Andrew Friedman has responded to my article `The Means of Management Control' by criticising its treatment of the labour process literature. He also contends that my alternative formulation is flawed in three regards: it is simultaneously functionalist and empiricist and is allegedly dismissive of the concept of `managerial strategy'. But Friedman's critique is built on an assemblage of misinterpretation and distortion. He repeatedly reconstitutes the elements in the article until they resemble for him more familiar targets. These are then subjected to a series of routine objections.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Burawoy, M. 1984. The Contours of Production Politics. Berlin: IIVG Publication Series.
Friedman, A.1987. `The Means of Management Control and Labour Process Theory: A Critical Note on Storey'. Sociology21:287.
5.
Gordon, D., Edwards, R. and Reich, M. 1982. Segmented Work, Divided Workers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Hickson, D. 1973. `A Convergence in Organisation Theory', in Salaman, G. and Thompson, K. (eds.) People and Organisations. London: Longman.
7.
Hopper, T., Cooper, D., Lowe, T. and Capps, T. 1984. `Financial Control and the Labour Process in a Nationalised Industry'. University of Manchester: mimeo.
8.
Hyman, R.1987. `Strategy or Structure? Capital, Labour and Control'. Work, Employment and Society1:1.
9.
Rose, M. and Jones, B. 1984. `Managerial Strategy and Trade Union Response', in Knights, D.et al. (eds.) Job Redesign. London: Heinemann.
10.
Storey, J.1985. `The Means of Management Control'. Sociology19:193.
11.
Storey, J. 1983. Managerial Prerogative and the Question of Control. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
