Programmable automation and the skill question: A reinterpretation of the cross-national evidence *

In this paper, the author re-examines the cross-national case study evidence from her own and others' research on management's job design practices when using programmable automation (PA) technologies to automate the machining process. She finds that there is no over-riding pattern of deskilling. Neither is there much evidence to support the opposing notion of a general tendency toward skill-upgrading. Differences in the skill and authority structure of production jobs associated with the introduction of PA seem to be explainable by a number of factors: the form of the technology adopted, industrial relations systems, the experience of unexpected technical and logistical problems with the technology, and the pre-existing form of work organization.

Finally, the author concludes by proposing a typology to explain the observed case study differences in management approaches to the design of jobs. Three policies, or strategic approaches to the utilization of human resources are evident – scientific management, technocentric participative, and worker-centered participative. Each carries different implications for the skill structure of production jobs, for exploiting the technology's flexibility, and for the risks posed in the long term for the development of the technology. This typology provides a useful schema for comparison with other analyses of management strategy that focus on the organization of work and labor relations.