Discuss the differences between Fordist and Post-fordist work?

University Degree Business and Administrative studies

The question invites us to discuss the differences between fordism and post fordism. Fordism is way in which production is organised in “high period of industrial manufactures in the C20th and early 1970s” [1] and is mainly mass production. Post Fordism is due to the emergence of cultural and economic changes it’s more of specialisation in products rather then mass production of fordism. I will go through and look at the differences between fordism and post fordism and then I will conclude whether a difference actually exists.

Fordism was derived from the Henry Ford away from skilled, craft production to mass production. Ford didn't invent mass consumption but he realised it meant that new forms of modern psychology and labour management. This help to create new markets due to economies of scale and large organizations build upon functional specialization and divisions of labour. The system was known as standardization standardized components, manufacturing processes, and a simple, easy production process for standard product. Standardization required nearly perfect interchange ability of parts to achieve its ability; Ford exploited the need of technology by using machine tools and gauging systems. These innovations made possible the moving, or continuous, assembly line in which each assembler performed a single, repetitive task, which is known as mass production. In the 1970s fordism started to break down due to economic and political and social reasons. The problems of fordism were that new bonds of culture and diffusion of lifestyles and culture became complex and therefore firms found it hard to meet consumer demands. As Sabel (1982) claims that the chief factor is the changing nature of consumer tastes. Increasing the demand is for customized products that incorporate quality design features.

Post-fordism was more of specialisation into products and services. “The aim of designing new products, and of exploiting gaps in the market.” [2] Basically the cultural and economics changes meant that people demanded for different items and therefore these items have to be supplied by the producer this therefore created niche markets. Post fordist begin in the 1970s and 1980s came to call Third Italy. Third Italy was about

“small workshops and factories employing usually no more then 5-50 workers, and often less then 10 had come to constitute the core of thriving, ‘industrial districts’. Each region specialized in a range of loosely related products.”[3].

Also the workplace was brand new, with high technology with numerically controlled tools. These were sophisticated and applied to both national and international markets.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Also the workplace was brand new, with high technology with numerically controlled tools. These were sophisticated and applied to both national and international markets.

Fordism is standardisation of products meaning that component parts are standardised and become interchangeable. The mechanisation of tasks is using special-purpose machinery to enable this type of mass production. Using the scientific management of tasks also known as Taylorism. Taylor believed that all jobs have an optimum way of being performed and that they can all be broken down into component parts. So that parts can be analysed scientifically to determine the most efficient way of doing it. He had set principles to guide management. They are usually defined as follows:

“The development of a true science for each person’s work. The scientific selection, training and development of the workers. Co-operation with the workers to ensure work is being carried out in the prescribed way. The division of work and responsibility between management and the workers.” [Mullins, 1985:49].

Post fordism involves new techniques of organisation and control of work like Just in time production (JIT). JIT is when you are produce the amount needed and therefore avoid waste. You are also reducing your expenses because you don’t need a lot storage space to store the products. Zero Stock and other methods like work teams, which work together to complete certain tasks this, may increase the motivation of some employers. Total quality management is at all levels of production quality checks are made to ensure quality standards are met.

Labour, which is a very important element to the production of goods and services. Fordism had fragmented and standardised work because it is an assembly line job. Whereas post fordism it is flexible specialisation with multi-skilled workers. It’s the companies’ ability to adjust its workers so that they can supply the product demanded.

“It relates to the use of internal and external labour markets in association with the polarizing of labour use, as critical, and thus privileged ‘core’, workers are divorced from non-critical and hence disadvantaged ‘peripheral’ workers”[4]

It is representing that workers are giving the responsibility of the work therefore enables the workforce to be multi skilled. Which means workers are not attached to a single job, which in effect makes labour more flexible. In fordism the employers are seen as being low trust and discretion majority mainly employed in the manufacturing industries, which usually involves a blue-collar job, as workers don’t have a lot of autonomy because they have to follow instructions. Whereas in post fordism high trust and discretion majority mainly employed in service sector industries and involve a white collar job. In fordism there is little requirement in job training it is usually on the spot training and skills are not updated to often as they are operating activities on an assembly line. Whereas for fordism there is a greater need for training as there is a demand for workers with knowledge the reason being is that workers are multi skilled and therefore not doing reparative tasks as fordist theory workers. This also has an element of motivation for the workers because if they are performing repetitive jobs they may not be motivated and therefore will not be meeting Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

“Maslow's basic position is that as one becomes more self-actualised and self-transcendent, one becomes more wise (develops wisdom) and automatically knows what to do in a wide variety of situations.”[5].

In fordism the markets are fairly predictable labour market therefore easy to plan for labour needs. However in post fordism unpredictable labour market histories due to technological changes and increased economic uncertainty.

Fordism not all did affect the work itself it also invaded into the homes of people because fordist was all about assembly line this also regulated family life along with the work life. Whereas fordism is “wider and deeper social and cultural development”(Hall and Jacques 1989b: 12) Meaning that it affected people they become more social able with other people and start interacting with them. It also had a political effect as there was a decline in national class political parties and class voting however there was in post fordism an increase in social movements. Also “Labour party, qua social democratic, could gain from the fordist system, with its Keynesian welfare state politics, it is Conservative Party which is pioneering the transition to post-fordism”(Jessop et al 1987:109-10). The reason being that reaganism and Thatcherism have benefited the post fordism development .In fordism time there was a lot of trade union membership however this has decreased now due to employees being able to go and negotiate with the employers which is known as plant based bargaining and also due to industrial tribunals etc. Also in fordism there was importance of locality, gender and class based lifestyle however this has come less important now. This maybe due to rise of individualism modes of behaviour and the way in which people have started to think. In fordism the mass consumption meant that there was the similar goods therefore not a wide variety whereas due to the specialisation it meant individual consumption and also consumers get a choice.

Overall I think there are many criticisms of the Post fordist theorists, Third Italy is a situation, which is unique and therefore can’t represent the entire industrial world. Also there are different economic tendencies-fordism is craft production to mass production and post fordism is specialisation. Also many critics have argued that Taylorism is a different thing from fordism because its also batch production as well as mass production.

“The assemble line itself, the very symbol of Fordism, was never present in more then a minority of plants in advanced economies” (Williams et al, 1987,1992;Sayer 1989;Wood 1989b;Thompson 1989; 218-29;Clarke 1990a, 1990b)

A large difference does not exist between the two theories however many books and authors suggest there are a vast difference, when in effect it’s the same thing but just a continuing evolution from fordism to post-fordism. Also this fordism and post fordism only fits into some countries, Andrew Sayer says that Japan doesn’t fit neither into a model of post fordism or fordism. Also suggest there were change in 1920s by Taylorism and assembly line however the 1970s and 1980s saw decentralisation of products. However these “changes are important but don’t mark fundamental break in order of capitalists industrialisation”[6]. However they are two different theories because fordism doesn’t really take into account the needs and wants of customers it just produces the goods however as time changed culture, economic and political changes. “What we have, then, is not the replacement of one form of production by another but the development of parallel and juxtaposed systems operating for different kinds of markets.” [7]. It meant that people demanded for different things creating consumer choice and therefore created niche markets.

References

[1] Dr Nick Thoburn (2004), Lecture 6, Fordism and Post Fordism notes, none published University Of Manchester

[2] Kumar,K From Post-Industrial to Post-Modern Society,Oxford:Blackwell,Chapter 3 ‘Fordism and Post Fordism’.P38

[3] Kumar,K From Post-Industrial to Post-Modern S ociety,Oxford:Blackwell,Chapter 3 ‘Fordism and Post Fordism’.P38

[4] Grint (1998), Sociology of work, Chapter 8, p285

[5] Citation: Huitt, W. (2004). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date] from: http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html.

[6] Kumar,K From Post-Industrial to Post-Modern Society,Oxford:Blackwell,Chapter 3 ‘Fordism and Post Fordism’.P64

[7] Grint (1998), Sociology of work, Chapter 8,p287