Titolo Rivista: STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI
Autori/Curatori: Roberto Albano, Ylenia Curzi, Tania Parisi, Lia Tirabeni
Anno di pubblicazione: 2018 Fascicolo: 2 Lingua: English
Numero pagine: 31 P. 31-61 Dimensione file: 247 KB
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
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
In the beginning, remote working was enthusiastically presented as a means for transforming traditional ways of working thanks to the possibility of separating working activities from the physical constraints imposed by offices and factories. The assumption behind such enthusiasm - from both managers’ and employees’ perspectives - was that being physically at a distance from managerial control would increase workers’ autonomy (Sewell and Taskin, 2015; Lake, 2015). Nowadays scholars are debating whether remote working - or better, so-called smart working - can really open up new possibilities for workers to make autonomous decisions in the regulation of their work, or, on the contrary, it increases managers’ control over work processes, thus reducing the actual autonomy of workers (Brey, 1999; Vendramin and Valenduc, 2016). The present paper proposes to examine the question starting from the analytical distinction between autonomy and discretion (Maggi, 2003/2016). Particularly, based on a recently proposed theoretical framework (Albano et al., 2018), we consider these two concepts as dichotomous dimensions that can be combined in order to identify four types of "organization personality" (Barnard, 1938) - that is, four prevailing ways in which the individual can contribute to the organizational process: other-directed, discretionary, relatively autonomous, and mainly autonomous. Finally, we performed a factor analysis of some variables drawn from the sixth wave (2015) of the European Working Conditions Survey in a subsample of four industrialized countries (Germany, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom) characterized by robust digitalization of industrial production, to measure the consistency of the four types of organization personality in two groups of respondents: mobile workers (a proxy group of smart workers) and other categories of workers (traditional). The results show that in our sample the perception of relative autonomy is more widespread among mobile workers than in other categories of workers. Smart working seems to be a way for achieving ‘dependable role performance’ (Katz and Kahn, 1966) in complex work processes without foregoing innovative and autonomous behaviours.
Roberto Albano, Ylenia Curzi, Tania Parisi, Lia Tirabeni, Perceived autonomy and discretion of mobile workers in "STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI " 2/2018, pp 31-61, DOI: 10.3280/SO2018-002002