The Corrosion of Character
This article is also published at?https://migoaguado.com/2023/07/12/the-corrosion-of-character-rise-of-populism-in-the-modern-economy/
Most modern businesses have exhibited holocracy, creative destruction, and fail-fast systems to adapt to changing environments, keep up with competition, and deliver value to customers as quickly as possible. Moreover, many companies undergo constant structure rationalization. These are embedded in a loose and flexible organizational structure with networked teams working together. Employers are always on the lookout for "team players," "flexible skills," and those who can thrive in "ad-hoc environments." While this modern working culture delivered revenues, built organizational resilience, and globalized the workforce, Richard Sennett, a London School of Economics sociologist, claims that the new capitalism has corroded the human character.?
Out With The Old, In With The New
In his book, The Corrosion of Character, Sennett argues that?character?is built long-term. The current structures in our workplaces are designed to thrive in the new economy: fast-paced, short-term, and flexible. According to economist Bennett Harrison, the source of this behavior is "impatient capital"--the desire for rapid return. Moreover, sociologist Mark Granovetter claims that fleeting forms of association are more helpful to people than long-term connections and loyalty as a value ceased to be compelling. This contrasts with the "old economy," where workers have built careers through repetitive tasks, long-term relationships with co-workers, and loyalty. According to him, character is the long-term aspect of our emotional experience. This is expressed by loyalty, mutual commitment, or through the pursuit of long-term goals, or by the practice of delayed gratification for the sake of a future end. There are two schools of thought in approaches to the routine at work:
Today, the new economy sides with Smith.
Character Building
How vital is a character, anyway? Lao Tzu advised us to watch our thoughts since they can become our words, actions, habits, character, and, ultimately, our destiny. Presumably, Lao Tzu defines character as a consistent exhibition of behaviors that could deliver us to our preferred destiny. Using this pathway, building character is essential to know who we are and where we want to go. Sennett says that in the new economy, our engagement with work becomes superficial, and we need a deeper understanding of what we are doing.
Furthermore, the new set-up exposes workers to a plethora of risks every day. Sociologist Ulrich Beck declares that the social production of risks accompanies the social production of wealth. This overexposure to risks meant that workers needed to start over every time as they navigated uncertainties in a complex environment. Going back to square 1 also means that we cannot form a strong sense of self and personal narrative, both of which are prerequisites to having a character. Social skills become "portable," and detachment is required as you shift from one task or project to another.
领英推荐
Theory: Corroded Characters Give Rise To Populism
Sennett didn't discuss populism as a probable side-effect of the new economy. However, he did mention a case study about the restructuring of IBM during the early 90s, where it laid off hundreds of thousands of employees. Some employees have looked at their retained Indian counterparts as "people who took their jobs." This is similar to populist sentiments in several countries. A populist leader claims to represent the unified "will of the people." S/he stands in opposition to an enemy, often embodied by the current system - aiming to "drain the swamp" (Molloy, 2018)[1].
Modern workers might seek someone to restore order as they face uncertainties and lose control of concrete career and life pathways.?Populist?parties and social movements are often led by charismatic or dominant figures who present themselves as the "voice of the people"?(European Center For Populism Studies)[2]. In the old economy, where hierarchical organizational structures dominated, power was centralized among people in different layers. These leaders, how autocratic they may be, can provide directions to subordinates, and the workers know exactly what to do (and what not to do). In the new economy, workers try to survive in the meandering course of shape-shifting projects, and they have the liberty to do "whatever they want" as long as they deliver results following company policies. Leaders in today's organizations function like a "coach" than a "boss." Could it be the case that today's workers yearn for a decisive authority in a fragmented structure? Many manifestations of populism have indeed given rise to flamboyant and strong political leaders (Mudde and Kaltwasser, as cited in European Center For Populism Studies).
A lack of definite character also means a lack of a definite set of personal and political principles. This hallowed embodiment of character can quickly resort to populist bandwagons. Sennett argues that modern capitalism impels people to long for a community where they can have a sense of attachment and deep relationships.
What do we do with our corroded characters?
Sennett did not suggest that we return to the Diderot School of Thought, which puts a premium on routine work and learning. Economies today cannot afford to have a dramatic shift of paradigm anyway. Here are some of my thoughts on how we can build character in the new capitalism.
SOURCES
[1] Molloy, D. (2018, March 6).?What is populism, and what does the term actually mean??BBC. Retrieved July 12, 2023, from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43301423
[2]?Populism. European Center For Populism Studies. Retrieved July 12, 2023, from https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/populism/