I followed the "Managing Knowledge Worker" thread with great interest.
And as the examples of industrial workers began to sneak into the
discussion, my suspicion was again confirmed that as an occupational
classification, "knowledge worker" does not seem to add enough distinction
that would indeed suggest different management or operational principles
than when we had such distinctions as white/blue collar work or
manual/service labor, etc... And if these categories no longer work, than
to come up with something like "knowledge worker" can only imply that
there is some work devoid of knowledge. I have yet to see examples of
this. Even Taylor appreciated the rich knowledge inherent in industrial
labor (he spent his career figuring out how to tranfer it to management
and the more educated classes of insutrial society).
Part of the problem with speaking of "hired hands" is that industrial
workers had knowledge, it simply was never appreciated and usually abused.
If anything, management sought to appropriate the knowledge of industrial
workers, routinize, and enforce it back upon the workers as
standardization (of course, part of this grew out of the eovlution of
scientific management).
We still live under the danger that this same principle can still be
applied to "knowledge workers." The supposed difference that knowledge
workers represent has certainly not stopped many people, under the guise
of knowledge management, expert systems, best practices, or
re-enginneering, etc..., to attempt to appropriate the knowledge of even
these workers for routinized appeal for the workplace. Even our emphases
on processes can sometimes suggest that processes cannot run efficiently
unless all knowledge is appropriated and made explicit for rationalization
and standardization.
So I would have to agree with Mr. Compton when he questions why
knowledge workers should be treated any differently than non-knowledge
workers (split over two posts):
"Why do we think a knowledge worker should be treated any differently
than an industrial worker?" and "I don't think knowledge workers and
hired hands should be treated any differently. They both deserve
respect. It may be true that knowledge workers have a greater chance of
getting the respect because of their mobility, but it doesn't mean they
deserve it more."
For a better critique of this concept than mine please see: Knowledge
Work Or Working Knowledge? Abiguity And Confusion In The Analysis Of The
"Knowledge Age", David Collins, March 1998
http://www.free-press.com/journals/knowledge/issue1/article7.htm
There have been other well-written pieces valuing industrial knowledge
and also challenging the whole notion of things like "knowledge worker"
(deeming it an elitist concept) and "post-industrial" society, etc... I
have a few references for those who are interested.
--Duru Ahanotu http://www.stanford.edu/~iqduru iqduru@leland.stanford.edu
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>