Tecnologie digitali e potere nelle organizzazioni: dinamiche di controllo ed effetto "contraccolpo"

Autori/Curatori Lia Tirabeni, Francesco Miele
Anno di pubblicazione 2020 Fascicolo 2020/1 Lingua Italiano
Numero pagine 29 P. 9-37 Dimensione file 369 KB
DOI 10.3280/SO2020-001001
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Attraverso una ricognizione concettuale della letteratura, il lavoro discute la relazione potere-tecnologia-organizzazione considerando due pratiche abilitate da tecnologie digitali: il lavoro da remoto e il monitoraggio sul lavoro. I due casi di pratiche lavorative tecnologicamente supportate permettono di ritornare a tematiche classiche del dibattito organizzativo, quali l’analisi delle dinamiche di controllo emergenti con l’introduzione di tecnologie digitali e le conseguenze sul potere preesistente. Con la metafora del contraccolpo si mostra che l’opportunità di esercitare un controllo più pervasivo sulla forza lavoro non si traduce automaticamente in un rafforzamento delle asimmetrie di potere. Al contrario, tale controllo potrebbe innescare nuove forme di riappropriazione del potere da parte dei lavoratori.;

Keywords:Tecnologia digitale; lavoro da remoto; dispositivo indossabile; potere; controllo; organizzazione.

  1. Sihag, V., Rijsdijk, S. (2018), “Organizational Controls and Performance Outcomes”, Journal of Management Studies, 1-43.
  2. Abbas, R., Michael, K., Michael, M. G., Aloudat, A. (2011), “Emerging forms of covert surveillance using GPS-enabled devices”, Journal of Cases on Information Technology (JCIT), 13(2): 19-33.
  3. Adams, R., Jeanrenaud, S., Bessant, J., Denyer, D., Overy, P. (2016). “Sustainability-oriented innovation: A systematic review”, International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(2), 180-205.
  4. Albano, R., Curzi, Y., Parisi, T. Tirabeni, L. (2018), “Perceived autonomy and discretion of mobile workers”, Studi Organizzativi, 2/2018: 31-61. DOI: 10.3280/SO2018-002002
  5. Akhtar, P. Moore, P. (2016), “The psychosocial impacts of technological change in contemporary workplaces, and trade union responses”, International Journal of Labour Research, 8(1-2): 101-131.
  6. Anckar, C. (2008), “On the applicability of the most similar systems design and the most different systems design in comparative research”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(5): 389-401. DOI: 10.1080/13645570701401552
  7. Bailey, D. E., Kurland, N. B. (2002), “A review of telework research: Findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work”, Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 23(4): 383-400.
  8. Ball, K., Wilson, D. C. (2000), “Power, control and computer-based performance monitoring: Repertoires, resistance and subjectivities”, Organization Studies, 21(3): 539-565. DOI: 10.1177/0170840600213003
  9. Baruch, Y. (2001), “The status of research on teleworking and an agenda for future research”, International journal of management reviews, 3(2): 113-129. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2370.00058
  10. Bogard, W. (1996), The simulation of surveillance: hyper-control in telematic societies, Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
  11. Brice Jr, J., Nelson, M., Gunby Jr, N. W. (2014), “The governance of telecommuters: An agency and transaction cost analysis”, Electronic Business, 13(4): 191-199.
  12. Brocklehurst, M. (2001), “Power, Identity and New Technology Homework: Implications for New Forms’ of Organizing”, Organization Studies, 22(3): 445-466. DOI: 10.1177/0170840601223003
  13. Bruni, A., Parolin, L.L. (2014), “Dalla produzione automatizzata agli ambienti tecnologicamente densi: la dimensione sociomateriale dell’agire organizzativo”, Studi Organizzativi, 1: 7-26, DOI: 10.3280/SO2014-001001
  14. Cambridge Dictionary (2018), “Recoil”. Accessed December 21, 2018. -- https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/recoil.
  15. Clegg, S. (1979), The Theory of Power and Organization. Routledge, London.
  16. Clegg, S. (1989), Frameworks of power. London, UK: Sage.
  17. Cornelissen, J. P., Oswick, C., Thøger Christensen, L., Phillips, N. (2008), “Metaphor in organizational research: Context, modalities and implications for research-Introduction”, Organization Studies, 29(1), 7-22. DOI: 10.1177/0170840607086634
  18. Dahl, R. A. (1957), “The concept of power”, Behavioral science, 2(3): 201-215.
  19. Dambrin, C. (2004), “How does telework influence the manager-employee relationship?”, International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 4(4): 358-374.
  20. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., Tinkler, J. (2006). “New public management is dead—long live digital-era governance”, Journal of public administration research and theory, 16(3): 467-494.
  21. Fleming, P., Spicer, A. (2014), “Power in management and organization science”, The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1): 237-298. DOI: 10.1080/19416520.2014.875671.
  22. Fogarty, H., Scott, P., Williams, S. (2011), “The half‐empty office: dilemmas in managing locational flexibility”, New Technology, Work and Employment, 26(3):183-195.
  23. Follett, M. P. (1924), Creative experience. New York: Longmans, Green.
  24. Foucault, M. (1979), Discipline and punish. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  25. Foucault, M. (1980), Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. Pantheon.
  26. Gajendran, R. S., Harrison, D. A. (2007), “The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences”, Journal of applied psychology, 92(6): 1524-1541. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.152
  27. Gallivan, M., Benbunan-Finch, R. (2008), “Exploring the relationship between gender and career outcomes for social scientists: Implications for research on IS scholarship”, Information Technology & People, 21(2): 178-204. DOI: 10.1108/09593840810881079
  28. Galtung, J. (1969), “Violence, peace, and peace research”, Journal of peace research, 6(3): 167-191. DOI: 10.1177/002234336900600301
  29. Gekara, V. O., Fairbrother, P. (2013), “Managerial technologies and power relations: a study of the Australian waterfront”, New Technology, Work and Employment, 28(1): 51-65.
  30. Giddens, A. (1984), The construction of society. Cambridge: Polity.
  31. Gorm, N., Shklovski. I. (2016), “Steps, Choices and Moral Accounting: Observations from a Step-Counting Campaign in the Workplace”, In CSCW ‘16: Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, 148-159. New York: ACM Press.
  32. Jermier, J. M., Knights, D., Nord, W. R. (1994). Critical perspectives on work and organization. Resistance and power in organizations. Florence, KY, US: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
  33. Jones, L., Marshall, P., Denison, J. (2016), “Health and well-being implications surrounding the use of wearable GPS devices in professional rugby league: A Foucauldian disciplinary analysis of the normalised use of a common surveillance aid”, Performance Enhancement & Health, 5(2): 38-46.
  34. Kaupins, G., Coco, M. (2017), “Perceptions of Internet-of-Things surveillance by human resource managers”, SAM Advanced Management Journal, 82(2): 53.
  35. Kirsch, L. J. (2004), “Deploying common systems globally: The dynamics of control”, Information systems research, 15(4): 374-395.
  36. Kraemer, K., King, J. L. (2006), “Information technology and administrative reform: will e-government be different?”, International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 2(1): 1-20.
  37. Kreutzer, M., Cardinal, L. B., Walter, J., Lechner, C. (2016), “Formal and informal control as complement or substitute? The role of the task environment”, Strategy Science, 1(4): 235-255.
  38. Kurland N. B., Cooper C. D. (2002), “Manager control and employee isolation in telecommuting environments”, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 13(1):107-126. DOI: 10.1016/S1047-8310(01)00051-7
  39. Kurland, N. D., Egan, T. D. (1999), “Telecommuting: Justice and control in the virtual organization”, Organization Science, 10(4): 500–513.
  40. Hatch, M. J. (2018), Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford university press.
  41. Hercheui, M. D. (2011), “A literature review of virtual communities: the relevance of understanding the influence of institutions on online collectives”, Information, Communication & Society, 14(1): 1-23. DOI: 10.1080/1369118100366359
  42. Hill, C. W., Jones, T. M. (1992), “Stakeholder-agency theory”, Journal of management studies, 29(2): 131-154.
  43. Jasperson, J. S., Carte, T. A., Saunders, C. S., Butler, B. S., Croes, H. J., Zheng, W. (2002). Power and information technology research: A metatriangulation review. MIS quarterly, 26(4), 397-459. DOI: 10.2307/4132315
  44. Larsen, J., Schultz, M. (1990). “Artifacts in a bureaucratic monastery”. In P. Gagliardi (ed.), Symbols and Artifacts: Views of the Corporate Landscape, Berlin, De Gruyter.
  45. Lautsch, B. A., Kossek, E. E., Eaton, S. C. (2009), “Supervisory approaches and paradoxes in managing telecommuting implementation”, Human Relations, 62(6): 795-827. DOI: 10.1177/0018726709104543
  46. Leavitt, H.J.; Whisler, T.L. (1958), “Management in the 1980’s”, Harvard Business Review, November-December 36(6), 41-48.
  47. Li, H., Wu, J., Gao, Y., Shi, Y. (2016), “Examining individuals’ adoption of healthcare wearable devices: An empirical study from privacy calculus perspective”, International journal of medical informatics, 88: 8-17.
  48. Lyon, D. (2003), “Surveillance technology and surveillance society”, In Modernity and technology, ed. Thomas J. Misa, Brey P., e Feenberg A. 161-83. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  49. Lupton, D. (2014), “Self-tracking cultures: towards a sociology of personal informatics”, in Proceedings of the 26th Australian Computer-human interaction conference on designing futures: The future of design, 77-86. New York: ACM Press.
  50. Masino, G., Zamarian, M. (2003). Information technology artefacts as structuring devices in organizations: design, appropriation and use issues. Interacting with Computers, 15(5), 693-707. DOI: 10.1016/S0953-5438(03)00059-6
  51. Mayo, M., Pastor, J. C., Gomez‐Mejia, L., Cruz, C. (2009), “Why some firms adopt telecommuting while others do not: A contingency perspective”, Human Resource Management, 48(6): 917-939. DOI: 10.1177/030631292022004006
  52. Mencarini, E., Rapp, A., Tirabeni, L. Zancanaro, M. (2019) “Designing Wearable Systems for Sport: A Review of Trends and Opportunities in Human-Computer Interaction, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems (THMS), 49(4): 314-325. DOI: 10.1109/THMS.2019.2919702
  53. Moore, P., Piwek, L. (2017), “Regulating wellbeing in the brave new quantified workplace”, Employee Relations, 39(3), 308-316. DOI: 10.1108/ER-06-2016-0126
  54. Moore, P., Robinson, A. (2016), “The quantified self: What counts in the neoliberal workplace”, New Media & Society, 18(11): 2774-2792. DOI: 10.1177/1461444815604328
  55. Nguyen, D. H., de Leeuw, S., Dullaert, W. E. (2018), “Consumer behaviour and order fulfilment in online retailing: a systematic review”, International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 255-276.
  56. Nicolini, D. (2007), “Stretching out and expanding work practices in time and space: The case of telemedicine”, Human Relations, 60(6): 889-920. DOI: 10.1177/0018726707080080
  57. Nielsen, J. A., Andersen, K. N., Danziger, J. N. (2016), “The power reinforcement framework revisited: mobile technology and management control in home care. Information”, Communication & Society, 19(2): 160-177. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1047784
  58. Norris, D. F., Reddick, C. G. (2013), “Local e-government in the United States: Transformation or incremental change?”, Public Administration Review, 73(1): 165-175.
  59. Olson, M. H. (1989), “Work at home for computer professionals: current attitudes and future prospects”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS). 7(4): 317-338. DOI: 10.1145/76158.76891
  60. O’Neill, C. (2017), “Taylorism, the European science of work, and the quantified self at work”, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 42(4): 600-621. DOI: 10.1177/0162243916677083
  61. Orlikowski, W. J. (1992), “The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations”, Organization science, 3(3): 398-427.
  62. Parolin, L.L. (2008), “Workplace studies: tecnologia e interazione sociale nei contesti di lavoro”, Studi Organizzativi, 1: 145-164.
  63. Petrakaki, D., Klecun, E., Cornford, T. (2016), “Changes in healthcare professional work afforded by technology: the introduction of a national electronic patient record in an English hospital”, Organization, 23(2): 206-226. DOI: 10.1177/1350508414545907
  64. Raghuram, S., Fang, D. (2014) “Telecommuting and the role of supervisory power in China”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(2): 523-547.
  65. Reed, M. I. (1996), “Expert power and control in late modernity: an empirical review and theoretical synthesis”, Organization studies, 17(4): 573-597.
  66. Rose, N. (1990), Governing the soul: the shaping of the private self. Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
  67. Schall Jr, M. C., Sesek, R. F., Cavuoto, L. A. (2018), “Barriers to the Adoption of Wearable Sensors in the Workplace: A Survey of Occupational Safety and Health Professionals”, Human factors, 60(3): 351-362. DOI: 10.1177/0018720817753907
  68. Sewell, G., Taskin, L. (2015), “Out of sight, out of mind in a new world of work? Autonomy, control, and spatiotemporal scaling in telework”, Organization Studies, 36(11): 1507-1529. DOI: 10.1177/0170840615593587.
  69. Stanton, J.M., Stam, K.R. (2002) “Information technology, privacy, and power within organizations: A view from boundary theory and social exchange perspectives”, Surveillance & Society, 1(2): 152-190.
  70. Swan, M. (2013), “The quantified self: Fundamental disruption in big data science and biological discovery”, Big Data, 1(2): 85-99.
  71. Teune, H., Przeworski, A. (1970), The logic of comparative social inquiry. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
  72. Tirabeni L. (2020) “Technology, Power and The Organization. Wearable Technologies and Their Implications For The Performance Appraisal” in T. Addabbo et al. (eds.), Performance Appraisal in Modern Employment Relations, Palgrave Springer.
  73. Valsecchi, R. (2006), “Visible moves and invisible bodies: The case of teleworking in an Italian call centre”, New Technology, Work and Employment, 21(2):123-138.
  74. Virick, M., DaSilva, N., Arrington, K. (2010), “Moderators of the curvilinear relation between extent of telecommuting and job and life satisfaction: The role of performance outcome orientation and worker type”, Human Relations, 63(1):137-154. DOI: 10.1177/0018726709349198
  75. Von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., Rechsteiner, L. (2012), “Leadership in organizational knowledge creation: A review and framework”, Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 240-277.
  76. Weston, M. (2015), “Wearable surveillance–a step too far?”, Strategic HR review, 14(6): 214-219. DOI: 10.1177/0018726709349198
  77. Webster, J., Watson, R. T. (2002), “Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review”, MIS quarterly, 26(2): 13-23.
  78. Wicks, D. (2002), “Successfully increasing technological control through minimizing workplace resistance: understanding the willingness to telework”, Management Decision, 40(7): 672-681. DOI: 10.1108/00251740210438508

  • Connectivity and human capacity in digital transformation: the exploratory hypotheses of hyper industrial Emiliana Armano, Salvatore Cominu, Kristin Carls, Marco Briziarelli, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 1/2021 pp.146
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2021-001007
  • The variable geometry of bargaining: implementing unions' strategies on remote work in Italy Anne-Iris Romens, Valeria Piro, Francesco E. Iannuzzi, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 1/2022 pp.129
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2022-001006

Lia Tirabeni, Francesco Miele, Tecnologie digitali e potere nelle organizzazioni: dinamiche di controllo ed effetto "contraccolpo" in "STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI " 1/2020, pp 9-37, DOI: 10.3280/SO2020-001001