Essai: organizational time; modern, symbolic and postmodern reflections

Organization Studies, Nov-Dec, 2002 by John Hassard

Abstract

This paper reflects upon how the concept of time is depicted in three major perspectives of organization theory--modem, symbolic and postmodern. In so doing, it draws upon time metaphors from sociological theory to make sense of time-related issues in the evolution of organizational analysis. The paper analyses, for example, the commodification of time identified in labour process analysis; the social construction of time described in workplace ethnographies; and the compression of time (and space) proposed in writing on post-Fordism. Overall, the paper promotes a reflexive pluri-paradigm appreciation of time in organization theory and research.

Descriptors: time metaphors, organizational analysis, sociological theory

Introduction

This short paper reflects upon images of temporal structuring and experience in the evolution of organization analysis. In particular, we analyze the various metaphors that reflect the way time is used and experienced in organizations. While initially the focus is upon those modernist linear time images that stem from the progressive commodification of the labour process, subsequently this analysis is qualified by time images that reflect the social construction of organizational symbolism and culture. An examination of the homogeneous time-reckoning systems of Taylorism is complemented here by examples of heterogeneous time-reckoning from anthropological and ethnographic studies of work and organization. Finally, we turn to postmodernism and discuss the notion of 'instantaneous time', whereby organizational practices are based on time-frames that lie beyond feasible human consciousness. Central to this debate is the notion of the time-space compression of physical processes and human experiences. Overall, th e paper promotes a reflexive appreciation of time images, associated with comprehending a plurality of theoretical perspectives, when conducting research on organizations and organizing.

Images of Organizational Time

During the last twenty years or so, sociologists have argued that metaphor is a powerful tool for organizational analysis (see Manning 1979; Morgan 1986; Hatch 1999). Morgan (1986), in particular, described the power of metaphor for interpreting work organizations as 'systems', 'machines', 'dramas', organisms', and even 'psychic prisons'. In research that seeks to analyze the more specific issue of organizational time, however, relatively few explanatory metaphors have yet emerged. Of those that have, the most influential have been basic ones of the 'line' and the 'cycle' type.

In organization studies, the linear metaphor has been influential, because of its link with a further concept--time as a commodity of the industrial process. This link is central to the development of what has been called the 'linear-quantitative' tradition in the sociology of time (Hassard 1990, 1996). The linear-quantitative tradition--and, in particular, its key notion of temporal commodification--is perceived as modernist in that it reflects those time-based technologies that were developed in the wake of industrialization and mechanization. During the rise of industrialism this sense of unilinearity was to find time equated with value (Thompson 1967; Thrift 1990; Nyland 1986). Technological and manufacturing innovations saw the concept of time become closely aligned with that of organizational progress. Time, like the individual, became a commodity of the production process, for, in the crucial equation that linked acceleration and accumulation, a human value could be placed upon time. In classical labou r-process analysis, surplus value is accrued through extracting more time from labourers than is required to produce goods that have the value of their wages (Marx 1976, first published 1867).

Mumford (1934) characterized the moment when he suggested that 'the clock, not the steam engine [was] the key machine of the industrial age' (1934: 14). He suggested that the reason why organizations of the industrial revolution were able to display such high levels of functional specialization was the rapid development and deployment of technologies of synchronization. Large production-based firms required considerable segmentation of both parts (roles and positions) and activities in time and space. Such specializations set requirements for extensive time/space co-ordination at both intra- and inter-organizational levels. As high levels of co-ordination needed high levels of planning, so sophisticated temporal schedules were necessary to provide a satisfactory degree of predictability. The basis of fine prediction became that of sophisticated measurement, with efficient organization becoming synonymous with detailed temporal assessments of productivity. As the machine became the focal point of work, so time schedules became the central feature of planning. In the modem era, the clock was the instrument of co-ordination and control. The time period replaced the task as the focal unit of production. The omnipresence of the factory clock brought with it the idea that one is exchanging time rather than skill--selling labour-time rather than labour.