想带着大家每天坚持读英语，就拿来Source为WSY的文章（有500多篇），每天带着大家读，希望大家能坚持每天学习+阅读打卡；
大家可以在有限时间内阅读，本帖回复文章结构。
看不懂英语的，可以来微信群要我要中文
每日的中文大意在揽瓜阁阅读群更新
考试群：
GMAT入群／揽瓜阁入群方式：https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-1382779-1-1.html
公众号：1.考什么试
2.商校百科
申请群
1. ChaseDream 2023 MBA 申请／校友答疑／面试群： https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-863011-1-1.html
2.英国，新加坡，美国，香港，德国商科申请群：
请加小白斩鸡进群（killgmat）
3. 行业分享交流／职业规划群：
https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-1388171-1-1.html
小红书：
1.留学+考试 最新消息 关注妥妥妥了 （小红书号：323014154）
2.求职+MBA 最新消息 关注元（小红书号：895404330)
Jon Clark’s study of the effect of the modernization of a telephone exchange on exchange maintenance work and workers is a solid contribution to a debate that encompasses two lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological determinism and social constructivism.
Clark makes the point that the characteristics of a technology have a decisive influence on job skills and work organization. Put more strongly, technology can be a primary determinant of social and managerial organization. Clark believes this possibility has been obscured by the recent sociological fashion, exemplified by Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes the way machinery reflects social choices. For Braverman, the shape of a technological system is subordinate to the manager’s desire to wrest control of the labor process from the workers. Technological change is construed as the outcome of negotiations among interested parties who seek to incorporate their own interests into the design and configuration of the machinery. This position represents the new mainstream called social constructivism.
The constructivists gain acceptance by misrepresenting technological determinism: technological determinists are supposed to believe, for example, that machinery imposes appropriate forms of order on society. The alternative to constructivism, in other words, is to view technology as existing outside society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization.
Clark refutes the extremes of the constructivists by both theoretical and empirical arguments. Theoretically he defines “technology” in terms of relationships between social and technical variables. Attempts to reduce the meaning of technology to cold, hard metal are bound to fail, for machinery is just scrap unless it is organized functionally and supported by appropriate systems of operation and maintenance. At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers. Some changes Clark attributes to the particular way management and labor unions negotiated the introduction of the technology, whereas others are seen as arising from the capabilities and nature of the technology itself. Thus Clark helps answer the question: “When is social choice decisive and when are the concrete characteristics of technology more important?” | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2023-4-18 09:47:45
收藏
收藏
