BOOK REVIEW
by Lisa Kimball


BRAVE NEW WORKPLACE: America's Corporate Utopias--How They Create New Inequalities and Social Conflict in Our Working Lives, by Robert Howard. Viking Penguin, Inc., New York, 1985.

In the introduction to this thought provoking book, Robert Howard points out the irony of the use of a Chaplinesque image to market IBM PCs. Chaplin, the first media figure to depict the alienation of the assembly line, is now delivered from boring, dirty, alienating work by the computer. Many of us have embraced that image of new technology ushering in a new era of flexibility, satisfaction, and personal power at work. But Howard cautions us against assuming that new technology will necessarily take us in that direction:

When technology is linked to the imperatives of
corporate control, work often becomes the antithesis
to the realm of freedom that the image of Charlie
Chaplin before the personal computer suggests.


If we want technology to move us in the more positive direction, Howard asserts that we will need to create and support new institutions dedicated to social control of technology and work.

Howard provides many anecdotal examples of the role of managerial control in supporting the negative outcomes of new technology. He believes that,

How workers acquire skills, what opportunities they
have to exercise them, the very quality of the skills
they learn and use are at the center of the
contradictions of control in the brave new workplace.


In many of his examples, workers whose jobs have changed as a result of new technology are NOT the ones benefiting from the elimination of its boring aspects. Instead, new layers of specialization have been created BETWEEN the worker and his/her tools, sometimes having the effect of eliminating the parts of the job which require judgment and creativity. This often reduces rather than increases productivity.

The mission of the Electronic Networking Association (ENA) reflects a belief that the medium of computer conferencing can make a positive contribution to the development of individuals and organizations. Articles about this medium have stressed its "democratic" structure, participatory process, and potential to loosen up the traditional communication patterns within organizations. But as use of the medium increases, we are beginning to see examples of its dark side (see Catharine Vinson's article in NETWEAVER Vol. 2, no. 2 and the article in this issue by Martin and Helene Lee-Gosselin). Howard suggests some specific problems with the introduction of technology to the workplace which we can be mindful of as this medium develops:

1. Managerial assumptions and values motivating the use of new computer
technology in the workplace which may be confused and contradictory.

2. Flawed attempts to "humanize" the workplace which talk of new
participatory management styles in organizations but continue to create
occupational health and safety hazards for workers using new technology.

3. Inequalities of power which continue to shape working life and may make
the introduction of new technology just another example of workers' lack
of control over their working environment.

Howard's thesis is that we make a mistake if we view technological development as "purely" technological rather than as the "sometimes messy act of social construction, built upon a foundation of myriad interests and goals."

He specifically cites new technologies of computer and advanced telecommunications as the "central nervous system of the brave new workplace" and describes decisions determining their use as intimately affecting "work organization, corporate investment, products and markets, even industrial efficiency itself." The process of its introduction to the workplace is, therefore, critical to the relationship of technology and work overall.

Howard suggests that we have a responsibility to take an active role in this process and that *all* the social and institutional groups affected by the changes in working life brought by technology be represented in the decisions and choices made about these changes. These groups should include: the workers who use the technology, the unions who represent them, the designers, citizens who must live with technology's impacts, and government officials who approve public spending on research and development and who should also represent the "public good."

Were even a small minority of concerned computer
professionals to begin to speak out on the "social
responsibility of the systems designer" and, as in
Scandinavia, even join together informally and
formally with unions and other "user representative
groups" in order to create alternative approaches to
planning technology and work, then the project to
enlarge people's realm of choice in the brave new
workplace would take a giant step.


BRAVE NEW WORKPLACE is a challenging book. I found Howard's view of management somewhat stereotypical in terms of lack of sensitivity to organizational culture and worker satisfaction and his view of the traditional role of unions somewhat utopian. But the questions he raises are important ones for us all to address and I very much appreciated his assertion that WE are ultimately responsible for the how the new workplace turns out.