FROM: Harris, D. (2004) Key
Concepts in Leisure Studies, London and Thousand Oaks: Sage McDonaldization McDonaldization is a term
originally coined by the
American sociologist George Ritzer in a series of best-selling books
about the spread
of the fast food industry and the implications raised for modern
society
(including other types of leisure). More general theoretical arguments
are also
involved. Controversy has greeted the work and has led to new emphases. Section Outline Weber on rationalization. Ritzer
on the
characteristics of McDonaldization. Critical evaluations of the
McDonaldization
thesis. Weber on the ‘ideal type’. Developments and applications to
other
leisure activities – package tours, Disney and the re-enchantment of
the
(baseball) ballpark.
The
most effective
means to achieve these specific goals, with maximum benefit and minimum
cost,
are then selected, regardless of sentiment, subjective or emotional
attachments, or tradition. This second kind of rationality has
obviously
dominated the modern corporation or state bureaucracy. Weber went on to
define
his notion of bureaucracy (in the rather special form of an 'ideal
type', to
which we shall return below) to reflect this overwhelming importance of
rationality: work was rationally subdivided, and organised in a
hierarchy,
there were technical rules and procedures to cover every operation,
people were
appointed exclusively according to their merits or experience. Modern
corporate
life would be impossible without the development of this kind of
rationality, Weber
thought. If an insurance company is to process a large number of
clients, for
example, it has to be completely rational in the way that it assesses
risks and
pay outs. It would be no good trying to judge the risk of applying
insurance cover
to drivers by making personal and subjective judgements about them.
Instead,
standard information is required, and forms are filled in. The status
and risks
attached to the policy are then calculated using a set of objective
rules.
Decisions whether to cover or not are managed by having a hierarchy of
offices,
with specialist claims assessors and actuaries at the top, and
reception staff
at the bottom. It is in no one's interests, least of all the
customers', to
leave such decisions in the hands of traditional elites, or people who
happen
to appeal to the shareholders regardless of their merits. It can even
be a
great relief and refuge to work in a rational organisation, instead of
one run
by prima donnas and bullies permitted to express their ‘bad’
subjectivity. It
might be obvious
immediately that these characteristics can be applied to leisure
businesses specifically.
The first step is to take a thorough look at a key example, the task of
providing recreational foods, in this case burgers. It is clear that
the whole
process can be modernised and developed by abandoning the traditional
craft
methods of producing burgers in small local stores. Something more like
a
factory is substituted instead -- the burger becomes a standard
combination of
a particular kind of sandwich or bun, a standard portion of meat, and a
standard combination of salad and gherkins. Standardization enables
exactly the
same kind of economic benefits that Henry Ford received after
standardising the
production of motor cars: in particular, fine calculations can be made
which
balance the quantities offered in the meal, the cost of those inputs,
the
volume of sales, and the price of each item. Such burgers are produced
on a
kind of factory production line to a standardized formula, and are
dispensed in
measurable packages. Craftwork disappears, and machines come
increasingly to
regulate the whole process. Ritzer describes the key qualities overall
as: (1)
efficiency
(choosing the most efficient means to achieve specified ends as above,
giving
the assembly-line philosophy of McDonald’s, drive-throughs, making the
customer
work to assemble their own meals and dispose of waste and so on), (2)
calculability
of process and product (the quantification of meals, portion size,
times to
cook fries), (3)
predictability (standardised
meals and
Mcworkers all over the world, often trained in-house by the (4)
control,
as in the use of non-human technology (factory
farms, microwaves, computerisation in cash tills or drinks dispensers
-- and
robot workers). (5)
‘irrationality
of rationality’, (the costs which rationalised organisations can impose
on their
environments or customers – what is rational for the company may be
damaging or
costly for these others, a clear reference to pollution or health
issues). High
overall
productivity clearly has been factor in the huge success of McDonald’s.
Prices
are low, and customers get the same value and (in general terms) the
same menu
wherever they go. However, there is a social price to pay, again well
foreseen
by Weber. The human and cultural meanings involved in producing food are stripped away. Weber used the
rather ambiguous term 'disenchantment' to describe this process – cold,
abstract scientific procedure replaces the (often illusory) mystery and
charm
of the old-fashioned ways of cooking. Ritzer (1999) uses this term to
describe
the dislike that people feel for coldly rational organisations that
seem
inhuman, especially in leisure, but goes on to look at processes of
‘re-enchantment’ as well, in a way which rescues him from many critics
as we
shall see. It
is clear that
Ritzer disapproves heartily of the trend towards McDonaldization, so
much so
that he urges readers to resist these trends, to press for quality
instead of
quantity, for diversity rather than uniformity, for human contact
rather than
the anonymous consumption of products after queuing at the delivery end
of a
production line. This clearly strikes a chord with many cultural
critics as
well. Rather as with Disney, many middle-class intellectual academics
clearly
despise McDonald’s and the whole fast food syndrome. Again we might use
Bourdieu to explain why (see the section on social class)
-- the quick anonymous consumption of bland and
probably unhealthy food is clearly going to be anathema to those
sharing the
'high aesthetic' with its central values of cool, abstracted judgment
and
denial of immediate gratification (and see the section on food).
This structured distaste for fast food is so common among
bourgeois groups that it might be difficult for them to see why anyone
ever wants
to eat in McDonald’s in the first place. Indeed, Parker, in Alfino et
al.
(1998), suggests this distaste is the real impulse behind Ritzer’s
analysis
rather than the attempted technical application of Weber. We
have already
acknowledged the convenience and predictability of the fast meal, but,
as
usual, deeper cultural manipulation might be at work. Given that
rationalization serves to strip food items of any cultural meaning by
reducing
them to industrial products, there is a need to supply alternative
meanings for
the consumer. These are going to be ones that lead to further
commercial
exploitation. McDonald’s has worked hard on its image as a family
restaurant,
for example, and, like Disney, its workers are trained to be hospitable
and
friendly (although not too friendly, since this might impede efficient
processing
of large numbers of customers). Children and adolescents like fast
food,
because it is tasty (salty or sweet), and because McDonald’s tries very
hard to
market their products with a whole range of toys and spin-offs for
children.
Although Ritzer does not mention it explicitly, we know from other
studies of
children's diet that they tend to like ‘junk’ foodstuffs that directly
invert
adult food values, as in the fascinating study by James (in Waites et
al. 1982)
of children’s desires for cheap, sticky and unwrapped sweets. Fast food
offers
these pleasures, not least in the way in which it can be eaten with
minimal
table manners. These clever marketing strategies are particularly
sinister,
perhaps, because vulnerable people like children are involved, and
because
there are serious anxieties about the overall effects on health of an
excessive
diet of burgers. There is a suspicion that ruthless business practices
underscore the friendly image: McDonald’s has also had a spate of bad
publicity
about the damage to the environment for which the company allegedly is
responsible.
For
some critics
of Ritzer, however, the familiar accusation is made that this simply
underestimates the capacity of the customers to choose or to resist. To
take some
quick examples, Rinehart, in Alfino et al. (1998) argues that feminists
are
perfectly capable of resisting the blandishments of the company, while
Turner,
in Smart (1999), suggests that customers are much more likely to be
playfully
consuming rather than to be completely dominated by the ideology of
rationality.
Kellner (Alfino et al. 1998) suggests that Ritzer simply has missed out
the
slightly subversive uses to which people can put the McDonald’s
restaurant,
such as when young Taiwanese meet in local Macs to discuss politics. As
might
be expected, advocates of the ‘skilled consumer’ thesis see a much more
active
and measured acceptance of the pleasures of rational consumption, as
Miles
argues (in Alfino et al. 1998): the predictability of McDonaldization
can be
welcome in an otherwise risky and changing world of consumerism, and
this value
is capably calculated even by young consumers. As with all celebrations
of the
skilled consumer, though, this particular argument can look very
uncritical and
blandly optimistic. There are some undoubted advantages for
rationalised food
production though, despite their drawbacks – they can relieve women of
the
constant responsibility of providing meals for the family, and
McDonald’s
restaurants can provide a kind of temporary refuge for the culturally
threatened
(like American visitors to the UK – see Caputo in Alfino et al. 1998). There
is also much
more diversity and subjective variability in concrete examples of
McDonald’s
restaurants. To take some of my own experience, I quickly spotted that
you can
buy alcohol in French ones, and one McDonald's I visited in the Place
de la République
in Paris was playing Verdi on the sound system (almost unknown in
Britain, I
would think). Menus vary as well, between These
comments
often lead on to a methodological argument as well, expressed best
perhaps by
Kellner (2003). By relying on Weber, Ritzer leaves out a number of
theoretical
models that would have explained the missing aspects of his analysis.
Marxism
might have helped provide an assessment of the capitalist background of
rationalisation, and the impact on the workforce. Semiotic
analysis could clarify the ways in which meanings are
attached to burgers, both by the company and by the customers, as
Caputo
demonstrates in his analysis of the appealing American ‘food, folks and
fun’
myth displayed in the advertisements (in Alfino et al. 1998: 49).
Certainly, in
order to understand McDonald’s itself as a phenomenon, and not just as
an
illustration of Weber's work on bureaucracy, we would need to draw upon
other theoretical
resources, including postmodern ones
– see Wynyard in Alfino et al (1998). In fact this is taken up by
Ritzer
himself in his later work on disenchantment and re-enchantment, when he
adds to
his account additional insights drawn from marxist and postmodernist
theorists
to consider consuming more fully (see the section on adding
leisure values). However,
there is
one aspect of Weber's work which might be deployed in the defence of
Ritzer's
analysis. It is clear that subjective variations do take place in
particular McDonald’s
restaurants, as they must whenever human beings are involved. Some
managers
will offer different decor or music, as we have seen. Some people will
attach
particular meanings to visiting McDonald’s, as do the (possibly
mythical)
divorced fathers who take their children for a Big Mac on the weekends
they
have access. Muscovites apparently queued for hours to be among the
first to
sample a burger on the opening of the first restaurant in However,
the point
is whether these subjective variations are important enough to weaken
the
central analysis. There will never be a pure type bureaucracy, complete
in
every detail, as Weber knew only too well. That is why he offered
instead an
'ideal type'. This term has been much discussed in social theory, but
the
word 'ideal' is usually seen as
referring to an idea, a central definition, the essence of the
organisation
(the 'type' part refers more to the commonly-found features in existing
typical
examples). If we see Ritzer's work as offering not a simple description
of McDonald’s
but this rather special 'ideal type' of the organisation, it becomes
possible
to rescue it from many of its critics. Despite all the variations we
have
found, does the central logic of McDonaldization show any signs of
weakening or
changing? Are the alternative menus themselves produced using the
principles of
calculability, predictability and so on? Asking this sort of question
might
lead to far more support for Ritzer's position, and, indeed, it is a
feature of
his later work on enchantment. He does use questions like this in reply
to his
many critics, and he does explicitly mention ideal-type analysis in his
reply
to critics in Smart (1999). However, he does not refer to this
particular
interpretation of the ideal type, but sees it instead as a simple
template or
yardstick! In
conclusion to
this section, we might briefly consider some attempts to apply this
work to
other aspects of leisure. Ritzer himself has always seen the package
tour as an
excellent example of McDonaldization (even in Ritzer 1993), and we
might
compare this with the discussion of authenticity.
He has also pursued the implications for Disney theme parks and shopping malls (Ritzer and Liska in Rojek
and Urry 1997), and a wide range of other ‘cathedrals of consumption’
such as
cruise ships or museums, and, in the process, tried to incorporate some
of the criticisms.
Perhaps the best single short piece on this is the analysis of the
postmodern ballpark
(Ritzer and Stillman 2001). Other
writers are
less certain of the general application of the McDonaldization model,
at least
in its earlier stages. Bryman, for example, tries out the five
characteristics
pretty explicitly in his revisit to the Disney theme park (in Smart
1999), and
finds a good fit except for the characteristic of calculability: Disney
parks
seem to stress the overall quality of the experience rather than
attempting to
calculate cost-effectiveness in a detailed and local manner. Jary has
explored
two major applications of McDonaldization – to the university (Parker
and Jary
1995) and to leisure and sports in general (in Smart 1999). The first
example
has provoked much amusement and irony among academics trying to debunk
the new
managerialism in British universities, but Parker and Jary find many
exceptions
to the overall trend to McDonaldization even in modern universities. In
terms
of leisure more generally, Jary finds the model too limiting, and he
wants to
add additional stages or dimensions to the analysis (including the
history of
leisure in figurationalist terms as
a pre-cursor to McDonaldization, and to analyses of commodification of
sport,
of the kind we explore with Nike, in the section on adding leisure
values).
Ritzer reacted rather sternly to this attempt to both extend and
localise his
model in his reply (also in Smart 1999), and claimed he was already
working to
add some missing elements (in the work on enchantment that became
Ritzer 1999). See
also: adding leisure values, authenticity,
Disneyfication, figurationalism,
postmodernism, shopping. Further reading Apart
from
following up the collections of criticisms (Alfino et al. 1998 and
Smart 1999)
Kellner’s (2003) online essay summarises the critiques and offers new
insights.
Ritzer and Stillman (2001) on baseball illuminate the power of the new
approach
to re-enchantment. Those interested in the Weberian background might
consult
Ritzer’s own bestselling textbook on social theory (Ritzer 1996), or
Ray
(1999), and compare the sections on the ‘ideal type’ especially. References Alfino,
M.,
Caputo, J. and Wynyard, R. (eds.) (1998) McDonaldization Revisited: critical essays on consumer
culture, Kellner,
D. (2003)
‘Theorizing/Resisting McDonaldization: A Multiperspectivist Approach’
[online]
http://www.uta.edu/huma/illuminations/kell30.htm. Parker,
M. and
Jary, D. (1995) ‘The McUniversity: organization, management and
academic
subjectivity’, in Organization, Vol. 2: 1—20. Ray,
L. (1999) Theorising Classical Sociology, Ritzer,
G. (1993) The
McDonaldization of Society: an investigation into the changing
character of
contemporary social life, Ritzer,
G. (1996) Sociological
Theory, 4th edn., Ritzer,
G. (1999) Enchanting
a Disenchanted World: revolutionizing the means of consumption, Ritzer,
G. and
Stillman, T. (2001) 'The Postmodern Ballpark as a Leisure Setting:
Enchantment
and Simulated De- McDonaldization', in Leisure Sciences, Vol.
23:
99—113. Rojek,
C. and
Urry, J. (eds.) (1997) Touring cultures: transformations of travel
and
theory, Smart,
B. (ed.)
(1999) Resisting McDonaldization, Waites,
B.,
Bennett, T. and Martin, G. (eds.) (1982) Popular Culture: past and
present,
Westoby,
A.(ed.) (1988)
Culture and Power in Educational Organisations, |