Titlebook: After Fordism; Robert Boyer,Jean-Pierre Durand Book 1997 Robert Boyer and Jean-Pierre Durand 1997 crisis.production.transformation.transit

腐蝕

https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52688-5 of the mode of regulation is itself destabilised and loses its coherence. The model of postwar Fordist growth was not immune to this rule, for its principles, the organisational forms they implied and the employment relations they generated proved increasingly counter-productive (Figure 2.1).

平

Omnipotent

https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52688-5roduction could never be more than a deepening of the scientific organisation of work, the equivalent of the transition from Ford’s model ‘T’ to the annual model change instigated by General Motors (see Figure 6.1). This diagnosis of great continuity is reinforced in countries where nostalgia for Fordism is strong.

ADOPT

Integrate

猛然一拉

slow-wave-sleep

What do the Changes Mean?Part I of this book claims that a new production paradigm may be emerging in Japan, Germany and Sweden. This claim can be tempered by showing that the characteristics of the German and Swedish ‘models’ in fact derive from local specificities, and they are particular versions of the same overall model, a model that is still very much alive.

煩憂

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-14027-5crisis; production; transformation; transition

清洗

暗指