There is no honest answer to “who changes work organization”. The changes to work develop from the constant battle between employee and employer over workplace control. Additionally managers, unions and the state bring other variables to the mix, each collectively shaping our workplaces. Numerous types of changes can occur; all of which have an effect on the workers psychological feelings. Finding the balance between worker and employer goals is essential for maintaining business quota and respecting worker feelings. Sociologist perspectives can help us understand how and why these changes occur in the workforce.

It’s very common in most employment relationships for the worker and the employer to have diverging interests. The employer favors the interest of the organization, typically with a capital or “business” goal in mind. On the contrary, employees conduct work on the basis that they need to provide a standard of living outside of work for themselves and possibly their families. With separate goals in mind, conflict is highly probable.

Employers generally hold the position of control. Most employees don’t have the option of working; rather it is simply required for them to put food on the table. This idea is relative to that of a bureaucratic hierarchy, a work system based on authority and rules (Krahn et al. 2011, p 225). Bureaucracies typically cause employee submission, which a loss in control that employers are looking to gain. The idea that there would be little to no worker resistance against management gives the employer more opportunity to organize work how they choose.

Since Weber’s positions on bureaucracy, many other ideas about work reform have arisen. Some failing mostly due to the face that organizations are changing rapidly. Although discussions about how work is organized may raise other fundamental questions (Athabasca University, p