The Concept Of Governmentality

The Concept Of Governmentality The concept of governmentality is a neologism used by Michel Foucault in his work on modern forms of political power. It is a term that combines government and rationality, suggesting a form of political analysis that focuses on the forms of knowledge that make objects visible and available for governing. In Foucaults terms, governmentality refers to a distinctive modality for exercising power, one which is not reducible to the state. Governmentality is understood to work at a distance by seeking to shape the conduct of conduct. This in turn implies that governmentality refers to a wide range of points of application, including fields of action not ordinarily thought of as political, such as medicine, education, religion, or popular culture. Governmentality is a notion that develops Foucaults distinctive approach to the analysis of power relations. His work not only relocates power, dispersing it away from sovereign actions of centralised state agencies. It rethinks the type of action through which power is exercised (see Brown 2006b). In fundamental respects, the significance of the notion of governmentality for social theory turns on the interpretation of just what sort of theory of action this notion presupposes. The next two sections explore just where this significance lies. Lemke (2002) argues that Foucaults work on governmentality provides a means of understanding the relationships between knowledge, strategies of power and technologies of the self that can usefully augment narratives of neoliberalism. From this perspective, neoliberalism is understood as a political rationality that tries to render the social domain economic and to link a reduction in (welfare) state services and security systems to the increasing call for personal responsibility and self-care' (Lemke 2001, 203). On this understanding, governmentality is a concept that augments the political-economy approaches outlined in the previous section. For example, Ongs (1999) account of the distinctive forms of governmentality deployed by post-developmental states revolves around the assumption that various regulatory regimes manipulate cultural discourses to selectively make people into certain sorts of economic subjects consistent with the objectives of particular national strategies of acc umulation. Jessop (2007, 40) has also argued that the convergence between Marxism and governmentality studies follows from the mutually supportive emphases of the two approaches: while Marx seeks to explain the why of capital accumulation and state power, Foucaults analyses of disciplinarity and governmentality try to explain the how of economic exploitation and political domination. This formulation acknowledges Foucaults own observation that he was concerned with the how of power, but assumes that this descriptive focus merely augments the explanatory project of Marxist political-economy. What is covered over here is a fundamental philosophical difference between these two approaches: the concept of governmentality implies an analysis that focuses on the description of practices instead of causes and explanations. The Marxist and Foucauldian approaches are not necessarily as easily reconciled as it might appear. There are two main areas of difference between these approaches: their respective understandings of the state and of discourse (Traub-Werner 2007, 1444-1446). Political-economy approaches assume fairly static models of the state and the market, and view their relationship in terms of contradictory movements of de-regulation and re-regulation; they also assume that discourse is a representational concept, and focus upon how discourses are theorized differentially materialised in particular contexts. In contrast, governmentality refers to modalities of power that stretch far beyond the state; and discourse is not a representational system so much as a distinctive concept of action, referring to the combination of technologies, means of representation and fields of possibility. Despite the underlying philosophical differences between governmentality and Marxist political economy, Foucaults notion has become an important reference point in recent debates about neoliberalization (Larner 2003, Barnett 2005). If there is such a thing as a neoliberal project, then it is assumed that it must work by seeking to bring into existence lots of neoliberal subjects (cf. Barnett et al 2008). Work on this topic assumes that extending the range of activities that are commodified, commercialized and marketized necessarily implies that peoples subjectivities need to be re-tooled and re-worked as active consumers, entrepreneurial subjects, or empowered participants (e.g. Bondi 2005, GÃ ¶kariksel and Mitchell 2005, Mitchell 2003, Mitchell 2006, Sparke 2006a, Walkerdine 2005). In this interpretation, the dispersal of power implied by the notion of governmentality is re-centred around a sovereign conception of state action, now able to reach out all the more effectively into a ll sorts of arenas in order to secure the conditions of its own (il)legitimacy. The reduction of governmentality to a mechanism of subjectification marks the point at which Foucaults historical, genealogical approach to issues of subject formation is subordinated to presentist functionalism of theories of neoliberalization. This reduction follows from the ambivalence around subject-formation in the formalized models of governmentality that have developed Foucaults ideas. Roses (1999) analysis of advanced liberal governmentality argues that forms of social government, of which the classical Keynsian welfare state stands as the exemplar, are being supplanted by the de-socialisation of modes of governing. The rationalities of advanced liberal welfare reform take the ethical reconstruction of the welfare recipient as their central problem (ibid. 263). They seek to govern people by regulating the choices made by autonomous actors in the context of their everyday, ordinary commitments to friends, family and community. This rationality is visible in the proliferation o f the registers of empowerment and improvement, in which both subjects participating in welfare or development programmes are geared towards transforming the relationships that subjects have with themselves (Cruickshank 1999, Li 2007). In analyses of advanced liberal governmentality, these shifts in political rationality are the result of the efforts of a diverse set of actors pursuing plural ends. They do not reflect the aims of a singular, coherent neoliberal project pursued through the agency of the state. This emphasis is lost in the functionalist appropriation of governmentality to bolster theories of neoliberalization. This is compounded by the tendency in this work to presume that the description of political rationalities also describes the actual accomplishment of subject-effects. The vocabulary of theorists of neoliberal governmentality theorists is replete with terms such as elicit, promote, foster, attract, guide, encourage and so on: The key feature of the neo-liberal rationality is the congruence it endeavours to achieve between a responsible and moral individual and an economic-rational actor. It aspires to construct prudent subjects whose moral quality is based on the fact that they rationally assess the costs and benefits of a certain sort as opposed to other alternative acts (Lemke 2001, 201). The point to underscore here is the emphasis on a rationality that endeavours and aspires to bring about certain subject-effects. Narratives of the emergence of neoliberal governmentality display little sense of just whether and how governmental programmes seek to get people to comply with projects of rule or identify with subject-positions. This is in large part because the Foucauldian approach to neoliberalism continues to construe governmentality in terms of a politics of subjection (Clarke 2004d, 70-71). Such an assumption leads almost automatically to the conclusion that neoliberalism degrades any residual potential for public action inherent in liberal democracy (e.g. Brown 2003). Equipped with the concept of governmentality, this sort of presentation of neoliberalism is able to avoid any serious consideration of what sort of action can be exercised on subjects through acting on them at a distance. The idea that governmentality is a distinctive mode of political rule which seeks to hail into existence its preferred subjects, which are then only left with the option of resistance, needs to be treated with considerable scepticism. Understood as a mechanism of subjection, governmentality is assumed to work through the operation of norms. However, Foucauldian theory is chronically unable to acknowledge the work of communicative rationalities in making any action-through-norms possible (Hacking 2004). Theories of governmentality consistently fail to adequately specify the looping-effects between knowledge-technologies, practices, and subject-formation which are implied by the idea of governing at a distance (Barnett 2001). This failure leads to the supposition that governmentality works through representational modes of subjectification rather than through the practical ordering of fields of strategic and communicative action. At the very most, the governmentality approach implies a probabilistic relationship between regulatory rationalities of rule and the transformations of subjectivities, mediated by the rules of chance (Agrawal 2005, 161-163). It might even imply a reorientation of analysis towards understanding the assemblage of dispersed, singular acts rather than on psycho-social processes of individual subjection (Barnett et al 2008). The recuperation of governmentality as a theory of subject-formation, modelled on theories of interpellative hailing, overlooks the distinctive modality of action through which the Foucault addresses questions of subjectivity. Whereas liberalism and neoliberalism are understood in political-economy approaches as market ideologies, from the governmentality perspective liberalism (and by extension neoliberalism) should properly refer to a particular problematization of governing, and in particular the problematization of the task of governing free subjects. While a free market ideology might imply a problematization of free subjects, it does not follow that the problematization of free subjects is always and everywhere reducible to the imperatives of free market ideologies. Ong (2006) suggests, for example, a definition of neoliberalism in which long established technologies for administering subjects for self-mastery are only contingently articulated with projects directed at securing profitability. But this clarification still presumes that neoliberalism extends and reproduces itself primarily through a politics of subjection (see also Brown 2006a). It might be better to suppose that the distinctive focus in governmentality studies on modes of problematization should reorient analysis to the forms of what Foucault (1988) once called practices of ethical problematization. This would direct analytical attention to investigating the conditions for individuals to recognize themselves as particular kinds of persons and to reflect upon their conduct to problematize it such that they may work upon and transform themselves in certain ways and towards particular goals (Hodges 2002, 457). Two things follow from this reorientation. Firstly, it presumes that subjectivity is the product of situated rationalities of practice, rather than the representational medium of interpellative recognition (Hacking 2002). Secondly, it implies that the proposition that liberal governme ntality seeks to construct self-regulating subjectivities should not be too easily reduced to the proposition that these subjectivities are normatively self-interested egoists (Du Gay 2005). For example, Isin (2004) argues that the distinctive style of problematizing contemporary subjects of rule is in terms of so many neurotic subjects faced with various risks and hazards. One implication of this style of problematizing subjects is that state agencies continue to be the objects of demands to take responsibility for monitoring such neurotic subjects or securing them from harm. In this section we have seen how the third of the approaches to conceptualising neoliberalism identified by Larner (2000), which appeals to the concept of governmentality, can be more or less easily subsumed into the prevalent political-economy interpretation. The assumption that governmentality is a concept that refers to the inculcation of certain sorts of mentality into subjects is the prevalent interpretation of governmentality in geographys usage of this concept to bolster theories of neoliberalization, not least in the proliferation of work on neoliberal subjects. The marriage of political-economy and governmentality therefore generates a shared space of debate that defines state-of-the-art research into neoliberalization (Barnett 2005). While in the political-economy approach, discourses are treated as expressive of other levels of determination, in the governmentality approach political economic processes recede into the background; whereas political-economy approaches privil ege class relations over other social relations, the governmentality approach reduces the social field to a plane of subjectification. But these differences converge around a shared assumption that reproduction happens: that subjects live out their self-governing subjection as ascribed by governmental rationalities, or subordinate classes live out their regulatory roles as ascribed by hegemonic projects of consent (Clarke 2004c). And so it is that the social is reduced to the repository of a mysterious force of resistance waiting to be activated by the revelatory force of academic demystification. Foucauldian analysis of neoliberal governmentality remains unclear whether either tradition can provide adequate resources for thinking about the practical problems of democracy, rights and social justice. This is not helped by the systematic denigration in both lines of thought of liberalism, a catch-all term used with little discrimination

Enzymes :: Free Essays

Enzymes are proteins, composed of polypeptide chains and non-protein groups. Their function is to help with the reactions of many cells and molecules by serving as catalysts. A catalyst is a substance that allows the activation energy required for a reaction by forming a temporary association with the molecules that are reacting. During this process, the catalyst itself is not permanently altered in the process, and so it can be used over and over again. Because of catalysts, cells are able to carry out chemical reactions at a great speed and at comparative low temperatures.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Almost 2,000 different enzymes are now known, each of them capable of catalyzing a specific chemical reaction. The molecule (s) on which an enzyme acts is known as its substrate. For example, sucrose is the substrate for the enzyme sucrase. Enzymes have specific structures that only its specific substrate will fit into. The polypeptide chains of an enzyme are folded in such way that they form a grove or pocket on the surface. The substrate fits in to this grove, which is the site of reactions catalyzed by the enzyme, or active site. Recent studies of enzyme structure have suggested that the active site is flexible. The binding between enzymes and substrate appears to alter the shape of the enzyme. This induces a close fit between the active site and the substrate. It is also believed that this may put some strain on the substrate molecule facilitating the reaction.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Another characteristics of enzymes are competitive inhibition and non-competitive inhibition. Competitive inhibition is the binding of a competitive molecule to the active site of the enzyme. This prevents the proper substrate from reacting with the enzyme. In non-competitive inhibition the binding of a non-competitive inhibitor to another site on the enzyme induces an allosteric change, or conformational change, that prevents the active site from binding to the proper substrate. Enzymes :: Free Essays Enzymes are proteins, composed of polypeptide chains and non-protein groups. Their function is to help with the reactions of many cells and molecules by serving as catalysts. A catalyst is a substance that allows the activation energy required for a reaction by forming a temporary association with the molecules that are reacting. During this process, the catalyst itself is not permanently altered in the process, and so it can be used over and over again. Because of catalysts, cells are able to carry out chemical reactions at a great speed and at comparative low temperatures.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Almost 2,000 different enzymes are now known, each of them capable of catalyzing a specific chemical reaction. The molecule (s) on which an enzyme acts is known as its substrate. For example, sucrose is the substrate for the enzyme sucrase. Enzymes have specific structures that only its specific substrate will fit into. The polypeptide chains of an enzyme are folded in such way that they form a grove or pocket on the surface. The substrate fits in to this grove, which is the site of reactions catalyzed by the enzyme, or active site. Recent studies of enzyme structure have suggested that the active site is flexible. The binding between enzymes and substrate appears to alter the shape of the enzyme. This induces a close fit between the active site and the substrate. It is also believed that this may put some strain on the substrate molecule facilitating the reaction.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Another characteristics of enzymes are competitive inhibition and non-competitive inhibition. Competitive inhibition is the binding of a competitive molecule to the active site of the enzyme. This prevents the proper substrate from reacting with the enzyme. In non-competitive inhibition the binding of a non-competitive inhibitor to another site on the enzyme induces an allosteric change, or conformational change, that prevents the active site from binding to the proper substrate.

Being a Professional Teacher

â€Å"Education is a powerful weapon which you can use to change the world† –Nelson Mandela- The term education above is having so powerful role for human’s life described by Nelson Mandela, President of South Africa. It means that education has a very important role for everything in this entire world. No human beings are able to survive properly without education. Education tells us how to think, how to work properly, how to cook, how to survive, how to make a decision, etc. through education only one can make separate identity.It is the most important thing besides our basic needs such as: Clothes, food, shelters or houses. For the first we learn to interact each other, as we know that we are social creature created by God. We learn to make friends because of education too. Since we were enrolled to a school by our parents, we didn’t learn only alphabet, number, reading etc, but we also made friends. We interacted with them with teacher. It shows us how important the role of education is. According to Wardiman Djoyonegoro, the ex of Ministry of Education affair â€Å"At least there are three aspects which are able to develop education properly. ) facilities, 2) The quality of the books, 3) professional Teachers and educational staffs†. From the above explanation from Wardiman, I ound it interesting to write about professional teacher and why teacher is being favorite job for me. From Dutch colonization era, there have been the term teacher, so close, so important and seems like spearhead rather than just â€Å"a smart and experienced people†. They’re so sharp, so kind even so hard. But that’s a teacher. Being a professional teacher is so interesting and will be respectable.But it’s not as easy as tearing a paper. It needs a lot of sacrifices, morally and materially. This country needs so many professional teachers and staffs. So that educational development will be as wonderful as snow in the des ert. Here some characteristics of professional teacher: Teachers should have a load of energy for their students. They care the students in every conversation or discussion they make with the students Having obvious purposes. They know the purpose each their lesson they will give and work all out to fulfill the purpose.Having a good creativity to make the students discipline and having a good class management They are able to communicate with the parents and also keep in touch with the students’ parents. They have a high hope from the students and encourage students to have a good achievement. If we have applied those all, surely we are being favorite teachers and will be respected by all. This is the reason why teacher should be our favorite job. Being a teacher is my decision when I enrolled to my collage STKIP PGRI Jombang.I decided to be a teacher when I’d graduated from this collage. When I was child, my mom told me that the smartest people is teacher. The preside nt became a president because of teacher. On that time I just imagined how wonderful they are and I decided that teacher would be my dream when I grew up. Hat’s only a piece of funny thought of mine. Now I realize I should be a professional teacher. Why? Looking back at the educational system of Indonesia, it’s so heart-touching when I see there are so many children have no chance to going to school, especially in remote area.Education now seems just for the high class people. Although there have been a law rule in UUD 1945 about Educational budget is 20%, education is free for the poor people. Thos are so far away if we look back the education in remote area. So how come the government does ask to the citizen to have higher education if the fee is not payable? That’s why I really want to be a teacher in remote area especially. At least I can contribute for my beloved country although I’m not a soldier or police who keep this country.

Free Essays on Employment At-Will

Employment at Will The industrial revolution changed the status of workers and employment soon became a purely economic relationship. By 1877, Horace G. Wood wrote an authoritative treatise on the law of master and servant and expressed the American rule as follows: "with us the rule is inflexible, that a general or indefinite hiring is prima facie hiring at-will...". Under the at-will-employment rule, an employee was free to terminate his or her employment relationship at any time for any reason and the employer was likewise permitted to terminate the employee with no reason. This employment-at-will rule remained the law until the rule began to be eroded through statutory exceptions. The employment-at-will doctrine is not absolute. As soon as it was developed, the courts recognized that a strict employment at-will doctrine could be unfair and contrary to policies established by the legislature. While many employee and employers know that states recognize the employment at-will doctrine, they may not be aware that this doctrine is not a Federal employment law, it is a common law. Since the first announcing of the at-will rule the courts have established several common law and statutory exceptions to at will employment. In his book, Heneman explains: Common law is court-made law based upon case by case decisions which over an extended period of time sets a precedence in determining permissible and impermissible actions. Every state develops and administers its own common law. Employment at-will is treated at the state level. However, there are Federal laws that dictate legal exceptions to employment at will. Many legislatures have gradually entered into protection statue areas and began chipping away at the employment at-will doctrine. Some of the many more common exceptions protected by the Federal Law include Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, American Disabilities Act. Alone, these a... Free Essays on Employment At-Will Free Essays on Employment At-Will Employment at Will The industrial revolution changed the status of workers and employment soon became a purely economic relationship. By 1877, Horace G. Wood wrote an authoritative treatise on the law of master and servant and expressed the American rule as follows: "with us the rule is inflexible, that a general or indefinite hiring is prima facie hiring at-will...". Under the at-will-employment rule, an employee was free to terminate his or her employment relationship at any time for any reason and the employer was likewise permitted to terminate the employee with no reason. This employment-at-will rule remained the law until the rule began to be eroded through statutory exceptions. The employment-at-will doctrine is not absolute. As soon as it was developed, the courts recognized that a strict employment at-will doctrine could be unfair and contrary to policies established by the legislature. While many employee and employers know that states recognize the employment at-will doctrine, they may not be aware that this doctrine is not a Federal employment law, it is a common law. Since the first announcing of the at-will rule the courts have established several common law and statutory exceptions to at will employment. In his book, Heneman explains: Common law is court-made law based upon case by case decisions which over an extended period of time sets a precedence in determining permissible and impermissible actions. Every state develops and administers its own common law. Employment at-will is treated at the state level. However, there are Federal laws that dictate legal exceptions to employment at will. Many legislatures have gradually entered into protection statue areas and began chipping away at the employment at-will doctrine. Some of the many more common exceptions protected by the Federal Law include Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, American Disabilities Act. Alone, these a...

Free Essays on Miranda

Miranda v. Arizona This Supreme Court case deals with the rights of accused. This case mainly encompasses one’s Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate one’s self. Ernest Miranda, a twenty-three year old drifter was arrested and taken directly to a Phoenix, Arizona police station. There, after being identified by the victim of a rape kidnapping, he was taken to an interrogation room, where he was questioned about the crimes. At first, Miranda maintained his innocence, but after two hours of questioning, the police emerged from the room with a signed written confession of guilt. At his trial, the written confession was admitted into evidence and Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. The United States Supreme Court was then faced with Miranda’s claim that the confession was self-incrimination and in violation of his constitutional rights. The police’s admission that neither before nor during the questioning had Miranda had been advised of his right to consult wi th an attorney before answering any questions or his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation solidified Miranda’s argument. The Court decided that prosecutors could not use statements stemming from interrogation unless proper procedure, such as the notification to the accused of his right to refuse to answer the questions given by the police and his right to have an attorney present, the ruling was in favor of Miranda; 5-4. The decision of the Miranda case has three parts, which have changed the procedures of police stations across the United States. The Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings from being coerced to incriminate themselves. The privilege also applies to questioning after the accused has been taken in to custody. The Court also ruled that a confession by the accused could only be admitted if it is voluntary and no coercion ... Free Essays on Miranda Free Essays on Miranda Miranda v. Arizona This Supreme Court case deals with the rights of accused. This case mainly encompasses one’s Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate one’s self. Ernest Miranda, a twenty-three year old drifter was arrested and taken directly to a Phoenix, Arizona police station. There, after being identified by the victim of a rape kidnapping, he was taken to an interrogation room, where he was questioned about the crimes. At first, Miranda maintained his innocence, but after two hours of questioning, the police emerged from the room with a signed written confession of guilt. At his trial, the written confession was admitted into evidence and Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. The United States Supreme Court was then faced with Miranda’s claim that the confession was self-incrimination and in violation of his constitutional rights. The police’s admission that neither before nor during the questioning had Miranda had been advised of his right to consult wi th an attorney before answering any questions or his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation solidified Miranda’s argument. The Court decided that prosecutors could not use statements stemming from interrogation unless proper procedure, such as the notification to the accused of his right to refuse to answer the questions given by the police and his right to have an attorney present, the ruling was in favor of Miranda; 5-4. The decision of the Miranda case has three parts, which have changed the procedures of police stations across the United States. The Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings from being coerced to incriminate themselves. The privilege also applies to questioning after the accused has been taken in to custody. The Court also ruled that a confession by the accused could only be admitted if it is voluntary and no coercion ...

The unconventional and powerful women of uncle tom's cabin Research Paper

The unconventional and powerful women of uncle tom's cabin - Research Paper Example The behaviors that are described are used specifically to create a different understanding of the women in the book and to provide a different sense of insight to the women of the time period and the roles which were carried out with the responses to slavery. The main ideologies which are seen in â€Å"Uncle Tom’s Cabin† are based on showing the conventional women as a main identity juxtaposed against those that don’t have the same ideals. The concept of the conventional woman is based on those who are submissive in society and which have a demeanor that is below men and is known for beauty. The unconventional women reject this ideal and move against this to create an outlook that is tough, rigid and which doesn’t conform to the submission that is a part of the social acceptance of gender. A point that shows this is when Marie becomes angry with her cousin. â€Å" ‘Delicacy! Said Marie, with a scornful laugh – ‘a fine word for such as s he! I’ll teach her, with all her airs, that she’s no better than the raggedest black wench that walks the streets! She’ll take no more airs with me!’† (Stowe, 366). This is an important line in the story as it shows the difference between the women. The identity of one is based on beauty, delicacy and the ‘lady-like airs.’ However, Stowe sides with the Marie who is interested in making the woman into a ‘wench’ and to teach her a lesson about the realities of life. The identity of gender leads from the conventional to one who rebels against this because of the values that are learned with gender. The unconventional ways in which Stowe focuses on the women in the book leads to one of the main controversies, specifically because of the time frame in which this was written in. The sentimental value doesn’t come from the lady like airs, but rather the toughness of the women. The value which is created among male scholars is one which would be associated with the lack of gender identity among the women. However, for women, there is a sense of identity, feminine power and value to the women which creates a type of sentiment and understanding to those that are in this condition. The representation of the women is then able to speak to an audience that moves beyond male scholars and instead speaks to the women who have the same conflicts with the belief that they are inferior because of their gender (Tompkins, 123). The concept of speaking to women, creating sentimental value and going against the convention all work together with several examples through â€Å"Uncle Tom’s Cabin.† Stowe is able to show how the idea of being unconventional is the only thing which allows the women to overcome their condition that is noted throughout the book. It also gives a sense of acceptance to those that don’t stay in the normal identity and which are able to create their own power by remaining ou tside of this. For instance, when Miss Ophelia and Marie are speaking, there is reference to Marie’s past life and her children. Marie states â€Å"Well, of course, I couldn’t bring them. They were little dirty things – I couldn’t have them about; and, besides, they took up too much of her time; but I believe that Mammy has always kept up a sort of sulkiness about this† (Stowe, 192). Marie then refers to her children as selfish and her need to take care of herself. The unconvention

Pro's and Con's of Telework from the Employers Perspective Research Paper

Pro's and Con's of Telework from the Employers Perspective - Research Paper Example Teleworking is an instrument that can alter the organization’s competencies (Illegems & Verbeke, 2004). Teleworking has multifaceted implications for the individual, for the organization as well as for the society. This paper evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of teleworking from an employer’s perspective. Lim and Teo (2000) define teleworking as a work arrangement where employees can work out of home during or outside office hours. Teleworking has also been defined as â€Å"Periodic work out of the principal office, one or more days per week either at home, a client’s site, or in a telework center (Nilles, 1998 cited in Hill, Ferris & Martinson, 2003). It involves working through different satellite offices or other remote locations away from the company office (Golden, 2006). Contact is maintained through different office equipments powered by communication and information technologies such as through computer modems, facsimiles and electronic and voic e mail systems. This is the reason that teleworking is more prevalent in countries that have more use of electronic communication. Teleworking is done part-time from home or other remote locations and this results in best output as it can prevent social isolation of the workers (Perez, Sanchez, & Carnicer, 2003). ... The IT industry has a high employee turnover rate globally. Frequent displacement of employees affects the morale of those who remain in the organization. Teleworking can be beneficial to the organization if the employees have a positive attitude towards it. The potential advantages include reduction in office space requirement, capital savings for the organization, and possibility of retention of scarce skills and talents in the organization (Lim & Teo, 2000). All of these in turn could boost the morale of the remaining employees. However, it is important that the employees have a favorable attitude towards teleworking. This has also been found in the case of Spanish firms where the organization can benefit only if the employees are involved in design and programming their own tasks (Perez, Sanchez, & Carnicer, 2003). If employees focus on self-management skills and are able to organize their schedules, set priorities, meet deadlines and asses their own performance, teleworking can be beneficial in Spain. This is because the HR managers are not familiar with technology and its implications. However, the same may not work in the UK as it requires shift in management culture (Perez, Sanchez, & Carnicer, 2003). To encourage teleworking initiative and adoption, an innovative culture is essential to foster and stimulate change as this makes adoption easier. Teleworking provides the organization to improve the way they manage their working activities in all areas of the value steam. To beat the talent war and scarcity of skills, offering such flexible working system enables the organization to offer something beyond the remuneration â€Å"deals† (Morgan, 2004). Telework helps to attract, motivate and retain