ABSTRACT
The way in which sociology originally developed to provide a critical understanding of industrial capitalist societies was established in Chapter 1. Work and how it is both organised and experienced has always been central to this project. In spite of this, a single and fully integrated industrial sociology or sociology of work did not emerge. Sociologists of work have varied in their methodological and theoretical orientations along the lines considered in Chapter 1. They have also differed in their primary interests. Some researchers have focused on large societal patterns of work organisation, while others have looked at more ‘micro’ aspects of work behaviour and experience. Some sociologists have prioritised issues of conflict, exploitation and inequality while others have given greater
emphasis to issues of workplace and team cooperation. Some have concentrated on structural factors influencing work activities and others have concentrated on the role of human agency and ‘subjectivity’. It is nevertheless possible to see some pattern in all of this. To avoid the artificiality of allocating different researchers and writers to ‘schools’ while still recognising the need somehow to bring together contributions which appear to have something in common, we can use the notion of strands of thought. This metaphor is not ideal but it recognises that some sociologists might work with just one of these strands in doing their research while others may pull together two or perhaps more strands to create a conceptual rope to take the weight of their analytical endeavour.
