Arguably, the movement from Fordism to post-Fordism had tremendous changes in the global. As a matter of fact, these impacts are still realized and continue to affect the world. The organizations of capitalism during this era had far much reaching consequences that were cultural, social, economic and political. These changes influence the attitudes and workplace relationships between a woman and men. Fordism entails an era of mass consumption and production that was characterized by developed economies of 1940s-1960s. During this time, a combination of mass production and mass consumption led to the realization of material advancement and sustained economic growth. It was marked by changes in arrangements and methods of production, as well has globalized movements. These sorts of changes and movement have led to significant changes and effects on the role of the state, social power, and transformation of relationships in the workplace. On the other hand, post-Fordism was marked by the dominance of systems pertaining production, consumption, economic as well as socioeconomic phenomena.
The Fordism revolution introduced technical changes and social relation of the production process. The social relations were affected in two ways’ this included decomposition of power and rigid separation of unskilled and skilled labor, as well as total differentiation in the labor force. In the capitalistic state, there were two forms of people. There were those who controlled the factors of production while others provided the labor. The Fordism was marked by inflexibility process that was overseen by a hierarchical and bureaucratic system (Walby 1989). The inflexibility saw the semi-skilled laborers be employed for repetitive and specialized tasks. As a matter of fact, the political and social components of Fordism focused on national market protection (Selkov & Roe 2004).
Specialization in the workplace began due to a Ford form of specialized labor. In this case, Fordism brought about the issue of specialization and division of labor since one worker was supposed to undertake single action. The ways women and women work today was influenced by Fordism. During this time men worked the entire day moving is a band. In the long run, the Fordism revolution lead to efficiency in production and the production of cheap products. In a broader concept, Fordism is believed to have tremendous influence on social and economic issues (Walby 1989). The spread of Fordism and its impacts in the postwar era encompassed factory, work, subdividing, and leisure. It redefined both production and consumption practices in the western society. The employment patterns began to change among man and women. It resulted to progressive labor markets policies that helped women to have easy entry into the labor force. This led to a high rate of women participating in the workplace, addr5essed enumeration differences, but failed to address the unequal division of domestic labor between men and women (Janet 2002). Regardless of the changes, women continued to shoulder the burden of care that depends on them. As time passed by, social and work legislation has changed; hence, women could enjoy reduced work hours and enjoyed parental and vocation paid leave.
Post-Fordism is very crucial for women, this is because women are framed to be victims of flexible specialization and Post-Fordism. This is because the era of flexible specialization focuses on women getting a greater representation in various activities, which include home working, part-time work, as well as temporary work. Post-Fordism leads to a numerically flexible job, most of the jobs that began in this era were performed by women. In addition, there was a tremendous experience in the drawbacks on the peripheral labor market (Janet 2002). Women adapted the modern techniques that were used by women in the Fordism era. During Fordism, most of the work were men-oriented, but during post-Fordism women could work with men in the same environment and the workplace.
The organization of capitalism has undergone many changes which affected social relations of production technological revolution, and the consumption revolution. Fordism to Post-Fordism because a transition of these factors that included social, political, and cultural impacts in society. There was a tremendous cost reduction in various activities that human beings undertook (Walby 1989). Capitalist issues became more flexible, making many people enjoy life and adjust to fit the emerging technologies and working styles. The working class could not only focus on work, but also could pursue for leisure and entertainment due to increasing freedom and mobility.
Perhaps, as a social regime system, Fordism aimed at increasing quantitative household scale in terms of commodities available in the marketplace. On the other hand, Post-Fordism changed social and economic issues by producing multiple services and goods aimed at diversification and commercialization of lifestyles and cultures. The stress of innovation and individualism tremendously weakened the social and political structures and collective constructed identities within the Fordist society (Selkov & Roe 2004). These effects allowed the emergence of postmodern culture that saw the replacement of many rigid stratifications such as race, sex, class, and gender. These cultural stratifications were replaced by differences from multiculturalism to bisexual, lesbian, gay, as well as transgender pride. Since the beginning of 1970s, a transitional era of post-Fordism has been witnessed. Compared to Fordism, Post-Fordism was more of a social regime, that saw the rise of information technologies, transnational corporations, as well as flexible production.
Certainly, the New Spirit of capitalism precisely adopts the sociological inquiry. In this case, human beings are sociable and always require justification in the insatiable process. Facebook is associated with technological advancement whereby individuals can socialize and connect with each other. In this scenario, communication and information play tremendous role in the new form of world capitalism. The new spirit of capitalism draws its rationale from networking, which brings more social life and socialization into the functioning of capitalism as a strategy to redeem (Galloway 2012). Hierarchy and bureaucracy in society have paved way to collaboration among agents in society. These involve the collaboration and interconnection between various factors of production. Facebook has introduced a new form of capitalism, since the association has become the integral part that overt various aspects of capitalist production.
The ear of Facebook has introduced an era of explicit socialization, making labor and its factors less alienating. As a matter of fact, economic security has become a factor in the trading of personal autonomy. In this era, various conditions such as products and producers has become less easily distinguishable. In the particular good relations has become part of a commodity. Work has become an immaterial labor. In fact, Facebook and other social media advocates for versatility and self-management in the workplace and other spheres of life. This is actually what is advocated in the new spirit of capitalism (Galloway 2012). As a matter of fact, many employees and individuals win workplace have leaders and mangers to direct and give instructions, but not to issues commands and orders. Facebook has led to the development of an interconnected world whereby a successful individual are those who transfer contacts skills and mobility in society.
In conclusion, it is evident that Fordism to Post-Fordism has caused a lot of changes. As a matter of fact, capitalist changes has changed tremendously affecting cultural, social and political issues. The changes have influenced the relationship in the workplace between women and men. This is because most of the work began to focus on gender equality. Women began to be involved in activities that were dedicated to men. Perhaps, this era led to flexibility in production and consumption in Western societies and all over the globe. The world of Facebook is also an indicator of the New Spirit of capitalism. These sorts of changes and movement have led to significant changes and effects on the role of the state, social power, and transformation of relationships in the workplace.
Galloway, R.. 2012. The interface effect. Cambridge, UK, Polity Press.
Janet, S. 2002. “Post-Fordism, Gender and Work”, Women In Management Review, Vol. 17 Iss: 5, pp.237 – 238
Selkov, E., & Roe, M. 2004. Globalisation, policy and shipping: Fordism, post-Fordism and the European Union maritime sector. Northhampton, MA [u.a.], Elgar.
Walby, S. 1989. “Flexibility and the changing division of labour”, in Wood, S. (Ed.), The Transformation of Work? Skill, Flexibility and the Labour Process, Unwin & Hyman, London, pp. 127-40.