by Edward Walker, University of California-Los Angeles

The Occupy Wall Street (OWS) demonstrations have caused, to say the least, quite a stir in the weeks since the first events in the New York financial district on September 17.  Organized with explicit reference to the Arab Spring uprisings, activists responded to a February call by the Canadian magazine Adbusters for a “Tahrir square moment” targeted against Wall Street financial firms, which they called “the greatest corruptor of our democracy.”  Although the first events included only a small number of activists and looked like to many like a bust, fortuitous events facilitated broader mobilization: mass arrests of over 700 demonstrators who thought they were following the officially sanctioned march route over the Brooklyn Bridge, a YouTube video of an officer pepper-spraying a seemingly defenseless group of activists, and the early support of the Airline Pilots Association (followed by significant additional union support in the following weeks). The campaign’s reach has become astoundingly broad; as of October 15, the movement claims to have a presence in over 100 U.S. cities and over 1,500 global cities.  Even if these figures can be discounted to some extent as self-serving overestimates, the ability of the campaign to capture public attention has been remarkable.  For instance, Nate Silver notes that the movement received a cumulative 3,000 print stories over the first three weeks of its existence, and my own October 16 search of NewsLibrary shows that an additional 4,500 stories have been published in the week since Silver’s October 7 accounting.  Media coverage of the movement seems to be following an accelerating production function, to use Oliver and colleagues’ (1985) terms. By this metric, OWS is on pace to receive more cumulative early coverage than the first Tax Day Tea Party events in April 2009, despite OWS’s minimal initial coverage and associated questions about the its legitimacy early on.  Further, the movement is gaining major traction in public opinion, as 54% now hold a favorable view of these demonstrations (this compares to the 27% favorable view held about the Tea Party movement).  Read More

A recent article in The Guardian by Lucy Siegle presents some uncomfortable facts about the conditions of production or of many middle-class home comforts. She reports on the human or environmental impacts involved in the production of nine items, from toy packaging to jeans to laptops.

The article presents an informative look into the complex global supply chains that are generally hidden from view when we purchase our products at the Big Box store or on the internet. When reading the article, I was struck by how the reality of global supply chains is often so far from the beneficent free markets found in economics textbooks. The article largely speaks for itself, but let me highlight two disconnections I found particularly egregious with regard to the so-called free market supply chains for mobile phones and coffee.

Read More

We are delighted to welcome three new regular contributors to the blog: Dana Britton (Professor of Sociology at Kansas State University), Carolina Bank Munoz (Associate Professor of Sociology at Brooklyn College), and Julie A. Kmec (Associate Professor of Sociology at Washington State University). We’ve got a piece from Julie on doing and undoing gender at work, coming soon; Carolina and Dana will begin contributing in the near future.

Both occupations and organizations are the subject of the latest version of the American Sociological Review (ASR), the flagship journal of our parent organization the American Sociological Association (ASA). The issue includes “Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering” (Erin Cech, Brian Rubineau, Susan Sibley, and Caroll Seron), which introduces the concept of professional role confidence to help explain the persistence of gender barriers in STEM professions. They argue that women have on average lower levels of confidence in their ability to fulfill professional roles. They find that women’s relative lack of professional role confidence explains some of the attrition of women from STEM occupations.

Read More

A recent article in the Sunday New York Times reported on the growth of health professionals earning doctorate degrees and how this has generated “a quiet battle over not only the title ‘doctor,’ but also the money, power and prestige that often comes with it.” The article reports that, as would be expected, physicians are none too happy with this development. Laws already exist in Arizona and Delaware that limit the right of nurses to use the title of ‘doctor’. And a bill proposed in the New York State Senate would bar nurses outright from using the title, whether or not they hold a doctorate.

Read More

Just a quick note on upcoming content.

First, we would like to welcome Adia Harvey Wingfieldwho has joined us a blog editor. And also welcome to Rachel Sherman who will be coming on soon as a regular contributor.

We are planning on getting a number of other regular contributors in the near future, with a goal of getting up to half a dozen new blog posts each week. Until we get fully up to speed, we’ll probably be posting around one or two new posts per week. All new posts will be announced on our Twitter.

In addition to contributions from our regular contributors, we are commissioning a number of pieces for Discussions and Panels. Among topics we expect to be coming soon are:

  • Ed Walker on Occupy Wall St.
  • Ofer Sharone on digital media and the job search
  • Dave Cotter, Joan Hermsen, and Reeve Vanneman on egalitarian essentialism
  • Jeff Sallaz and Victoria Johnson on Bourdieu and the study of work organizations
  • Work, Gender, and the Media
  • Financialization and work
  • The new labor scholar/practitioner network that is being set up (coordinated by American Rights at Work)

Contact is if you have any more ideas for Discussions or Panels. And if you are a sociologist interested in posting something, please do be in touch.

This past August, the Organizations, Occupations and Work section honored a number of academic works during the American Sociological Association’s annual meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Weber Award, traditionally given to a significant contribution to the literature by a book, was awarded to Martin Ruef of Princeton University. Ruef’s book The Entrepreneurial Group: Social Identities, Relations and Collective Action (Princeton University Press, 2010), takes to task the assumptions that underlie many previous studies of entrepreneurship. The Weber Award committee (Mary Blair-Loy, Elizabeth Gorman and William Finley) note that they believe “this book will redefine how entrepreneurship is studied in the future.”

Read More

More than a decade ago I was asked to organize an “Author Meets Critics” session dealing with Richard Sennett’s Corrosion of Character.  Given the author’s prominence, it was no surprise when 200 people showed up for the session, and heard a set of probing comments from a distinguished panel. I reserved a few minutes for my own humble comments, and took that opportunity to lament how rarely our works succeed (as Sennett’s often do) in resonating with lay audiences. An old lament, I know. But it’s true. As a former colleague once put it, it’s as if many of us aren’t entirely comfortable allowing perfect strangers to buy our books.

Read More

Welcome to the Organizations, Occupations and Work blog, established under the auspices of the OOW section of the American Sociological Association. We hope the blog will provide a lively home for sociologists studying organizations, occupations and work, who will (we hope) enjoy the scholarly exchanges we aim to provide. But we also hope to address a broader audience, confronting questions of broad public concern about workplace and occupational issues today. Yes, there will be some jargon. And yes, there will be discussion of cutting edge journal articles, of the state of the art in this or that field. But in addition, we hope to provide fresh and irreverent takes on a wide array of work-related issues and events that to appeal to a wide audience.

And surely, such commentary has never been more sorely needed. For nearly a generation now, our nation’s economic institutions have been undergoing structural changes of historic proportions. Some occupations are being uprooted entirely. New forms of work organization have emerged. Non-standard work arrangements have begun to become the norm. Globalization has relocated employment in whole industries. And unemployment has spread widely, reaching levels not seen in generations.

Given these and other changes on the horizon, we have decided to join a small but growing group of sociologists and scholars in organizational studies who want to raise the public profile of sociology by establishing a stronger and more interactive presence in social media. Please see our blogroll for a list, by no means exhaustive, of related endeavors.

We think that the sociology of organizations, occupations and work can play an especially important role in this respect. Both popular and policy discourse on work and organizations are dominated by the efficiency-based perspective of mainstream economics. The list of sociological critiques of mainstream economics is well known: assumptions of perfect rationality, perfect information and information processing capability, fair and equal exchange, and efficient markets tending toward equilibrium and stability.

All of these – assumptions for economists – are generally seen by sociologists as outcomes that vary across time and space. Sociologists focus analysis on how the social world, including the economy, is fundamentally constituted by social and political institutions, from cultural understandings, habits, ways of thinking and norms to formal organizations, rules and laws, to power relationships (class, race/ethnicity, gender, etc). And these days, we are convinced that work organizations are simply too important (and too embattled) to be left to the economists.

We hope this blog will serve as a venue for disseminating these types of ideas and analysis, a platform for sociologists to try to reach a broader audience, and for sociologists and other scholars to exchange ideas and debate. We hope you find it useful, and we encourage your input topics you would like to see discussed here. Do not hesitate to contact us via email. And follow us on Twitter if you’d like.

Steve, Matt and Chris.