The ties that bind us: Networks, projects and careers in British TV

IF 4.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Jonathan Morris, A. Mckinlay, Catherine Farrell
{"title":"The ties that bind us: Networks, projects and careers in British TV","authors":"Jonathan Morris, A. Mckinlay, Catherine Farrell","doi":"10.1177/00187267211062863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dominant view of careers is that they have been transformed by the emergence of ‘post-bureaucratic’ organizations. ‘Neo-bureaucratic’ structures have emerged, retaining centralized control over strategy and finance while outsourcing production, creating employment precarity. British television epitomizes a sector that has experienced long-run deregulation. Producing television content is risky and highly competitive. How do broadcasters minimize the risks of television production? Broadcasting neo-bureaucracies avoid relying on fragmented labour markets to hire technically self-disciplining crews. Control regimes are enacted through activating social networks by broadcast commissioners, green-lit to trusted creative teams who recruit key crew, through social networks that complement diffuse forms of normative control. Social networks and the self-discipline of crews are mutually constitutive, (re)producing patterns of labour market advantage/disadvantage. Younger freelancers prove vulnerable, exposed to precariousness inherent in freelance employment; to build a career they must access and sustain their social network membership. We locate individual decisions around career narratives in the context of specific social networks and industry structures. Careers are not boundaryless, individual constructs. We introduce the concept of ‘mosaic-career’, capturing the complexity of individual work histories, composed of fragmented employment in organizations/projects. How do neo-bureaucracies, then, intervene in labour markets? What are the consequences of those interventions?","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"76 1","pages":"341 - 361"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267211062863","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The dominant view of careers is that they have been transformed by the emergence of ‘post-bureaucratic’ organizations. ‘Neo-bureaucratic’ structures have emerged, retaining centralized control over strategy and finance while outsourcing production, creating employment precarity. British television epitomizes a sector that has experienced long-run deregulation. Producing television content is risky and highly competitive. How do broadcasters minimize the risks of television production? Broadcasting neo-bureaucracies avoid relying on fragmented labour markets to hire technically self-disciplining crews. Control regimes are enacted through activating social networks by broadcast commissioners, green-lit to trusted creative teams who recruit key crew, through social networks that complement diffuse forms of normative control. Social networks and the self-discipline of crews are mutually constitutive, (re)producing patterns of labour market advantage/disadvantage. Younger freelancers prove vulnerable, exposed to precariousness inherent in freelance employment; to build a career they must access and sustain their social network membership. We locate individual decisions around career narratives in the context of specific social networks and industry structures. Careers are not boundaryless, individual constructs. We introduce the concept of ‘mosaic-career’, capturing the complexity of individual work histories, composed of fragmented employment in organizations/projects. How do neo-bureaucracies, then, intervene in labour markets? What are the consequences of those interventions?
将我们联系在一起的纽带:英国电视界的网络、项目和职业
对职业的主流看法是,“后官僚”组织的出现改变了他们的职业生涯新官僚结构已经出现,在外包生产的同时,保留了对战略和财务的集中控制,造成了就业的不稳定。英国电视业是经历了长期放松管制的行业的缩影。制作电视内容风险大,竞争激烈。广播公司如何将电视制作的风险降至最低?广播新官僚机构避免依赖分散的劳动力市场来雇佣技术上自律的工作人员。控制制度是通过广播专员激活社交网络制定的,为招募关键工作人员的值得信赖的创意团队开绿灯,通过社交网络补充分散形式的规范控制。社交网络和员工的自律是相互构成的,(重新)产生了劳动力市场优势/劣势的模式。年轻的自由职业者被证明是脆弱的,暴露在自由职业固有的不稳定中;为了建立职业生涯,他们必须获得并保持社交网络会员资格。我们在特定的社会网络和行业结构的背景下,围绕职业叙事定位个人决策。职业并不是无边界的、个体的结构。我们引入了“马赛克职业”的概念,捕捉了个人工作历史的复杂性,由组织/项目中的零散就业组成。那么,新官僚机构是如何干预劳动力市场的呢?这些干预措施的后果是什么?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Relations
Human Relations Multiple-
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
7.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信