The Changing Nature of Work

Implications for Occupational Analysis

Committee on Techniques for the Enhancement of Human Performance: Occupational Analysis

Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
The Changing Nature of Work Implications for Occupational Analysis Committee on Techniques for the Enhancement of Human Performance: Occupational Analysis Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. DASW01-96-C-0051 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of the Army. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The changing nature of work : implications for occupational analysis. p. cm. "Committee on Techniques for the Enhancement of Human Performance, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council." Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-309-06525-9 1. Work. 2. Labor market. 3. Diversity in the workplace. 4. Occupations—Forecasting. 5. Industrial sociology. I. National Academy Press (U.S.) II. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Techniques for the Enhancement of Human Performance. HD4901 .C428 1999 331.25—dc21 99-6682 Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Lock Box 285 Washington, D.C. 20055 Call 800-624-6242 or 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area). This report is also available on line at http://www.nap.edu Printed in the United States of America Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON TECHNIQUES FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE: OCCUPATIONAL ANALYSIS THOMAS A. KOCHAN (Co-Chair), Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology STEPHEN R. BARLEY (Co-Chair), Department of Industrial and Engineering Management, Stanford University ROSEMARY BATT, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University NICOLE WOOLSEY BIGGART, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis PETER CAPPELLI, Department of Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania MARK J. EITELBERG, Department of Systems Management, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California ANN HOWARD, Assessment Technology Integrity, Development Dimensions International, Tenafly, New Jersey ARNE L. KALLEBERG, Department of Sociology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill DAVID NEUMARK, Department of Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing PAUL OSTERMAN, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology NORMAN G. PETERSON, American Institutes for Research, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota LYMAN W. PORTER, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Irvine KENNETH I. SPENNER, Markets and Management Studies Program, Department of Sociology, Duke University LTG THEODORE G. STROUP, JR. (retired), Institute of Land Warfare, Association of the United States Army, Arlington, Virginia ROBERT J. VANCE, Center for Applied Behavioral Sciences, Pennsylvania State University ANNE S. MAVOR, Study Director JAMES P. McGEE, Senior Research Associate SUSAN R. McCUTCHEN, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
Contents Preface   vii Executive Summary   1     Conclusions   3 1 Introduction   13     Framework for Analyzing the Changing Nature of Work   14     Nature of the Evidence   20     Multidisciplinary Approach   23     Charge to the Committee   27     Guide to the Report   28 2 The External Contexts of Work   30     Changing Markets   30     Changing Technology   36     Changes in Workforce Demographics   40     Conclusions and Implications   71 3 Changes in the Organizational Contexts of Work   73     Organizational Restructuring   73     Changing Employment Relationships   86     Conclusions and Implications   102

OCR for page R1
4 Changes in the Structure and Content of Work   105     Blue-Collar Work   108     Service Work   121     Managerial Work   134     Professional and Technical Work   141     Conclusions   158 5 Implications for Occupational Analysis Systems   164     History   166     Types of Occupational Analysis Systems   169     Assessment   197     Conclusions   201 6 Army Work and Approaches to Occupational Analysis   216     Key Features of Army Mission and Employment   216     External Contexts of Work   222     The Army's Approach to Occupational Analysis   243 7 Conclusions and Implications   263     Summary of the Evidence on the Changing Nature of Work   264     The Broader Debates About Jobs and Work   273     Implications for Systems of Occupational Analysis and Classification   276     Implications for the Army   280     Implications for Research   285     Implications for Policy   287 References   288 Appendixes     A   Prototype Evaluation   321 B   Current Occupational Analysis Systems   329 C   Biographical Sketches   341 Index   349

OCR for page R1
Preface In 1985, the Army Research Institute (ARI) asked the National Academy of Sciences to explore the utility and effectiveness of various techniques to enhance human performance. The Academy, through the National Research Council (NRC), established the Committee on Techniques for the Enhancement of Human Performance. The committee, then composed primarily of psychologists, first examined and then evaluated commercial and proprietary techniques then being considered by the Army; later the committee broadened its inquiry to study a variety of related issues, including team learning, simulation training, and skill practice. In 1995, the focus shifted to the organizational context of individual and group performance. The committee's current topic and the subject of this book are the changing nature of work and the implications for occupational analysis. The charge to the committee from the Army Research Institute was (1) to review and analyze the research on the environmental forces, organizational factors, and the content of work; (2) to identify key issues in the changing context and content of work that affect the design of occupations in the civilian and military sectors; (3) to evaluate the changes in tools for analyzing the nature of the work environment and developing occupational classification systems that are responsive to current and future needs of the workplace; and (4) to assess the application of meth-

OCR for page R1
ods and tools developed in the civilian sector to occupational classification and analysis in the Army. The current composition of the committee includes experts in the areas of sociology, economics, management, occupational analysis, and industrial and organizational psychology and training. This book is intended to provide decision makers in both public and private organizations, as well as in both the civilian and military sectors, with guidance on how to assess and respond to contemporary debates about changes in work. Our audience extends far beyond the boundaries of social scientists and human resource specialists who have a professional interest in understanding changes in work and the adequacy of occupational analysis systems for charting and managing the changes. In particular, we hope that decision makers whose choices influence the nature of work—who include senior executives, line mangers, military officers, and designers of technology—will find valuable information in this volume. We extend thanks to Michael Drillings, Chief, Research and Advanced Concepts, at the U.S. Army Research Institute, our sponsor, for his interest in the topic of this report and our work. He has supported the committee's efforts and provided assistance in obtaining information. A number of individuals throughout the U.S. Army helped arrange field trips and provided the committee with special briefings and demonstrations: Dr. Robert Bauer, Directorate of Training and Doctrine Development; CSM Garvey, Commandant, NCO Academy; Walter Gunning, U.S. Army Personnel Command; MC George H. Harmeyer, Commanding General, U.S. Army Armor Center and Ft. Knox; and MG Alfonso E. Lenhardt, Commanding General, USAREC. Many people have contributed to this study by drafting background material, and those who played the most direct role in developing the manuscript deserve special mention: Grace McLaughlin, University of California, Irvine; Siobhan O'Mahoney, Stanford University; Yuri Suárez and Dillon Soares, Michigan State University; Eva Skuratowicz, University of California, Davis; and Michael Strausser and Danielle Van Jaarsveld, Cornell University. In the course of preparing this report, each member of the committee took an active role in drafting chapters, leading dis-

OCR for page R1
cussions, and reading and commenting on successive drafts. We are deeply indebted to them, for their broad scholarship, their insights, and their cooperative spirit. Their commitment to our collective work was real and their efforts are immensely appreciated. Truly, our report is the product of an intellectual team effort. Specifically, David Neumark assumed major responsibility for sections on workforce demographics, Peter Cappelli for structure of the material on changes in the organizational contexts of work, Norman Peterson for the chapter on occupational analysis, and Mark Eitelberg for sections on work and demographics in the Army. Kenneth Spenner contributed significant portions of the sections on demographics and on occupational analysis. Robert Vance performed analyses on the Gantz Wiley survey data and contributed significantly to the chapter on occupational analysis. Key materials were contributed by Rosemary Batt on service work, Nicole Biggart on interactive-emotion work, Anne Howard on training, Arne Kalleberg on changing employment relationships and the meaning of work, Paul Osterman on managerial work, and Lyman Porter on teamwork. LTG Theodore Stroup contributed significantly to the identification of Army implications of civilian work trends and identification of means by which the Army uses its occupational classification system to manage its personnel. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Eileen Appelbaum, Economic Policy Institute, Washington, D.C.; David J. Armor, Institute of Public Policy, George Mason University; John Campbell, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota; Wayne Cascio, Graduate School of Business, University of Colorado; Paula

OCR for page R1
England, Department of Sociology, University of Pennsylvania; Richard Jeanneret, Jeanneret & Associates, Houston, Texas; Frank Landy, SHL Landy Jacobs, Boulder, Colorado; Paul Sackett, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota; and Charles Tilly, Departments of Sociology and Political Science, Columbia University. Although the individuals listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, it must be emphasized that responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring committee and the institution. Staff of the National Research Council made important contributions to our work in many ways. Three staff members contributed to the initial stages of the committee's work: Daniel Druckman, study director, Mary Ann Statman, research associate, and Sharon Vandivere, senior project assistant. We extend particular thanks to Susan McCutchen, the committee's senior project assistant, who was indispensable in organizing meetings, arranging travel, compiling agenda materials, coordinating the sharing of information among committee members, and managing the preparation of this report. We are also indebted to James McGee, who provided help whenever it was needed and who made significant contributions throughout the report. We also thank Christine McShane, who edited and significantly improved the report. THOMAS A. KOCHAN, CO-CHAIR STEPHEN R. BARLEY, CO-CHAIR ANNE S. MAVOR, STUDY DIRECTOR COMMITTEE ON TECHNIQUES FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE: OCCUPATIONAL ANALYSIS

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.