or second most important aspect of the job. This was followed by the intrinsic
nature of the work in terms of variety, challenge, and learning opportunities. Other
important factors included promotion prospects, co-worker relations, and inXu-
ence over decisions that aVect their work (p. 791 ). One of the reasons why pay and
rewards were so important to the knowledge workers in this study was that, unlike
the professions, status was less hierarchically or tenured based. However, the
abstract nature of the knowledge worker’s skills was priced on a perceptual basis:
‘my client cannot do what I do (they may not even know how I do this) and
because they think I’m invaluable, they’ll pay a lot for my services.’ This spiral of
reward (perception—high reward—positive perception) is also the mechanism
through which knowledge workers tend to determine their status and their ‘next
big career move.’
Knowledge in and of itself naturally becomes the focal point for the knowledge
worker’s activities. The factors that drive knowledge workers to choose some
projects over others are often related to the feedback received on their knowledge
outputs (often through performance management systems or client relationships)
and the desire to deepen technical expertise by taking on challenging projects.
Knowledge workers are often in control of the networks that they develop and the
skills that they acquire and often associate their organizational commitment with
the extent to which they are able to develop transferable skills (May et al. 2002 ).
Furthermore, they feel the need to be involved in decisions that will inXuence
their developmental opportunities and careers (more so than organization-wide
decisions) and tend to have a need for a high degree of autonomy (Alvesson 1995 ).
One of the major factors that aVects the commitment, work eVort, and job
satisfaction of knowledge workers is the way they are organized and relate to
management (May et al. 2002 ). Their status is based on the mastery of unique,
inimitable, and valuable skills (Barney 1991 ). Reed ( 1996 ) argues that, unlike
traditional professionals, knowledge workers do not rely on hierarchical systems
to establish credibility but rely on the intangible nature of their knowledge to create
market niches for themselves. In this sense, they are ‘entrepreneurial professionals’
(Reed 1996 ). This approach to establishing political and economic power lends
itself to organic or network-based organizational forms characterized by decen-
tralizedXexibility and autonomy (May et al. 2002 : 777 ).
Knowledge workers are often found not onlyinsideorganizations butacrossthem,
drawing on their personal, professional, and expertise networks. This holds serious
implications for the management of knowledge workers. Because of the prominence
of individual and organizational networks, the organization has less control over
how it manages ‘its’ knowledge workers. Non-standard forms of employment such
as contracts for services andWxed-term employment can therefore be more suitable
and are frequently found across knowledge-based organizations.
These characteristics of professional knowledge workers present employing
organizations with some severe challenges: knowledge-based Wrms rely on the
hrm and knowledge workers 455