In this contribution, we focus on the results of the Belgian Trend Study. The intention of this study was to examine the prevalence of new production concepts within the widest possible range of companies in the automotive, the machine tool, the chemical, and the clothing industries. The Trend Study aimed to answer the following questions: is the Taylorist division of labor a thing of the past? What are the alternatives? Are shifts in the division of labor accompanied by another type of personnel policy, and do traditional industrial relations have to make way for this new approach? The methodological concept used had to guarantee that the findings at the level of each industry could be generalized. Though the picture emerging from the empirical data collected in the four industrial sectors is inevitably diverse, the data make it possible merely to suggest a neorather than a post-Thylorist or -Fordist concept.
AUER, P. , & RIEGLER, C. H.Post-Taylorism: The enterprise as a place of learning organizational change. Berlin/Stockholm: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fur Sozialforschung/Arbetsmiljöfonden , 1990.
2.
BERG, P. , APPELBAUM, E. , BAILEY, T. , & KALLEBERG, A. L.The performance effects of modular production in the apparel industry . Industrial Relations, 1996, 35(3), 356-373 .
BLAUNER, R.Alienation and freedom. The factory worker and his industry. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press , 1964.
5.
CAMPBELL, I.New production concepts? The West German debates on restructuring . Labour and Industry, 1989, 2(2), 247-280 .
6.
DAEMS, H., & VAN DE WEYER, P. Buitenlandse invloed in België. De gevolgen voor de strategische beslissingsmacht. Brussel: Koning Boudewijnstichting, 1993.
7.
DANKBAAR, B.New production concepts, management strategies and the quality of work . Work, Employment and Society, 1988, 2(1), 25-50 .
8.
DE SITTER, L. U.Synergetisch produceren. Human resources mobilization in de Productie. Assen: Van Gorcum , 1994.
9.
DUNLOP, J. T. , & WEIL, D.Diffusion and performance of modular production in the U.S. apparel industry . Industrial Relations, 1996, 35(3), 334-355 .
10.
EYSACKERS, E.Teamgerichte productieorganisatie in de confectiesector: Quick response systemen. Brussel: SERV/STV , 1994.
11.
GYLLT ENHAMMER, P.People at workReading: Addison-Wesley , 1977.
12.
HUYS, R., SELS, L, & VAN HOOTEGEM, G. De uitgestelde transformatie. Technische en sociaal-organisatorische herstrnctureringen in de chemische, de automobile-en de machine-bouwindustrie. Brussel: Federale Diensten voor Wetenschappelijke, Technische en Culturele Aangelegenheden, 1995.
13.
JURGENS, U. , MALSCH, T. , & DOHSE, K.Breaking from Taylorism: Changing forms of work in the automobile industry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 1993.
14.
KATZ, H. , & SABEL, C.Industrial relations and industrial adjustment in the car industry . Industrial Relations, 1985, 24(3), 295-315 .
15.
KELLEY, M. R.Participative bureaucracy and productivity in the machined products sector . Industrial Relations, 1996, 35(3), 374-399 .
16.
KERN, H. , & SCHUMANN, M.Das ende der arbeitsteilung? Rationalisierung in der industriellen production. Mfinchen: Verlag C.H. Beck , 1984.
17.
LITTLER, C. R.The development of the labour process in capitalist societies. A comparative study of the transformation of work organization in Britain, Japan and the USA. London: Heinemann Educational Books , 1982.
18.
LUTZ, B. Wie neu sind die "neuen Produktionskonzepte?" In T Malschand R. Seltz (Eds.), Die neuen produionskonzepte auf dem pnrfstand. Beitrdge zur entwicklung der industriearbeit. Berlin: Edition Sigma, 1988, pp. 195-208.
19.
McLELLAN, J. , WIGFIELD, A. , & WILKES, V.Using teams to make clothes. In I. M. Tiplin and J. Winterton (Eds.), Restructuring within a labour intensive industry. Aldershot: Avebury , 1996, pp. 199-219.
20.
PIORE, M. J. , & SABEL, C. F.The second industrial divide. Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books , 1984.
21.
SCHUMANN, M.New Workers Profiles in Industry . Paper for the Conference on Joint Design of Technology, Organization and People Growth, Venice, October 1988.
22.
SCHUMANN, M. , BAETHGE, V. , NEUMANN, U. , et al.Trend-Report on Industrial Rationalization . Paper for the Conference on Technik in Alltag und Arbeit held by the Verbund Sozialwissenschaftliche RIchnikforschung, Bonn, 1989.
23.
SCHUMANN, M. , BAETHGE-KINSKY, V. , NEUMANN, U. , et al.The spread of the new model of production-a halting transformation of the structures of work . International Journal of Political Economy, Winter 1991, 14-41 .
24.
SCHUMANN, M. , BAETHGE-KINSKY, V. , KUHLMANN, M. , et al.Neue arbeitsein-zatskonzepte im deutschen automobilbau. Hat lean production eine chance?SOFI-Mitteilungen, 1992, 1.
25.
SCHUMANN, M. , BAETHGE-KINSKY, V. , KUHLMANN, M. , et al.Trendrepon rational-isierung. automobilindustrie, werkzeugmaschinenbau, chemische industrie. Berlin: Edition Sigma , 1994.
26.
SHINGO, S.The Toyota production systemTokyo: Japan Management Association , 1981.
27.
SMITH, C.Flexible specialisation, automation and mass production . Work, Employment & Society, 1989, 3(2), 203-220 .
28.
TAPLIN, I. M.Flexible production, rigid jobs: Lessons from the clothing industry . Work and Occupations, 1995, 22(4), 412-438 .
29.
TAYLOR, F. W.Scientific management. Westport: Greenwood Press , 1972.
30.
VISSER, J.Trends in trade union membership. In: OECD Employment outlook 1991. Paris: Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation , 1991, pp. 97-134.
31.
WOMACK, J. P. , JONES, D. T. & ROOS, D.The machine that changed the world. New York: Rawson , 1990.
