Separate toilets for staff and students symbolising inequalities between staff and students, also the situation of the toilets, i.e. student toilets only available on the ground floor. Separation of post- and under-graduate facilities also illustrates a similar point as does the lack of an undergraduate common room.

Design of the building creates an identity. The modern style and ‘officey’ look to the building is symbolic of the corporate identity portrayed, rather than that of a school.

Wording used in, for example, the prospectus is symbolic of the modern, intellectual, identity that the school tries to portray.

Saturated with symbolism, in the ‘uniform’ instructed to wear and the grandeur of the ceremony itself symbolising achievement.

Symbolising power, e.g., ‘Head of School’, or lack of power, e.g. student. (In reality it is debatable how much power actually is granted). Socially constructed symbolism ascribed to the title. Many people unaware of the subtle power relationships at work behind the scenes between holders of different job titles. The symbolism seen by the individual themselves does not always match that which other people see.

Symbolic of power - hierarchical constraints placed on lecturers and that placed by lecturers on students. Demonstrates the bureaucratic context within which the members of staff work, this also highlights the inequalities present within the educational system.

The same ‘symbol’ may mean different things to different people. The meaning that is ascribed to an image is not necessarily that which the creator intended (e.g. the MSM logo). The ‘intended’ symbolic meaning may not be positively reinforced due to personal experiences, resulting in a more ‘emergent’ symbolic association. This could also be represented by a formal vs. informal definition of the symbolism.

E.g. Job Titles- the official power and identity of a job title is not always the same as which people perceive it to be. How much of the actual power ascribed to a job title is as a result of the perceived power- self-perpetuating myth?

Some aspects of symbolism are more emergent than others.

The clothing worn by students is a symbolic reflection of their identity. It can be said that students wear a certain type of clothing to identify with a group of people, and because of insecurities re: feeling different. [Power dressing?] Within MSM there are clusters of people wearing different styles of clothing. No-one in authority dictates what should be worn, but some people feel the need to dress ‘up’- conforming to what they feel symbolises e.g. affluent, fashionable, professional etc. (Lukes 3^rd Dimension of Power at work?)

We could also look at the clothing worn by lecturers, comparing it with those in other departments. Is the standard of dress more professional/ modern in this dept. due to the amount of external funding sought, with lecturers trying to project an alternate identity to that which the term lecturer usually symbolises.

Language used is symbolic of students’ identities.

This is different within different departments of UMIST. Within MSM there is an apathetic reaction, this is because the feedback represents another constraint imposed upon the teaching staff. This highlights the underlying political struggle, power relations and potentially the insecurities of the staff involved. This is shown in their unwillingness to receive the feedback and their lackadaisical attitude.

Explore the Significance of Culture and Symbolism for the Formation and Development of Identity in the Workplace Context.

We should first consider the ‘workplace context’. This will obviously differ with contrasting occupations and professions. One particular, maybe traditional, viewpoint is that of a regimented highly regulated workplace. Where workers understand their role in relation to a hierarchy influenced by power and control. However some companies are beginning to ‘blur’ the boundaries of this traditional hierarchical system. These firms have introduced a more egalitarian system in which individuals are organised, however power is still vested in certain less distinct positions. Workers appear on a more even footing with each other, particularly in a social role. Culture and symbolism, constructed by employers, aids the formation and development of this workplace context and likewise the identity of workers within it.

So how is Identity formed in these workplace contexts?

We should first accept that it is not only the individual whose identity is affected by the workplace. The workplace identity is itself affected by the individuals within it. As well as accepting that identities of individuals are formed as a result of the workplace we should not dismiss the idea that the identity of the workplace is itself a direct consequence of the individuals which form it.

Identity in the Workplace: External/Public Identity

Internal/ Work Colleague Identity

External or Public Identity

A company’s public image is of vital importance as to how it is perceived in society. Workers form a large part of this external identity and therefore their individual public identity is usually controlled in accordance with company culture/policy. Various methods are used including uniforms, company standards, company procedures, codes of practice etc. These act to produce a uniform company identity and also contribute to a workers identity. Workers are part of a collective whole – the company’s identity and derive power and status accordingly.

Internal or Working Colleague Identity

This identity may be closely linked to an individual’s own identity because despite being company ‘players’ workers bring their own identities from outside of the collective group. However the internal structure and culture within the workplace contributes to the individual's identity. Firms attempt to control culture (using symbolism) to blur roles/identities so workers develop social relations at work. This has the effect of :

Therefore, overall work and societal contexts are blurred. Symbolism can be used to reinforce this. Eg:

Equal canteens for workers and managers

Open plan offices (workers and managers together)

Increase in team working

Flatter hierarchies and less distinct job discriptions

Activity groups (eg: yoga, squash etc)

Company car

Free dental & healthcare

Traditional roles/identities of people were

Home Life – Parents, Husbands, Wives etc

Social Life – Friends, Members of societies (eg. Golf Club)

Work Life – Workers, Managers

The distinction between these may not be as great as was true of the historical worker vs workplace attitude. Whereby there existed a greater mentality of "them & us" – a worker vs management culture. In creating a flatter hierarchy and a greater emphasis on a ‘common purpose the worker feels an affiliation with the system in which he/she is part of. This greater bonding reduces the insecurity of individuals due to a reduction in uncertainty. The individual has a common group direction.

Fromm has suggested that a result of capitalism is a greater freedom for the individual. People have been freed from the shackles of the feudal era where a person’s future was mapped out for him. But consequently we have lost certainty in life and thus increased insecurity. He asserts that it is part of "man’s" nature to feel the need to unite with something, either by being dominant over people/belief or by submitting to an ideology a group or a person etc. In this way man is not alone in the world and has a common purpose and direction thus reducing uncertainty and insecurity.

Work can offer 'man' this purpose and direction. At the very extreme - Workaholism - work is an individual's ultimate purpose, a 'live to work' attitude. Work could be viewed at this level as a reason for existence.

Thus work on different levels reduces insecurity and uncertainty. This may be as a result of expectations from others or society; or to reduce economic insecurity; or maybe to reduce the pressure of that 'es muss sein' that Tomas feels in ULB.

Room Layout – symbolises power relationship.

Lectern – physical separation, symbolic of status / power / knowledge differences.

These signify student respect for the lecturer and their knowledge and authority.

LIVED EXPERIENCE:

We do talk, text-message, eat, drink … and towards the end of lectures we take control by becoming restless and making noise (collective resistance), perhaps ending the lecture before the lecturer would have done.

MSM format change from traditional, to less rigid, free form rooms.

Change appears to offer more equality (a bid to motivate us more?), give students more control over the process.

Allows more interaction and encourages input.