Author:
Mather Kim,Worrall Les,Mather Graeme
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore control and resistance in the UK further education (FE) sector by examining senior college managers’ attempts to engineer culture change and analysing lecturers’ resistance to such measures.Design/methodology/approachData were derived from interviews with managers and lecturers in two English FE colleges and the analysis of college documents. Interview data were analysed thematically using NVIVO software.FindingsIt was found that college managers sought to build consent to change among lecturers based on values derived from “business‐like” views. Culture change initiatives were framed within the language of empowerment but lecturers’ experiences of change led them to feel disempowered and cynical as managers imposed their view of what lecturers should be doing and how they should behave. This attempt to gain control of the lecturers’ labour process invoked the “Stepford” lecturer metaphor used in the paper. Paradoxically, as managers sought to create lecturers who were less resistant to change, individualised resistance intensified as managers’ attempts to win hearts and minds conspicuously failed.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper draws on data from two case study colleges and this limits the generalisability of its findings.Practical implicationsThe paper provides a critical perspective on the received wisdom of investing in stylised change programmes that promise to win staff over to change but which may alienate those they purport to empower and ultimately lead to degenerative workplace relations.Originality/valueThe paper offers new insights into culture change from the juxtaposed, polarised views of senior managers and lecturers, while highlighting the negative consequences of imposing change initiatives from above.
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Industrial relations
Reference50 articles.
1. Ashworth, R. and Entwistle, T. (2011), “The contingent relationship between public management reform and public service work”, in Blyton, P., Heery, E. and Turnbull, P. (Eds), Reassessing the Employment Relationship, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 424‐44.
2. Avis, J. (2005), “Beyond performativity: reflections on activist professionalism and the labour process in further education”, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 209‐22.
3. Bain, P. and Taylor, P. (2000), “Entrapped by the ‘electronic panopticon’? Worker resistance in the call centre”, New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 2‐18.
4. Ball, S. (2003), “The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity”, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 215‐28.
5. Brook, P. and Pioch, E. (2006), “Culture change management”, in Lucas, R., Lupton, B. and Mathieson, H. (Eds), Human Resource Management in an International Context, CIPD, London, pp. 89‐116.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献