wereassigned, brokenas nearthemedianas possibleforeach
scalescoredistribution forthetotalsample.

5. For thepowerlessness scale,thecorrelations of singleitemsto thesumofall

othersranged from.49 to .63.
6. Exceptforitem3 (r = .35) and item8 (r = .41), thecorrelations of single
itemswiththesumofall otheritemsvariedfrom.50 to .70.
7. Item-totalcorrelationswentfrom.38 to .48.
8. Item-totalcorrelationswentfrom.29 to .49.
9. This conceptualization differs fromDean's definition, whichrefersto the
individual's
friendship status-thatis, feelingof isolationfromthe groupor of
isolation
fromgroupstandards.
10. Item-totalcorrelationsrangedfrom.50 to .65.
11. An elaboration of theseideasmaybe foundin Faunce(1968: 90-97)and
Shepard(1972).
12. An obviousalternative is to testdirectly
therelationshipsbetweenpowerless-
self-evaluative
ness,meaninglessness, involvement,isolation
fromorganizational goals,
andinstrumental workorientation. Thisapproachis leftfordevelopment elsewhere
(Shepard,1972). Of centralconcernnowaretherelationships betweenthephasesin
theman-machine andwork-related
relationship alienation.
REFERENCES
Bell,Daniel
1947 "Adjusting mento machines." Commentary 3 (January):79-88.
1956 WorkandItsDiscontents. Boston:Beacon.
Bendix,Reinhard
1963 WorkandAuthority inIndustry.NewYork:Harper& Row.
Blauner,Robert
1964 Alienation andFreedom.Chicago:Univ.ofChicagoPress.
Bright,JamesR.
1958 Automationand Management. Boston: HarvardUniversity Graduate
SchoolofBusiness Administration.
Browning, CharlesA. et al.
1961 "On themeaning of alienation."
Amer.Soc. Rev. 26 (October):780-781.
Clark,JohnP.
1959 "Measuringalienationwithina social system."Amer.Soc. Rev. 24
(December):849-852.
Davis,LouisE.
1956 "Jobdesignresearch." J.ofIndustrial
Engineering 7 (September/October):
275-282.
1957 "Job designand productivity: a newapproach."Personnel33 (March):
418-430.
1966 "Thedesignofjobs." Industrial Relations6 (October):21-45.
---- andRichard Werling
1960 "Jobdesignfactors." Occupational Psychology 34 (April):109-132.
Dean,DwightE.
1961 "Alienation:Its meaningand measurement." Amer. Soc. Rev. 26
(October):755-758.

Dubin,Robert
1956 "Industrialworkers'worlds:a studyof the 'centrallife interests' of
industrialworkers." SocialProblems 3 (January): 131-142.
Faunce,William A.
1958 "Automation in theautomobileindustry: someconsequences forin-plant
socialstructure." Amer.Soc. Rev.23 (August):401-407.
1965 "Automationand the divisionof labor." Social Problems13 (Fall):
149-160.
1968 Problems ofan IndustrialSociety.NewYork:McGraw-Hill.
Friedmann, Georges
1961 TheAnatomy ofWork.NewYork:FreePress.
Hirschi,TravisandHananSelvin
1967 DelinquencyResearch.An Appraisalof AnalyticMethods.New York:
FreePress.
Israel,Joachim
1971 Alienation: FromMarxto ModemSociology.Boston:Allyn& Bacon.
Kilbridge,MauriceD.
1960 "Reduced costs throughjob enlargement: a case." J. of Business33
(October):357-362.
Kornhauser, William
1959 ThePoliticsofMassSociety.NewYork:FreePress.
Mann,FloydC. andL. RichardHoffman
1960 Automation andtheWorker. NewYork:HenryHolt.
Middleton, Russell
1963 "Alienation,race and education."Amer. Soc. Rev. 28 (December):
973-977.
Murphy, Gardner
1947 Personality. NewYork:Harper& Row.
Neal,A. G. andMelvinSeeman
1964 "Organizations and powerlessness-a test of the mediationhypothesis,"
Amer.Soc. Rev.29 (April):216-226.
Nettler,Gwynn
1957 "A measure ofalienation." Amer.Soc. Rev.22 (December):670-677.
Nisbet,RobertA.
1953 QuestforCommunity. NewYork:OxfordUniv.Press.
Paul,William J.,KeithB. Robertson, andFrederick Herzberg
1969 "Job enrichment pays off." HarvardBusinessRev. 47 (March-April):
6 1-78.
Seeman,Melvin
1959 "On the meaningof alienation."Amer. Soc. Rev. 24 (December):
783-791.
Shepard, JonM.
1969 "Functionalspecializationand workattitudes."Industrial Relations8
(February):185-194.
1970 "Functionalspecialization, alienationandjob satisfaction."Industrialand
LaborRelationsRev.23 (January): 207-219.
1971 Automationand Alienation.A Study of Officeand FactoryWorkers.
Cambridge, Mass.:MITPress.

1972 "Alienationfromworkas a process." Soc. Q. 13 (Spring): 161-173.

n.d. "Alienation:a discrepancyapproach." (unpublished)
Simmons,J. L.
1966 "Some intercorrelations among 'alienation measures.'" Social Forces 44
(March): 370-372.
Struening,Elmer L. and ArthurH. Richardson
1965 "A factor analyticexploration of the alienation,anomia, and authoritar-
ianismdomain." Amer.Soc. Rev. 30 (October): 768-776.
Swados, Harvey
1962 "Myth of the happy worker." Pp. 105-113 in E. Josephson and M.
Josephson(eds.) Man Alone: Alienation in Modern Society. New York:
Dell.
U.S. Departmentof Labor
1956 A Case Study of a Large Mechanized Bakery. Washington,D.C.:
GovernmentPrintingOffice.
Walker,CharlesR.
1950 "The problem of the repetitivejob." HarvardBusiness Rev. 28 (May):
54-58.
1957 Toward the AutomaticFactory: A Case Study of Men and Machines.New
Haven,Conn.: Yale Univ.Press.
--- and Robert H. Guest
1952 The Man on the AssemblyLine. Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniv. Press.
Walker,J. and R. Marriott
1951 "A studyof some attitudesto factorywork." OccupationalPsychology25
(July): 181-191.
THE STATE Authority

OF THE and
UNIVERSITY Change
Edited by CARLOS E. KRUYTBOSCH, State Universityof New York

at Buffalo and SHELDON L. MESSINGER, Universityof Californiaat Berkeley
The papers collected in this volume share a concern with the

problem of authorityin the university-itschangingbases, uses, emergent
forms,and prospects. On the one hand, the relationof the
universityto society is changing;on the other hand, the internal
constitution,the characterof the university,is also changing.
The main question is: Can a formof authoritybe found which will at
once accommodate these changes and insurethe freedomessential to
teaching,learning,innovation,and communication?The authors
offerno easy answers. 1970 384 Pages Cloth,$10.00 Paper,$4.50
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD

275 S. BeverlyDr. / BeverlyHills,CA. 90212 44 Hatton Garden, London E C 1


Shepard 1973

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shepard 1973

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pacific Sociological Association

Technology, Division of Labor, and Alienation

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

In recentyears social scientists

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

individualexpectationsand social realitiesand, of course,the

TECHNOLOGY AND FUNCTIONAL SPECIALIZATION

Historically,in the factoryand morerecentlyin the office,

Labor.Anypartmaybe reproduced bytheU.S.government. Appreciation

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

philosophy of job design is based on the convictionthat

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

the presenceof a unique man-machinerelationshipattending,

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

Several pieces of research do indicate that automated

Much of the alienationresearchassumesthelargersocietyas

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

subsystem.An importantpoint is that integrationinto social

In the changefromguildhandicraftproductionto manufac-

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

The meaninglessnessvariant of alienation refers to the

(1) To whatextent doyouknowhowyourjob fitsintothetotalwork

INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

itself" Self-estrangement is said to exist when an activityis

youhavetodo toearna living;

SELF-EVALUATIVE INVOLVEMENT IN THE WORK ROLE

Self-evaluativeinvolvementrefersto the degree to which a

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

evaluatesoneselfwith regardto the work role. The fiveitems

(1) You wouldlikepeopletojudgeyouforthemostpartbywhatyou

ISOLATION FROM ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS

Seeman (1959: 789) definesisolation as the assignmentof

(1) The reputationof this companyin the communityis very

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

The total sample consists of 305 blue-collarproduction

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

The followinggeneralquestionis exploredin thisstudy:Do

Powerlessnessis related to the division of labor in that

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

theirpowerto controlthe quantityof worktheydo. Theyare

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

The effectsof the divisionof labor are most clearlyseen in

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

A second factor promotingworkerattentionto the larger

SELF-EVALUATIVE INVOLVEMENT, INSTRUMENTAL WORK

Some ideas derived from social psychologicaltheory'

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

PHASES IN THE MAN-MACHINERELATIONSHIP AND

INCOME, EDUCATION, AND AGE AS TEST FACTORS

A furtherstep in the analysis is to introduceincome,

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

make it more difficultto deny negativeaspects of work.

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

finishedhighschool as would be expectedfromtheirolderage

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

appear in only fourof the thirtycontrolledtests.In threeof

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

Uncon- Age Income

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.175 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:47:07 PM

workers,the degreeof relationshipdecreaseson the otherside