Social produktivitet: Et rhizomatisk studie af HRM’s tilblivelsesmuligheder i det immaterielle samfund

Christian W. Hansen & Louise Kongstad Stigsson

Student thesis: Master thesis

Abstract

The main focus in this thesis is to examine what kind of ways social productivity is expressed in a project called Bedre Partnerskaber (BP). The purpose is to use these expressions to positively affirm the area of Human Resource Management (HRM) and its possibilities for incorporating social productivity. The immaterial labor constitutes the point of departure of this thesis. Immaterial labor is not defined by the four walls of a factory. The location in which it operates is outside in the society and it constitutes itself in forms that are social and innovative. It is characterized by the worker, who is instantly social productive. In the light of the immaterial work we illustrate the HRM area as three different streams; designing tool, best practice, and critical HRM. The critical HRM argue that conventional HRM tools unify and discipline the employee. The critical HRM is capable of catching sight of many relevant problems. But we never see an affirmative way of dealing with the problems. Instead we will ask: What else to do? Starting from the immaterial production, we whish to move the HRM area through this question. We make this movement by the empirical case Bedre Partnerskaber. BP is a co-operation among private and public organizations. The purpose of the project is to try out new interactions between private and public organizations and to support innovations. The thesis consists of two analyses. First we analyze BP in the perspective of social construction theory. In this analysis we will focus on the problems as the members are expressing. The problems are connected to four concepts; partnership, identity, sense making and results. In short the pivotal point are the questions asked in BP; “who are we?” and “how do we make results?”. We argue that this perspective retain the members in a locked and delimited perspective. We move our perspective in the second analysis, trying to affirm the existing problems. We do this in order to study what BP is about to be and how they constantly produce results in the becoming. These movements allow us to actually study how they becomeother in BP. We try to move beyond what the concepts in the first analysis can identify. We unfold a rhizomatic way of thinking, where thing grows from the middle, without beginning or end. The main concept is repetition. We end the thesis the same place as where we started; in the social production. We offer an idea of “what else to do?” in relation to HRM.

EducationsMSc in Human Resource Management, (Graduate Programme) Final Thesis
LanguageDanish
Publication date2006
Number of pages143