The discussions on skill as discretion and complexity and skill in the person believe that skills can be objectively analysed. However, the limitations of this approach is that it ignores the ways in which skills are socially and politically constructed. Therefore, it is important to also take into account skill in the setting.
-
SKILL IN THE SETTING
This concentrates on how skill becomes defined in a particular workplace over time by different interest groups. This is the most common approach amongst sociologists. Central to this is an understanding of ‘social closure’ Weber (1947). This refers to the way people with a shared interest protect themselves by acting collectively to form a group which is in some way demarcated. Entry to this group is regulated by the existing members, thus they may choose to exclude or include outsiders depending on whether it serves their interests. An occupational group then can enact social closure to insulate itself from competition in the labour market and unites a group by a ‘consciousness of difference’ by using 3 mechanisms:-
-
Ideological – This requires 1) shared values and beliefs 2) reinforced through symbols and language
-
Political – This requires 1) collective organisation and, 2) regulation of the labour supply
-
Material – This requires 1) the appropriation of tools and technology 2) control of work organisation and task allocation.
a) Shared beliefs and values
b) Language and symbols
It is one thing for a group to have shared values and beliefs leading to a collective identity but a group must support this through a representative body for the organisation to act collectively.
a) Collective organisation
b) Regulation of the labour supply
Groups also need to control and exert influence over the way work is undertaken. They attempt to do this based on:-
-
Control of work organisation and task allocation
-
Appropriation of tools and technology
Social closure is only enacted when these three processes are inter-related. It can be argued that groups may also lose their skill status if one or other of these processes are not enacted. Time is also crucial, for example, in today’s context the political capital has changed, for instance, the closed shop has been removed. Similarly, new technology may have replaced the material tools of the trade.
THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF SKILL
The key argument of those who adopt a social construction approach to skill is that for a group to lay claim to skilled status they must establish its distinctiveness and separateness. This raises a question - Is the attribution of skill solely a product of social construction? or, Do objective factors also have an effect? Littler (1982) distinguishes between two forms of social construction:
- ‘strong’ whereby skill depends not on the job content but on the control of supply through employers’ or workers’ entry barriers and, in this case, skilled status can be achieved through social closure without necessarily any inherent task complexity and knowledge. Workers therefore ‘talk up’ the skilled nature of their work.
- ‘weak’ stresses that most jobs have significant skills but this is only recognised as such by the ability of workers to define them as such. So the technical skills are merely a starting point but does not guarantee the occupation a skilled status because the occupational group must enact social closure.
Although thus far we have concentrated on occupational groups, it is the example of gender which illustrates most vividly the way skills are socially constructed. Further, this raises important issues concerning equality.
GENDER AND SKILL
Social closure also refers to the way men as a social group have mobilised their interests over women in the labour market, so that what we define as skills have been constructed to benefit men and disadvantage men. There is now a range of evidence which substantiates this claim, especially the work of dual systems theorists and those academics who view gendering as significant for understanding social processes such as skill construction. Phillips and Taylor (1986) stress that,
‘it is the qualities of the worker rather than the skill content of the work that is important in deeming women’s work as unskilled; ‘women workers carry into the workplace their status of subordinate individuals and this status comes to define the value of the work they do’ (1986: 55).
Their work indicates the way ideological processes are crucial for understanding the linking of skills with gender. The debate on gender and skill concentrates upon three processes by which men have been able to define their work as skilled. These include:- a) mobilisation of political interests b) ideological interests and c) material resources.
GENDER AND IDEOLOGICAL PROCESSES.
Ideological processes have also been influential in sustaining women’s disadvantaged position within the labour market. These processes are concerned with the ideology of attributing certain attitudes and behaviours as either male or female. These give rise to stereotypes of males and females which inform our wider culture. The workplace is a key site when male and female stereotypes are affirmed. Many workers seek to differentiate themselves from the opposite sex by over-emphasising the masculinity or femininity of their work. For example, the significant gender stereotypes which are still, to some extent relevant for understanding the allocation of work are:-
- Men are viewed as better suited to work which involved physical strength, logical thought and responsibility.
- Women are viewed as better suited to work involving care, demands manual dexterity and which is boring and repetitive.
Examples from case studies illustrate that it is not just that men and women undertake different work but that this work is valued differently. Women’s work is considered un-skilled compared with the work which is undertaken by men and even in cases where women and men work together it is still the case that men are graded more highly and are better rewarded.
GENDER AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS
Workers’ capacity to define skill is contingent upon the strategic position which they occupy in the workplace and the collective organisation of the workforce. It is argued that in these settings men have been proactive in seeking to protect and differentiate their skills from those of women. Feminist research has suggested that it is male workers that have best been able to draw upon collective organisation in the form of trades unions to define their work as skilled (Cockburn, 1983; Bradley, 1986; Walby, 1986). They have been able to do this through managing the supply of labour as craft unions have secured control over apprenticeships and training and by mobilising political support to define their work as skilled. It is also apparent that professional associations have also been active in excluding women e.g. midwifery excluded as a medical profession by doctors.
GENDER AND THE MATERIAL PROCESS
Cynthia Cockburn’s (1983:1985) research on printers at a time of technological change remains one of the best examples of the ways in which men appropriated material resources in order to claim their status as skilled workers. The two ways in which men have used material means to maintain their status as skilled is through the physical and technological effectiveness.
Physicality - ‘shouldn’t do it’
Technicality – ‘couldn’t do it’
COCKBURN’S CASE STUDY : PRINTERS
Her study focuses on changes in the skill levels of print workers and the ensuing power of their unions to enact social closure. Printers originally worked with hot metal to compose the print, this required physicality and the ability to endure heat. However, the advent of new technology required print workers to work with computers and VDU terminals and to learn typing skills. Although some of their past skills were useful in the sense of they knew how the print was constructed and they had knowledge of how to construct a newspaper – this new work only used a small percentage of their past craft skills.
Cockburn argues that for most the changes in new technology has brought increased earnings and a reduction in working hours and less pressure. As the work is more generalised and easier the men feel that they are loosing their status. These feelings are partly related to the way printers felt a sense of self-respect which includes an element of masculinity in these sentiments. The men are sensitive to the gender skills of typing and the fact they have lost the ability to differentiate themselves, not just from unskilled men but also from women. Cockburn notes how these craftsmen were caught in a double-bind. The nature of their work and its association with metal was undeniably male and the new VDU skills was associated with women’s work, thus they either see themselves as being deskilled or they must accept that many women are as skilled as men. Cockburn notes that much of the bitterness the men feel is explained by these contradictions.
These developments destabilised the previous synchronisation of skill in the man, job and setting. What the workers were left with was skill in the person but these skills were no longer relevant for skill in the job, whilst the political definition of skill was also seriously reduced because of the diminished power of the trade union. Thus for these men the skill and craft of their job has been removed and therefore they are deskilled.
THE ROLE OF MANAGEMENT IN SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTING SKILLS
Although much of the debate concerning the social construction of skills rest with the ability of men and in particular their representatives to mobilise their interests it also has to be noted that management have also been active as well as complicit in the social construction of skill. Example - Collinson and Knights’s (1986) research into the insurance industry indicated the importance of examining management perceptions in the creation and reproduction of sex-typed work. As well as reinforcing the sexual division of labour through their employment practices, management are also involved in under-valuing women’s work - Why?
- Financial Incentive
- Social Values
- Customer Expectations
Research into Royal Mail (Jenkins et al 2002) illustrated the way management and unions have acted together to sustain a sex-typed workplace. However, changes in the organisation have challenged these practices and there is a tension between workers and managers – men have lost their political and material resources to sustain the workplace as a male domain. In these cases, ideological resources were used to demarcate the territory as male.
CONCLUSION
It is apparent that there are many ways in which we can analyse skill. It is argued here that as well as the person and the job we need to take into account the ways in which skills are socially constructed – taking account of political, ideological and material processes by which some groups have enacted social closure. It is important to recognise the diversity in analysing skills because of the crucial important skill has in defining the status of the job and in role definitions of skill has in perpetuating the sexual division of labour.
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES
Collinson, D. L. and Knights, D. (1986) ‘Men Only’: Theories and Practice and Job Segregation in Insurance’, in Knights, D. and Willmott, H. (eds.) Gender and the Labour Process, London: Sage.
Davis, C. and Rosser, J. (1986) ‘Gendered Jobs in the Health Service’, in Knights, D. and Willmott, H. (eds.) Gender and the Labour Process, Aldershot: Gower.
Grint, K. (1988) ‘Women and equality: the acquisition of equal pay in the Post Office 1870-1961’, Sociology, 22(1): 87-108.
Jenson, J. (1989) ‘The talents of women, the skill of men’, in S. Wood (ed.) The Transformation of Work? London: Unwin Hyman.
Littler, C. R. (1982) The Development of the Labour Process in Capitalist Societies, Aldershot: Gower.
Phillips, A. & Taylor, B. (1980) ‘Sex and skill : notes towards feminist economics’, Feminist Review (6): 79-88.
Walby, S. (1986) Patriarchy at Work, Cambridge: Polity Press.
READING
Noon, M. and Blyton, P. (2002) Realities of Work, Chap. 5 Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Attewell, P. (1990) ‘What is skill?’, Work and Occupations,17(4): 88-115.
Cockburn, C. (1985) The Machinery of Dominance: Women, Men and
Technical Know-How, London: Pluto Press.
Cockburn, C. (1983) Brothers: Male Dominance and Technological Change, London: Pluto Press.
Francis, B. and Penn, R. (1994) ‘Towards a phenomenology of skills’, in Penn, R., Rose, M. and Rubery, J. (1994) (eds.) Skill and Occupational Change, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, S., Martinez-Lucio M. and Noon, M. (2002) ‘Return to Gender: An Analysis of Women’s Disadvantage in Postal Work’, Gender, Work and Organization, 9(1): 81-104.
Steinberg, R. J. (1990) ‘Social construction of skill’, Work and Occupations, 17(4): 449-82.
Steiger, T. L. (1993) ‘Construction skill and skill construction’, Work, Employment and Society, 7(4): 535-60.
Wacjman, J. (1991) ‘Patriarchy, technology and skill’, Work and Occupations, 18 (1): 29-45.