Dal fordismo al post fordismo Il gran parlare che si fa di economia globale e di globalizzazione lascia pochi dubbi sul fatto che tutti i comportamenti e i problemi economici siano profondamente influenzati da questa tendenza. O meglio, capita che ciascuno di noi abbia in mente conseguenze diverse e spesso contrastanti. Le altre imprese operavano saldamente ancorate - quanto a produzione, personale, management, capitale azionario e di credito - ai confini nazionali, e praticavano i mercati transnazionali solo per le forniture materie prime, tecnologie, macchine e per le vendite esportazioni. Legittimare le multinazionali sulla base della loro maggiore efficienza o gli scambi internazionali sulla base della reciproca convenienza mercantile non risolve il problema del controllo e dunque del conflitto Rullani Questo spiega le resistenze, talvolta giustificate, che ostacolano il cammino della globalizzazione e le contraddizioni che emergono quando la deregolazione globale dei mercati viene lasciata completamente libera di agire. Tutta la catena del valore si fa transnazionale Grandinetti e Rullani ,

Author:Nesar Kagalabar
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):25 February 2005
PDF File Size:13.28 Mb
ePub File Size:8.55 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

Emphasis on types of consumers in contrast to previous emphasis on social class The rise of the service and the white-collar worker Theories[ edit ] Post-Fordism has been applied to multiple social processes. As the theory continues to evolve, it is commonly[ citation needed ] divided into three schools of thought: the Regulation School, Flexible Specialization, and Neo-Schumpeterianism.

The theory is based on two key concepts. According to Regulation theory, every Regime of Accumulation will reach a crisis point at which the Mode of Regulation will no longer support it, and society will be forced to find new rules and norms, forming a new Mode of Regulation.

This will begin a new Regime of Accumulation, which will eventually reach a crisis, and so forth. Factors such as the oil shocks of , increased competition from foreign markets especially Southeast Asia due to globalization, the end of the post-World War II boom, and increasing privatization made the old system of mass-producing identical, cheap goods through division of labor uncompetitive. Instead of producing generic goods, firms now found it more profitable to produce diverse product lines targeted at different groups of consumers, appealing to their sense of taste and fashion.

Instead of investing huge amounts of money on the mass production of a single product, firms now needed to build intelligent systems of labor and machines that were flexible and could quickly respond to the whims of the market. The technology originally associated with flexible production was the numerical control technology, which was developed in the United States in the s; however, the CNC, developed in Japan, later replaced it.

The development of the computer was very important to the technology of flexible specialization. Not only could the computer change characteristics of the goods being produced, but it could also analyze data to order supplies and produce goods in accordance with current demand. These types of technology made adjustments simple and inexpensive, making smaller specialized production runs economically feasible.

Flexibility and skill in the labor was also important. The workforce was now divided into a skill-flexible core and a time-flexible periphery. Flexibility and variety in the skills and knowledge of the core workers and the machines used for production allowed for the specialized production of goods. Modern just in time manufacturing is one example of a flexible approach to production.

Likewise, the production structure began to change on the sector level. Instead of a single firm manning the assembly line from raw materials to finished product, the production process became fragmented as individual firms specialized on their areas of expertise. Neo-Schumpeterianism[ edit ] The Neo- Schumpeterian approach to post-Fordism is based upon the theory of Kondratiev waves also known as long waves.

The theory holds that a "techno-economic paradigm" Perez characterizes each long wave. Fordism was the techno-economic paradigm of the fourth Kondratiev wave, and post-Fordism is thus the techno-economic paradigm of the fifth, which is dominated by information and communication technology. Post-Fordist theory in Italy[ edit ] In Italy, post-Fordism has been theorised by the long wave of workerism or autonomia.

But this distinction has long ceased to apply in the post-Fordist New Economy, in which both spheres are structurally affected by language and communication. In Capital and Language Marazzi argues that the changes in financial markets and the transformation of labor into immaterial labor that is, its reliance on abstract knowledge, general intellect, and social cooperation are two sides of a new development paradigm: financialization through and thanks to the rise of the new economy.

The saturation of key markets brought on a turn against mass consumption and a pursuit of higher living standards. Rather than being viewed as a mass market to be served by mass production , the consumers began to be viewed as different groups pursuing different goals who could be better served with small batches of specialized goods. In the economic realm, post-Fordism brought the decline of regulation and production by the nation-state and the rise of global markets and corporations.

Mass marketing was replaced by flexible specialization, and organizations began to emphasize communication more than command. The workforce changed with an increase in internal marketing, franchising, and subcontracting and a rise in part-time, temp, self-employed, and home workers. Politically, class-based political parties declined and social movements based on region, gender, or race increased. Mass unions began to vanish and were instead replaced by localized plant-based bargaining.

Cultural and ideological changes included the rise in individualist modes of thought and behavior and a culture of entrepreneurialism. Following the shift in production and acknowledging the need for more knowledge-based workers, education became less standardized and more specialized.

Prominent ideologies that arose included fragmentation and pluralism in values, post-modern eclecticism, and populist approaches to culture. The First Italy included the areas of large-scale mass production, such as Turin , Milan , and Genoa , and the Second Italy described the undeveloped South.

The Third Italy, however, was where clusters of small firms and workshops developed in the s and s in the central and northeast regions of the country. Each region specialized in a range of loosely related products and each workshop usually had five to fifty workers and often less than ten. The range of products in each region reflected the post-Fordist shift to economies of scope. Additionally, these workshops were known for producing high quality products and employing highly skilled, well-paid workers.

The workshops were very design-oriented and multidisciplinary, involving collaboration between entrepreneurs, designers, engineers and workers. First, there were changes to company structure, including the replacement of independent trade unions with pro-management, company-based unions; the development of a core of permanent male multi-skilled workers; and the development of a periphery of untrained temporary and part-time employees, who were mostly female.

Second, after World War II, Japan was somewhat isolated because of import barriers and foreign investment restrictions, and as a result, Japan began to experiment with production techniques. Third, as imported technologies became more available, Japan began to replicate, absorb, and improve them, with many improvements deriving from modifications for local conditions.

Fourth, Japan began to concentrate on the need for small-batch production and quick changeover of product lines to serve the demand for a wide range of products in a relatively small market.

Because of informal price-fixing , competition was based not on price but rather on product differentiation. As a result, production became less standardized and more specialized, particularly across different companies.

Fifth, Japan began to build long-term supply and subcontracting networks, which contrasted with the vertically integrated, Fordist American corporations. Sixth, because small and medium-size manufacturers produced a wide range of products, there was a need for affordable multipurpose equipment as opposed to the specialized, costly production machinery in Fordist industries in the United States. Technology for flexible production was significant in Japan and particularly necessary for smaller producers.

The smaller producers also found it necessary to reduce costs. As a result, Japan became one of the main users of robots and CNC. Criticisms[ edit ] The main criticism of post-Fordism asserts that post-Fordism mistakes the nature of the Fordist revolution and that Fordism was not in crisis, but was simply evolving and will continue to evolve. The automobile industry has combined Fordist and post-Fordist strategies, [11] using both mass production and flexible specialization.

Ford introduced flexibility into mass production, so that Fordism could continue to evolve. Those who advocate post-Fordism, however, note that criticism that focuses primarily on flexible specialization ignores post-Fordist changes in other areas of life and that flexible specialization cannot be looked at alone when examining post-Fordism.

Another criticism is that post-Fordism relies too heavily on the examples of the Third Italy and Japan. Some believe that Japan is neither Fordist nor post-Fordist and that vertical disintegration and mass production go hand in hand. Another main criticism is that we are too much in the midst to judge whether or not there really is a new system of production. This change of vocabulary is also associated with a number of important conceptual shifts see sections above.



El mundo actual parece oponer, en efecto: Un mundo desarrollado, organizado en tres bloques continentales, dirigidos respectivamente por EE. En las partes cuarta, quinta y sexta, volveremos a los caracteres contrastados de los tres bloques. La competitividad se iguala entre EE. La idea principal era coordinar el mantenimiento de la demanda mundial. Veremos que en la realidad estas opciones no son compatibles.


Diferencia entre Fordismo y Posfordismo


Related Articles