Observing how communication is used to construct a class system, and how class identification is obtained in a large hierarchical organization.
In my exploration of the class system I focused on ways the employees are divided into class groups. I examined the practice of annual review – a process used by managers to evaluate the employee performance. From a critical perspective, I looked at how the entire process functions as a control mechanism and contributes to class formation.
Looking at an organization which employs well-specialized engineers and a work force consisting of highly-educated personnel. Those who hold a Ph.D. are engaged in the research and development of advanced technology systems. The remaining staff consists of mechanical engineers and technicians who work in manufacturing and production. These are the employees who work offstage and are rarely seen in the area where the offices and conference rooms are. The office space is split into front and back, giving visibility and higher regard to employees who are in forward positions.
Each employee is expected to set yearly objectives and is responsible for achieving and working towards the set goals. Since the annual performance review is vital for professional advancement, employees often depend on their managers for good ratings. Managers who conduct evaluations of employee performance have seniority and hold higher positions within the organization; they are vice presidents, directors, senior managers and supervisors. These distinctions between levels are evidence of power relationships (p. 99).
Classism occurs when some people have power over the others (p. 98). In an organizational setting, power helps high-status managers to administer their subordinates; it gives them control over the workforce. In this setting, class matters because it affects the organizational system. The powerlessness employees experience leads to consent and subordination. As a result, employees are placed in ranks, and managers with higher status are given the ability to control others’ behavior. This legitimizes the system of domination and maintains the class system that seems very hard to change. Class becomes a product of power relations in the system of hierarchical organization. The workplace is a crucial site of class production and reproduction (p. 108).
In a competitive environment, where employees are driven to exceed expectations, success is seen as a result of “superior” individual effort and employee potential (p. 105). Everyone can advance if they work hard (p. 105). In the process of performance evaluation, however, employees are categorized and classified into groups based on cognitive abilities and skill set. No matter how hard employees work, their ranking is determined by their performance relative to others. Not all employees perform on the same level, especially in relation to each other. Those in business development teams who hold Masters or Bachelor’s Degrees have an advantage over manufacturing and assembly line employees, given their communication skills and capacity for achieving higher rankings. The apparent advantages of business administrators over blue-collar employees can be explained by the differences in cognitive and verbal abilities. In effect, use of performance review marginalizes employees, regardless of their performance capability. By holding employees responsible for their accomplishments, the process ignores the fact that “a person’s starting point can affect success” (p. 99).
Success often depends on social standing, which is determined at birth or earned over a lifetime. There is a difference between the ascribed and achieved status – a status acquired based on merit, skills and abilities. Looking at my own example, the difference in my manager’s and my social status is only the tip of the iceberg. The underwater part of the cultural iceberg is his class identification “based on conditions at birth, race, sex and place of birth” (p. 97). My manager is a white male who was born in the United States and was better positioned to attain resources like social skills and education, whereas I immigrated to America without financial assets and had to rely on my knowledge of language and interpreting skills to obtain my class identification.
Economic factors are not the only determinants of class (p. 98). According to French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, people use capital to achieve social status (p. 98). Bourdieu emphasizes three types of capital: “economic capital, which includes financial assets; cultural capital, which consists of specialized skills, education, experience, and knowledge such as linguistic; and social capital, which is networks of connections” (p. 98). Due to my cultural capital – the experiences I gained while traveling and the cultural competencies passed down through my family – I was able to work my way through the labyrinth of hierarchical organization. Unless we acknowledge that the economic, cultural and social capital can tilt the playing field in favor of those who have wealth, knowledge and connections, the hierarchies will not be flattened.
Through the ongoing practice of employee evaluation the stratification of employees is created and perpetuated. These types of company policies and processes grant control to managers who are subordinating members of their staff by rating employees into categories of high, basic and low contributors. Subordination of employees is a form of power. This process reinforces the class system; it secures status for employees in higher ranks and deprives those in lower ranks of power.
Moreover, classism is continually reproduced by communication practices and daily interactions. Social status is reflected in ways we communicate; it is apparent in employee conduct and determines a set of behaviors and expectations. We perform class through our choices of clothing, speech style, manners and food preference (p. 108). Our appearance signals status in the organization and helps us maintain a certain image (p. 108). Although people rarely admit how great a part of life is dependent on socioeconomic status (SES), which is determined by the combination of income, education and occupation, many of us throughout life and career strive to achieve status and privilege (p.100).
References
Allen, B. J. (2004) Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment