Nomadic Work: Romance and Reality. A Response to Barbara Czarniawska’s ‘Nomadic Work as Life-Story Plot’

Abstract

This article takes departure in Barbara Czarniawska's discussion of 'Nomadic Work as Life--Story Plot'. It contextualises her analysis of actors' interpretations of nomadic work with a bi--focal review of the ambiguous realities of these phenomena. Firstly, an examination of key aspects of the socio--economic and political context of nomadic work in global neoliberal economies reveals precarious conditions that cloud romantic interpretations of nomadicity. Secondly, a review of studies of everyday practices of nomadic work shows how neoliberal, but also alternative futures are enacted through creative appropriation of collaborative technologies. One example is the work of digital 'disaster deck' volunteers and its potential for the mobilization of 'rapid, highly localized assistance' through closer collaboration between a distributed crowd, local communities, and official emergency responders (Starbird and Palen 2013). This and other examples suggest emergent new practices and politics of dwelling in mobility that are focused on sociality and collaboration, straddling virtual and physical commons. The twin critique developed in this response can augment narrative analysis to inform more integrated CSCW innovation that challenges the 'brave new world of work'.

Detailing a Spectrum of Motivational Forces Shaping Nomadic Practices

“…Furthering this strand of research is important to account for such practices as they are occurring in people's lives, as this challenges assumptions regarding their character or desirability often made within other fields as noted by Büscher [11]. The identification of this spectrum is an important advancement on the understanding of nomadicity for it allows a better comprehension of how the process is triggered and how it unfolds.…”

“…However, it is not clear how these connect to motivational considerations and strategies. Furthermore, there has been a tendency in the past to see nomadicity as a desirable professional lifestyle motivated by its own "romance" [11]. Yet, when looking at actual nomadic practices, there appears to be a complex set of factors that workers need to handle and obstacles that need to be overcome, suggesting a more complex reality of nomadic practices and their motives.…”

Work Practices, Nomadicity and the Mediational Role of Technology

“…They also provide a nuanced account of how practices of nomadicity are performed by different actors: freelancers, students, public sector employees and corporation workers. Therefore, in these studies we see multiple configurations of movement, fluidity and nomadic identities, as well as an account of the complex motivations for nomadicity-instances of what Büscher in her contribution calls the "romance and reality of nomadic work" (Büscher 2014), where organisational and societal aspirations and demands interplay with personal and practical strategies for embracing and managing nomadicity.…”

“…Büscher argues that Czarniawska's focus on individual career choices rationalises and romanticises these choices and does not bring to the fore other powerful forces that shape nomadic lives, glossing over "an imbroglio of technology, social practices and intersecting social, physical, virtual, communicative and imaginative mobilities of nomadic work" (Büscher 2014). Büscher goes on to review key accounts of nomadicity and nomadic practices that have emerged in CSCW, identifying different registers of mobility: network society practices building social and cultural capital from the "weak ties" of frequent and lightweight social interactions; "plastic" amalgamation of technologies into everyday life practices; deliberate interactions underpinning collaborative interactions online; choosing and making places, andparticularly-homing practices; different forms of remote and co-located solitary and cooperative activities ("working together apart" and "working alone together") (Büscher 2014).…”

“…Büscher goes on to review key accounts of nomadicity and nomadic practices that have emerged in CSCW, identifying different registers of mobility: network society practices building social and cultural capital from the "weak ties" of frequent and lightweight social interactions; "plastic" amalgamation of technologies into everyday life practices; deliberate interactions underpinning collaborative interactions online; choosing and making places, andparticularly-homing practices; different forms of remote and co-located solitary and cooperative activities ("working together apart" and "working alone together") (Büscher 2014).…”