Empowerment and beyond: Paradoxes of self-organised work

Sauer, Stefan; Nicklich, Manuel

doi:10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.2.0073

ScienceOpen: research and publishing network

For Publishers

For Researchers

Blog
About

Search
Advanced search

965

views

recommends

Call for Papers: Hierarchies of domesticity – spatial and social boundaries. Deadline for submissions is 30^th September, 2024. Full details can be read here.

Articles to be no longer than 6,000 words (excluding footnotes and bibliography) and submitted in two forms: an anonymised version in which all references to the authors’ institution and publications are omitted; and a full version including the authors’ titles and institutional affiliations. For complete instructions on style, formatting, etc., please consult: https://www.plutojournals.com/wp-content/uploads/WOLG-Instructions-for-Authors2023.pdf

scite_

Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation

Volume 15, Issue 2

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Empowerment and beyond: Paradoxes of self-organised work

Published

research-article

Author(s): Stefan Sauer , Manuel Nicklich

Publication date (Print): 1 January 2021

Journal: Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation

Publisher: Pluto Journals

Keywords: agile work, autonomy and control, knowledge work, paradox, project-based work, self-organisation

Bookmark

Abstract

In recent years, empowerment has increasingly become the watchword for work in knowledge-intensive industries. In particular, The Agile Manifesto (2001) and new management approaches such as agile frameworks promise to cut down documentation duties and increase autonomy for knowledge workers. It nonetheless remains an open question whether self-organisation as a structural framework and self-organising as an agentic, team-based process can actually be realised in a holistic manner. By building on insights into the paradox of organising and the paradox of autonomy and control, we consider the conditions under which self-organised work in fact becomes feasible. We therefore focus conceptually on two paradoxes of empowerment and empirically on project teams within software development firms. Our data show that organisations might respond to these paradoxes by structurally and culturally opening up to agile approaches – thereby not only empowering teams, but also enabling them to develop by providing structural and personal resources, qualifications and means for promoting self-awareness.

Content

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (doi): 10.2307/j50010512

Journal ID (jcode): workorgalaboglob

Title: Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation

Publisher: Pluto Journals

ISSN: 1745-641X

ISSN: 1745-6428

Publication date (Print): 1 January 2021

Volume: 15

Issue: 2 ( doiID: 10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.issue-2 )

Pages: 73-90

Article

Publisher ID: workorgalaboglob.15.2.0073

DOI: 10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.2.0073

SO-VID: f0ca9be9-94fc-4b51-a760-e79301485f7a

License:

All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

History

Custom metadata

lang eng

ScienceOpen disciplines: Sociology,Labor law,Political science,Labor & Demographic economics,Political economics

Keywords: project-based work,self-organisation,paradox,knowledge work,autonomy and control,agile work

References

Annosi, M.C., N. Foss, F. Brunetta & M. Magnusson (2017) ‘The interaction of control systems and stakeholder networks in shaping the identities of self-managed teams’, Organisation Studies, 38 (5):619–645.
Anzola, D., P. Barbrook-Johnson & J. Cano (2017) ‘Self-organisation and social science’, Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory, 23 (2):221–257.
Ashcraft, K.L. & A. Kedrowicz (2002) ‘Self-direction or social support? Nonprofit empowerment and the tacit employment contract of organisational communication studies’, Communication Monographs, 69 (1):88–110.
Barker, J.R. (1993) ‘Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (3):408–437.
Bartonitz, M., V. Lévesque, T. Michl, W. Steinbrecher, C. Vonhof & L.F.J. Wagner (eds) (2018) Agile Verwaltung: Wie der Öffentliche Dienst aus der Gegenwart die Zukunft entwickeln kann. Berlin: Springer Gabler.
Bartunek, J.M. & G.M. Spreitzer (2006) ‘The interdisciplinary career of a popular construct used in management: Empowerment in the late 20th century’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 15 (3):255–273.
Beck, K., M. Beedle, A. Van Bennekum, A. Cockburn, W. Cunningham, M. Fowler, et al. (2001) ‘Manifesto for agile software development’, https://agilemanifesto.org (accessed 4 February 2021).
Bernstein, E.S. (2012) ‘The transparency paradox: A role for privacy in organisational learning and operational control’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 57 (2):181–216.
Bowen, D.E. & E.E. Lawler (1995) ‘Empowering service employees’, Sloan Management Review, 36 (4):73–84.
Child, J. (2005) Organisation: Contemporary Principles and Practice, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Clegg, S.R., J.V. Da Cunha & M.P.E. Cunha (2002) ‘Management paradoxes: A relational view’, Human Relations, 55:483–509.
Cockburn, A. & J. Highsmith (2001) ‘Agile software development, the people factor’, Computer, 34 (11):131–133.
Davidow, W.H. & M.S. Malone (1992) The Virtual Corporation: Structuring and Revitalising the Corporation for the 21st Century, New York: Harper Paperbacks.
Deleuze, G. (1993) Unterhandlungen 1972–1990, Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
Dykstra-DeVette, T.A. & H.E. Canary (2019) ‘Crystalline empowerment: Negotiating tensions in refugee resettlement’, Organisation Studies, 40 (3):323–342.
Edwards, P. & M. Collinson (2002) ‘Empowerment and managerial labor strategy’, Work and Occupations, 29 (3):272–299.
Friedman, A.L. (1977) Industry and Labour: Class Struggle at Work and Monopoly Capitalism, London: Macmillan.
Gilbert, N., D. Anzola, P. Johnson, C. Elsenbroich, T. Balke & O. Dilaver (2015) ‘Self-organising dynamical systems’ in J.D. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, London: Elsevier:13844–13859.
Hales, C. (2000) ‘Management and empowerment programmes’, Work, Employment and Society, 14 (3):501–19.
Hargrave, T.J. & A.H. Van de Ven (2017) ‘Integrating dialectical and paradox perspectives on managing contradictions in organisations’, Organisation Studies, 38 (3–4):319–339.
Harley, B. (1999) ‘The myth of empowerment: Work organisation, hierarchy and employee autonomy in contemporary Australian workplaces’, Work, Employment and Society, 13 (1):41–66.
Hirsch, R.D. (2016) International Entrepreneurship, Los Angeles: SAGE.
Hodgson, D. & L. Briand (2013) ‘Controlling the uncontrollable: “Agile” teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work’, Work, Employment and Society, 27 (2):308–325.
Holbeche, L. (2015), The Agile Organization: How to Build an Innovative, Sustainable and Resilient Business. London and Philadelphia: Kogan Page.
Kameo, N. (2017) ‘A culture of uncertainty: Interaction and organisational memory in software engineering teams under a productivity scheme’, Organisation Studies, 38 (6):733–752.
Khan, S. & R. VanWynsberghe (2004) ‘Cultivating the under-mined: Cross-case analysis as knowledge mobilization’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9 (1):34.
Kirkman, B.L. & B. Rosen (1999) ‘Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment’, Academy of Management Journal, 42 (1):8–74.
Kohlbacher, F. (2006) ‘The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7 (1):1–30.
Komus, A. (2020) Status Quo (Scaled) Agile, https://www.process-and-project.net/studien/studienunterseiten/status-quo-scaled-agile-2020/ (accessed 4 February 2021).
Langfred, C.W. (2000) ‘The paradox of self-management: Individual and group autonomy in work groups’, Journal of Organisational Behavior, 21 (5):563–585.
Lee, C.K. & Y. Shen (2009) ‘The paradox and possibility of a public sociology of labor’, Work and Occupation, 36 (2):110–125.
Mann, C. & F. Maurer (2005) ‘A case study on the impact of Scrum on overtime and customer satisfaction’, Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference, Denver, CO, USA, 24–29 July:70–79.
Mayring, P. (2000) ‘Qualitative content analyses’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1 (2):20.
Mazmanian, M., W.J. Orlikowski & J. Yates (2013) ‘The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals’, Organisation Science, 24 (5):1337–1357.
Nerur, S., R. Mahapatra & G. Mangalaraj (2005) ‘Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies’, Communications of the ACM, 48 (5):72–78.
Nicklich, M., S. Sauer & S. Pfeiffer (2021) ‘Antecedents and consequences of agility – on the ongoing invocation of self-organization’ in S. Pfeiffer, M. Nicklich & S. Sauer (eds), The Agile Imperative. Teams, Organizations and Society under Reconstruction? Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan:19–38.
Pongratz, H.J. & G.G. Voß (1997) ‘Fremdorganisierte Selbstorganisation. Eine soziologische Diskussion aktueller Managementkonzepte’, German Journal of Human Resource Management, 11 (1):30–53.
Prange, C. & L. Heracleous (2018) Agility. X: How Organizations Thrive in Unpredictable Times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rappaport, J. (1981) ‘In praise of paradox: A social policy of empowerment over prevention’, American Journal of Community Psychology, 9 (1):1–25.
Sauer, S. (2017) Wertschätzend selbst organisieren? Arbeitsvermögens- und anerkennungsbasierte Selbstorganisation bei Projektarbeit. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Sauer, S. & M. Nicklich (2018) ‘Dealing with paradoxes of agile project management. Team-based self-organization between promises and challenges’, Journal of the Academy of Business and Economics, 18 (2):71–76.
Seawright, J. & J. Gerring (2008) ‘Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options’, Political Research Quarterly, 61 (2):294–308.
Smith, W.K. & M.W. Lewis (2011) ‘Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organising’, Academy of Management Review, 36 (2):381–403.
Sobering, K. (2019) ‘Watercooler democracy: Rumors and transparency in a cooperative workplace’, Work and Occupations, 46 (4):411–440.
Sutherland, J. (2015) Scrum: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time, London: Random House.
Taskin, L., M. Ajzen & C. Donis (2017) ‘New ways of working: From smart to shared power’ in V. Muhlbauer & W. Harry (eds), Redefining Management: Smart Power Perspectives, Berlin: Springer:65–79.
Tight, M. (2017) Understanding Case Study Research: Small-Scale Research with Meaning, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Weidenstedt, L. (2016) ‘Empowerment gone bad: Communicative consequences of power transfers’, Socius, 2:1–11.
Yin, R.K. (2009) Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] Annosi, M.C., N. Foss, F. Brunetta & M. Magnusson (2017) ‘The interaction of control systems and stakeholder networks in shaping the identities of self-managed teams’, Organisation Studies, 38 (5):619–645.

[2] Anzola, D., P. Barbrook-Johnson & J. Cano (2017) ‘Self-organisation and social science’, Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory, 23 (2):221–257.

[3] Ashcraft, K.L. & A. Kedrowicz (2002) ‘Self-direction or social support? Nonprofit empowerment and the tacit employment contract of organisational communication studies’, Communication Monographs, 69 (1):88–110.

[4] Barker, J.R. (1993) ‘Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (3):408–437.

[5] Bartonitz, M., V. Lévesque, T. Michl, W. Steinbrecher, C. Vonhof & L.F.J. Wagner (eds) (2018) Agile Verwaltung: Wie der Öffentliche Dienst aus der Gegenwart die Zukunft entwickeln kann. Berlin: Springer Gabler.

[6] Bartunek, J.M. & G.M. Spreitzer (2006) ‘The interdisciplinary career of a popular construct used in management: Empowerment in the late 20th century’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 15 (3):255–273.

[7] Beck, K., M. Beedle, A. Van Bennekum, A. Cockburn, W. Cunningham, M. Fowler, et al. (2001) ‘Manifesto for agile software development’, https://agilemanifesto.org (accessed 4 February 2021).

[8] Bernstein, E.S. (2012) ‘The transparency paradox: A role for privacy in organisational learning and operational control’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 57 (2):181–216.

[9] Bowen, D.E. & E.E. Lawler (1995) ‘Empowering service employees’, Sloan Management Review, 36 (4):73–84.

[10] Child, J. (2005) Organisation: Contemporary Principles and Practice, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

[11] Clegg, S.R., J.V. Da Cunha & M.P.E. Cunha (2002) ‘Management paradoxes: A relational view’, Human Relations, 55:483–509.

[12] Cockburn, A. & J. Highsmith (2001) ‘Agile software development, the people factor’, Computer, 34 (11):131–133.

[13] Davidow, W.H. & M.S. Malone (1992) The Virtual Corporation: Structuring and Revitalising the Corporation for the 21st Century, New York: Harper Paperbacks.

[14] Deleuze, G. (1993) Unterhandlungen 1972–1990, Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.

[15] Dykstra-DeVette, T.A. & H.E. Canary (2019) ‘Crystalline empowerment: Negotiating tensions in refugee resettlement’, Organisation Studies, 40 (3):323–342.

[16] Edwards, P. & M. Collinson (2002) ‘Empowerment and managerial labor strategy’, Work and Occupations, 29 (3):272–299.

[17] Friedman, A.L. (1977) Industry and Labour: Class Struggle at Work and Monopoly Capitalism, London: Macmillan.

[18] Gilbert, N., D. Anzola, P. Johnson, C. Elsenbroich, T. Balke & O. Dilaver (2015) ‘Self-organising dynamical systems’ in J.D. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, London: Elsevier:13844–13859.

[19] Hales, C. (2000) ‘Management and empowerment programmes’, Work, Employment and Society, 14 (3):501–19.

[20] Hargrave, T.J. & A.H. Van de Ven (2017) ‘Integrating dialectical and paradox perspectives on managing contradictions in organisations’, Organisation Studies, 38 (3–4):319–339.

[21] Harley, B. (1999) ‘The myth of empowerment: Work organisation, hierarchy and employee autonomy in contemporary Australian workplaces’, Work, Employment and Society, 13 (1):41–66.

[22] Hirsch, R.D. (2016) International Entrepreneurship, Los Angeles: SAGE.

[23] Hodgson, D. & L. Briand (2013) ‘Controlling the uncontrollable: “Agile” teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work’, Work, Employment and Society, 27 (2):308–325.

[24] Holbeche, L. (2015), The Agile Organization: How to Build an Innovative, Sustainable and Resilient Business. London and Philadelphia: Kogan Page.

[25] Kameo, N. (2017) ‘A culture of uncertainty: Interaction and organisational memory in software engineering teams under a productivity scheme’, Organisation Studies, 38 (6):733–752.

[26] Khan, S. & R. VanWynsberghe (2004) ‘Cultivating the under-mined: Cross-case analysis as knowledge mobilization’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9 (1):34.

[27] Kirkman, B.L. & B. Rosen (1999) ‘Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment’, Academy of Management Journal, 42 (1):8–74.

[28] Kohlbacher, F. (2006) ‘The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7 (1):1–30.

[29] Komus, A. (2020) Status Quo (Scaled) Agile, https://www.process-and-project.net/studien/studienunterseiten/status-quo-scaled-agile-2020/ (accessed 4 February 2021).

[30] Langfred, C.W. (2000) ‘The paradox of self-management: Individual and group autonomy in work groups’, Journal of Organisational Behavior, 21 (5):563–585.

[31] Lee, C.K. & Y. Shen (2009) ‘The paradox and possibility of a public sociology of labor’, Work and Occupation, 36 (2):110–125.

[32] Mann, C. & F. Maurer (2005) ‘A case study on the impact of Scrum on overtime and customer satisfaction’, Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference, Denver, CO, USA, 24–29 July:70–79.

[33] Mayring, P. (2000) ‘Qualitative content analyses’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1 (2):20.

[34] Mazmanian, M., W.J. Orlikowski & J. Yates (2013) ‘The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals’, Organisation Science, 24 (5):1337–1357.

[35] Nerur, S., R. Mahapatra & G. Mangalaraj (2005) ‘Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies’, Communications of the ACM, 48 (5):72–78.

[36] Nicklich, M., S. Sauer & S. Pfeiffer (2021) ‘Antecedents and consequences of agility – on the ongoing invocation of self-organization’ in S. Pfeiffer, M. Nicklich & S. Sauer (eds), The Agile Imperative. Teams, Organizations and Society under Reconstruction? Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan:19–38.

[37] Pongratz, H.J. & G.G. Voß (1997) ‘Fremdorganisierte Selbstorganisation. Eine soziologische Diskussion aktueller Managementkonzepte’, German Journal of Human Resource Management, 11 (1):30–53.

[38] Prange, C. & L. Heracleous (2018) Agility. X: How Organizations Thrive in Unpredictable Times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[39] Rappaport, J. (1981) ‘In praise of paradox: A social policy of empowerment over prevention’, American Journal of Community Psychology, 9 (1):1–25.

[40] Sauer, S. (2017) Wertschätzend selbst organisieren? Arbeitsvermögens- und anerkennungsbasierte Selbstorganisation bei Projektarbeit. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

[41] Sauer, S. & M. Nicklich (2018) ‘Dealing with paradoxes of agile project management. Team-based self-organization between promises and challenges’, Journal of the Academy of Business and Economics, 18 (2):71–76.

[42] Seawright, J. & J. Gerring (2008) ‘Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options’, Political Research Quarterly, 61 (2):294–308.

[43] Smith, W.K. & M.W. Lewis (2011) ‘Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organising’, Academy of Management Review, 36 (2):381–403.

[44] Sobering, K. (2019) ‘Watercooler democracy: Rumors and transparency in a cooperative workplace’, Work and Occupations, 46 (4):411–440.

[45] Sutherland, J. (2015) Scrum: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time, London: Random House.

[46] Taskin, L., M. Ajzen & C. Donis (2017) ‘New ways of working: From smart to shared power’ in V. Muhlbauer & W. Harry (eds), Redefining Management: Smart Power Perspectives, Berlin: Springer:65–79.

[47] Tight, M. (2017) Understanding Case Study Research: Small-Scale Research with Meaning, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

[48] Weidenstedt, L. (2016) ‘Empowerment gone bad: Communicative consequences of power transfers’, Socius, 2:1–11.

[49] Yin, R.K. (2009) Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.