Manufacturing Economic Development Policy: Impact Of Technology And Deindustrialisation

Technologies facilitate the emergence of new work model

Discuss About The Manufacturing Economic Development Policy?

Technology is reshaping the workplace globally and office environment is changing rapidly. The influx of latest technologies, the life of an employee is changing also. Technologies bring productivity and efficiency of the employees within the workplace as time management can be optimised through this. Employees’ every day works can be lightened through this and collaborative works can be increased through this. Moreover, deindustrialisation is happening in some parts of the works where removal of industrial capacities has been done for economic and social purposes. In case of heavy industry, this deindustrialisation is the result of the long-term decline of output in manufacturing sector or employment. In this report, the main aim is to highlight the nature of work that has come through deindustrialisation and technological changes.

Most importantly, the information of this report has been taken from secondary sources; however, interview sessions have been conducted to ask about deindustrialisation and technological changes. Interviews have been conducted with the friends and families of the group and face-to-face interviews have been conducted. 7 open-ended interview questions have been framed in order to carry out the interview. In the first part, technological innovation in the workplace will be the focal point and then, advantages and limitations of technology in the workplace will be the major highlight. In the second part, reasons of deindustrialisation in the recent time will be explained with describing the impact of it. This report will describe generalise perspectives of technology and deindustrialisation with taking practical examples of interviews.

Technology provides help in gig economy through the use of information technology (IT). With the advancement of time, changing nature of work has been observed in the job market. Gig economy suggests working from home and it is depended mainly on the employees’ will. In this scenario, personal devices, video conferencing and network speed are related to the gig economy. In today’s world, utilisation of online media is giving the benefits to the employees to find the works easily. During the industrialisation, the concept of equal wages, working hours and discipline came into existence; however, gig economy is about scalable workforce and personal outsourcing (Grint and Woolgar 2013). In the recent time of internet, technology gives the benefits of digital system and employees can find the suitable work from internet. One of the interviewees mentioned during the interview that technology gives the advantages of working through using cloud networking and it gives the advantage to connect all employees at a time. On the contrary, as stated by Winthrop and McGivey (2016), gig economy provides the chance to exploit the faceless workers and gig workers are not fallen under the insurance.

On-demand economy

In recent times, technology gives the boom in the on-demand economy as it raises the company like Uber. Of late, the recognition of IT-based organisation connects the employees and customers through technology. These types of organisations are existed only on online and customers contact the organisations through technologies only. On-demand economy gives the rise of multiple job holders, part-time work, short-duration job and cyclical variations. One f the aged interviewees told those inflexible working hours, employees can work on-demand basis and in a lean period the employees do not have any work at hand. Bellace (2014), supported this by saying employees provide labour services in making the contracts with independent employers as this have the strong customer base, however, it does not have any security.

Technology gives the benefits of working remotely for the employees and employees can complete the work from home also using technologies. Computers, cloud-based network and the internet are the blessings for the employees. On the other side, according to Edwards and Ramirez (2016), flexible working is a benefit for the employers as it gives advantages of saving the costs as employees work from home and employers can contact with employees at any time. Flexible working hours gives the assistance to the employees to manage their households and their job profile as well. On the contrary, technologies can overload the lives of the employees as they get touched with the organisation in 24*7. One of the interviewees shared the concept of burden of workload in flexible working hours as video calling at late night, instant messaging at any time and employees have to do this in order to maintain professional images. As argued by Grint and Case (2015), flexible working hours is worth as it gives job satisfaction to the employees and it increases the satisfaction of employees from 60% to 84%. In recent times, most of the employees work with the computer system and this kind of digital stress impact the employees. Work-life balance concept emphasises on ‘work’ that is connected to ambition or career of the employees, whereas, life is related to the recreation and emotional ideas of leisure, family and health.

 Technological changes in the workplace give opportunity to change the nature of work for the employees and technologies assist to alter the forms of work, job satisfaction and flexibility in work and gig economy (Hatch and Cunliffe 2015). This is the era of technology and the organisations work taking the assistance of technology and technology. The possibility of technology happened in the year 1820. Technology, however, can offer advantages to the two managers and workers. In any case, innovative impacts can convey negative outcomes to the work-life adjust. One of the respondents averred that changing nature of work terribly originates from mechanical impacts. In Australia and the vast majority of Asia Pacific nations, low maintenance work, brief span work and numerous occupation holders’ sorts work are not made much. The explanations for this might be the innovative impacts and advancements make the openings for work and it additionally lessens the same. Advances give the chances to the representatives to work from the coveted spots; unexpectedly, technologies tie the representatives to the business for 24 hours. Innovative changes are socially built and it makes the authoritative relationship socially decided (Compa 2012). What’s more, technology is only a utilization of science; it is the relationship of social, political and social applications all in all. Under the idea of free enterprise, the employment of technologies is getting higher and the idea of gifted specialists is getting extinct. As stated by Ridrik (2016), technological determinism assumes that technology can determine the cultural values and social structure; this is the primary influence on human and social relations.

Flexible working hours and work-life balance

Technology acquires the progressions working example inside an organisation and in particular in distribution of assignments inside an organisation has been changed. In IT based work stage, it gives the representatives variable potential cloud-based application through which workers can get to connect anywhere and do their works (Spencer 2016). These progressions affect the lives of the representatives and they must be dynamic for 24 hours. On the opposite side, amid the meetings, one of the interviewees called attention to that the more the work markets begin utilizing technology the more the representatives would be untalented. Globalizing the item market can give focused weight to the organisations and this can move to the workers. This weight can convey the wellbeing perils to the representatives who have a tendency to be occupied with work utilising advancements.

As stated by Polivik (2016), all work is getting the same and workers are going to be machines. Skilled craft work is rare in the industry and deskilling is taking the place with the use of technology. Employment is being hurt as automation takes place and machines keep control of the working process. This fact is undeniable that technology has made changes in job market and employment landscape as the demand of work is shifting. As supported by Colbert et al. (2016), teamwork and technology are going to be the workforce model of the future and government policies and educational systems need to make the gap to promote on intellectual skills and innovation.

Technological unemployment is about loss of jobs due to the technological change. In global market, the introduction of mechanical-muscle (machines) are labour saving, however, these machines take away the chances of employment. Automation technologies can cause short-term job losses and it is true in some circumstances. One of the respondents said during interviews that innovation can be disruptive to the employment in short-term, however, it would not possible for the managers of the organisations to replace the staffs with robots. On the contrary, as pointed out by Hacker (2017), technology cannot automate the occupations completely as occupational services decline for lack of demand.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming the world and most of the employees are at risk for automation. AI can impact the employment in two ways, in negative perspective, it can directly displace the employees from work, whereas, AI can increases the demand of workforces also (Weil 2014). In previous time, the starting of machines had created a fear among labours to lose the jobs and introduction of machines made the products cheaper than before. However, as stated by one of the interviewees, technology may lead to new employment opportunity and it may increase alternative employment.

Workplace changes through using of technology

Find job through online: Technology has brought the better opportunity to find the job online and it gets easier for employees to find the online job than previous time. For employers, it gets also easier to find the employees in cost-effective way. Recruiters are using search tool or portal in a way that must give them benefits to find people easily.

In previous time, employees had to go the workplace in order to continue their jobs, however, apps, internet connections are giving the facility to work from remote place without being present in the workplace physically. Employees can work from overseas and get money with the help of technology. Technology must be selected based on innate superiority rather than creates the power within the organisation (Carayon et al. 2015).

Social media use and digital technology creates more employment opportunity, creative, high-quality working can be done through freelancing. Employers post job opportunities through social-media posts, interested employees show eagerness towards those and they can get the job. Most importantly, rise of the freelancing and technologies means beneficial for the entrepreneurs (Colbert et al. 2016).

Contingent works mean the non-standard work of the employees and it could also mean the contract-temporary based work. With the online representation, employers can attract more contract basis employees and employers can get profit by their services. In US, more than 8% workers are contingent workers or on-call workers.

Last 25 years, employment in manufacturing sector has fallen drastically in many development economies. The phenomenon of massive degradation of manufacturing process in a region or in society is called deindustrialisation (Gawer and Cusumano 2014). This concept is quite opposite of industrialisation and it made the society one step backwards to the economic growth. One of the interviewees who worked in Asia-Pacific region shared his view that in East Asia, most of developed economies like China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea saw deindustrialisation and he believed that it is because of inequality of income. On the other side, as stated by Bernard et al. (2017), deindustrialisation is the result of globalisation and rapid growth in the market of north-south trade (between developed and developing economies). Moreover, labour centric manufacturing sectors faced the issue of deindustrialisation, for instance, Japan faced the deindustrialisation as developing world is displacing the possibility of jobs because of higher-wages of employees.

There is a rapid shifting of employment from the manufacturing sector to service sector because of good career opportunity (Bernard et al. 2017). In the manufacturing sector, a decline of employment was obvious in recent past because of social conditions of the employees, for example, war and external threat.  One of the interviewees shared that manufacturing process decreased because of external trade and it made the export surplus. Investors did not want to invest in the manufacturing sector and domestic expenditure on manufacturing goods was comparatively stable. Deindustrialisation is the result of large productivity in manufacturing rather than services (Wolman et al. 2015).

Impact of technology on employment

During the deindustrialisation, the share of employment in the manufacturing sector has started declining. In may support the view that this decline may show the view of the decline of domestic expenditure in the manufacturing sector, whereas it was also evident that expenditure on services has enhanced rapidly. Deindustrialisation is the result of the poor economy; however, it is not right as it is the sign of maturing economy.

Expenditure in current price on services has increased in advanced economies as the growth is seen in labour productivity that is slower than the manufacturing sector. The result of this, services price has grown up and manufacturing has grown cheaper. One of the interviewees told that deindustrialisation is not the symptom of the economic failure of a country; however, it could be the result of the economic development of a country. Rodwin and Sazanami (2017), supported this, deindustrialisation is the result of rising standard of living of employees and they don’t want to be part of manufacturing sector anymore.

However, deindustrialisation can impact on manufacturing job and it may lead to appreciation in the exchange rate of a country. In the service sector, the employers may not be able to absorb a sudden increase of employees or labours who want to shift from manufacturing to services. This incident may result in unemployment and fall in living standard for the employees.  As pointed out by Gawer and Cusumano (2014), higher productivity in manufacturing is caused by new technology and automation led to cost reduction. Sometimes, free-trade agreements could cause a decline in manufacturing sector locally.

Deindustrialisation implies the long-term growth of an economy as workforce tries to move into the service sector. According to Freeman (2017), productivity growth of the services would determine the growth of standards of living of the employees.  In terms of technological progress, the organisations are producing more goods with fewer workers. In the service sector, human resources are very important and in case of personal services economy, growth would be high. Reemployment would occur in short-term basis, however, with the argument of asymptotically stagnant theory, the long-term average rate of growth can be determined y the activity in which growth is slowest (Vance and Paik 2015). 

Conclusion

Anecdotal evidence that advanced technologies debilitate occupations is, obviously, all over the place. Robots and propelled robotisation have been basic in many sorts of assembling for a considerable length of time. Innumerable conventional cubicle occupations, for example, numerous in the mail station and in client benefit, have vanished. Productivity growth in the manufacturing sector would remain less influential that can improve the living standards of employees in advanced economies. Deindustrialisation has relation with technological improvement; however, productivity growth will increase the development in information technology. Technological changes made some alteration in organisational structure and deindustrialisation created pressure on the services sector. Product innovation is another important factor as the manufacturing sector is now spilling over currently.

Reference List

Bellace, J. 2014  ’Hoisted on their own petard? Business and human rights’ Journal of Industrial Relations 56(3), pp.442-457.

Bernard, A.B., Smeets, V. and Warzynski, F., 2017. Rethinking deindustrialization. Economic Policy, 32(89), pp.5-38.

Carayon, P., Hancock, P., Leveson, N., Noy, I., Sznelwar, L. and Van Hootegem, G., 2015. Advancing a sociotechnical systems approach to workplace safety–developing the conceptual framework. Ergonomics, 58(4), pp.548-564.

Colbert, A., Yee, N. and George, G., 2016. The digital workforce and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), pp.731-739.

Compa, L. 2012. ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Workers’ Rights’  Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 30 (1), pp.1-10

Edwards, P and Ramirez, P 2016. ‘When should workers embrace or resist new technology?’, New Technology, Work and Employment, 31(2), pp.99-113.

Freeman, R., 2017. Doubling the global workforce: the challenges of integrating China, India, and the former Soviet block into the world economy. Doubling the Global Work Force”. 1(3), pp.23-28

Gawer, A. and Cusumano, M.A., 2014. Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), pp.417-433.

Grint, K., and Case, P. 2015. The violent rhetoric of re?engineering: management consultancy on the offensive. Journal of Management Studies, 35(5), pp. 557-577.

Grint, K., and Woolgar, S. 2013. The machine at work: Technology, work and organization. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Hacker, S., 2017. Pleasure, power and technology: Some tales of gender, engineering, and the cooperative workplace (Vol. 5). Abingdon: Routledge.

Hatch, M. J., and Cunliffe, A. L. 2012. Organization theory: modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford: Oxford university press.

Polivka A.E. 2016. ‘Contingent and alternative work arrangments, defined’, Monthly Labor Review, 119 (10), pp.3-9

Rodrik, D., 2016. Premature deindustrialization. Journal of Economic Growth, 21(1), pp.1-33.

Rodwin, L. and Sazanami, H. eds., 2017. Deindustrialization and regional economic transformation: The experience of the United States. Abingdon: Routledge.

Spencer, D 2016. ‘Work in and beyond the Second Machine Age: the politics of production and digital technologies’, Work Employment and Society, 1(2), pp.1-11.

Vance, C.M. and Paik, Y., 2015. Managing a global workforce. Abingdon: Routledge.

Weil, D., 2014. The fissured workplace. Harvard University Press.

Winthrop, R. and McGivey, E. 2016. Skills for a Changing World. The Brooking Institute

Wolman, H., Wial, H. and Hill, E., 2015. Introduction to Focus Issue on Deindustrialization, Manufacturing Job Loss, and Economic Development Policy. Economic Development Quarterly, 29(2), pp.99-101.