This article aims at analysing how highly educated professionals cope with technological and social acceleration. To explore the emerging patterns of time-based stratification we use an empirical model of personal time-use capability based on the data from a representative survey conducted in 2014 among the Estonian population aged 15–79 (N=1,503) and focus groups conducted in 2017–2018 among three generations of academic professionals (n=24). The mixed-method analysis revealed a multidimensional pattern of socio-demographic, life-course and agency-related factors influencing individual time-use capability and the related set of practices and attitudes. Our findings confirm the assumed importance of age-related factors: the youngest professionals (born 1989–1994) tend to be most flexible, and the middle-aged (born 1969–1974) most efficient, in developing time-use strategies to cope with social acceleration, while the oldest (born 1949–1954) win the least from rapid developments. In general, highly educated professionals collectively serve as agents of social acceleration.
Agger, Ben (2011) “iTime: labor and life in a smartphone era”. Time & Society 20, 1, 119–136.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X10380730
Allmer, Thomas (2018) “Theorising and analysing academic labour”. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique 16, 1, 49–77.
https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v16i1.868
Becker, Gary S. (1964) Human capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Berg, Maggie and Barbara K. Seeber (2017) The slow professor: challenging the culture of speed in the academy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442663091
Bianchi, Suzanne M., Liana C. Sayer, Melissa A. Milkie, and John P. Robinson (2012) “Housework: who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter?”. Social Forces 91, 1, 55–63.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sos120
Bolin, Göran and Oscar Westlund (2009) “Mobile generations: the role of mobile technology in the shaping of Swedish media generations”. International Journal of Communication 3, 108–124.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1986) “The forms of capital”. In John Richardson, ed. Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, 241–258. New York: Greenwood.
Bryman, Alan (2006) “Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?”. Qualitative Research 6, 1, 97–113.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058877
Bryson, Valerie (2007) Gender and the politics of time: feminist theory and contemporary debates. Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt9qgwcr
Castells, Manuel (1996) The rise of the network society. Oxford and Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.
Cicmil, Svetlana, Monica Lindgren, and Johann Packendorff (2016) “The project (management) discourse and its consequences: on vulnerability and unsustainability in project-based work”. The Politics of Projects in Technology-Intensive Work 31, 1, 58–76.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12058
Corsten, Michael (1999) “The time of generations”. Time & Society 8, 2-3, 249–272.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X99008002003
Davies, Bronwyn and Eva Bendix Petersen (2005) “Neo-liberal discourse in the academy: the forestalling of (collective) resistance”. Learning & Teaching in the Social Sciences 2, 2, 77–98.
https://doi.org/10.1386/ltss.2.2.77/1
Edmunds, June and Bryan S. Turner (2002) Generations, culture and society. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Elo, Satu, Maria Kääriäinen, Outi Kanste, Tarja Pölkki, Kati Utriainen, and Helvi Kyngäs (2014) “Qualitative content analysis: a focus on trustworthiness”. SAGE Open 4, 1, 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633
Erss, Maria, Veronika Kalmus, and Tero Henrik Autio (2016) “‘Walking a fine line’: teachers’ perception of curricular autonomy in Estonia, Finland and Germany”. Journal of Curriculum Studies 48, 5, 589–609.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2016.1167960
Fuchs, Christian and Sebastian Sevignani (2013) “What is digital labour? What is digital work? What’s their difference? And why do these questions matter for understanding social media?” tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique 11, 2, 237–293.
https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v11i2.461
Gill, Rosalind (2010) “Breaking the silence: the hidden injuries of the neoliberal university”. In Roisin Ryan-Flood R and Rosalind Gill, eds. Secrecy and silence in the research process: feminist reflections, 228–244. London: Routledge.
Hepp, Andreas (2019) “A deep generational shift? Some remarks on media generations and deep mediatization”. In Peter Jakobsson and Fredrik Stiernstedt, eds. Fritt från fältet: om medier, generationer och värden. Festskrift till Göran Bolin, 21–36, Stockholm: Södertörns högskola.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351064903-2
Hepp, Andreas, Matthias Berg, and Cindy Roitsch (2017) “A processual concept of media generation: the media-generational positioning of elderly people”. Nordicom Review 38, 1, 109–122.
https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2017-0395
Hodgson, Damian and Svetlana Cicmil, eds. (2006) Making projects critical. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-20929-9
Kalmus, Veronika (2016) “The emergence of the ‘digital generation’ in Estonia’s transition period”. In Raili Nugin, Anu Kannike and Maaris Raudsepp, eds. Generations in Estonia: contemporary perspectives on turbulent times, 319–341, Tartu: University of Tartu Press.
Kalmus, Veronika, Anu Masso, Signe Opermann, and Karin Täht (2018) “Mobile time as a blessing or a curse: perceptions of smartphone use and personal time among generation groups in Estonia”. Trames 22, 1, 45–62.
Kalmus, Veronika and Signe Opermann (2019) “Operationalising Mannheim: empirical building blocks of generational identity”. In Göran Bolin and Fausto Colombo, eds. Generations, Time, and Media. Comunicazioni sociali 2, 232–246.
https://doi.org/10.3176/tr.2018.1.03
Lauristin, Marju and Peeter Vihalemm (2009) “The political agenda during different periods of Estonian transformation: external and internal factors”. Journal of Baltic Studies 40, 1, 1–28.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01629770902722237
Lindquist, Julie (2012) “Time to grow them: practicing slow research in a fast field”. Economies of Writing 32, 3-4, 645–666.
Lindgren, Monica and Johann Packendorff (2006) “Projects and prisons”. In Damian Hodgson and Svetlana Cicmil, eds. Making projects critical, 111–131. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-20929-9_6
Mannheim, Karl (1952 [1927/1928]) “The problem of generations”. In Paul Kecskemeti (ed.), Karl Mannheim. Essays in the sociology of knowledge, 276–320. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Milczarek, Malgorzata, Elke Schneider, and Eusebio Rial González (2009) European Risk Observatory Report. OSH in Figures: stress at work – facts and figures. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Luxembourg: European Communities. Available online at <https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-and-publications/publications/reports/TE-81-08-478-EN-C_OSH_in_figures_stress_at_work>. Accessed on 12.09.2019.
Mückenberger, Ulrich (2011) “Time abstraction, temporal policy and the right to one’s own time”. KronoScope 11, 1-2, 66–97.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156852411X595288
Nies, Sarah and Dieter Sauer (2018) “Work – more than employment? critique of capitalism and the sociology of work”. In Klaus Dörre, Nicole Mayer-Ahuja, Dieter Sauer and Volker Wittke, eds. Capitalism and labor: towards critical perspectives, 44–70. Frankfurt, New York: Campus Verlag.
Tervishoiu ja tööohutuse seadus [Occupational health and safety act] (1999) Riigi Teataja. Available online at <https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/112122018074?leiaKehtiv>. Accessed on 12.09.2019.
Papert, Seymour (1996) The connected family: bridging the digital generation gap. Atlanta: Longstreet Press.
Pilcher, Jane (1994) “Mannheim’s sociology of generations: an undervalued legacy”. British Journal of Sociology 45, 3, 481–495.
https://doi.org/10.2307/591659
Portes, Alejandro (1998) “Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology”. Annual Review of Sociology 24, 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1
Preda, Marian (2013) “Time capital and social gravity: two new concepts for sociology of time”. In Bianca Maria Pirani and Thomas S. Smith, eds. Body and time: bodily rhythms and social synchronization in the digital media society, 21–38. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Putnam, Robert D. (2000) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.361990
Rosa, Hartmut (2013) Social acceleration: a new theory of modernity. New York: Columbia University Press.
https://doi.org/10.7312/rosa14834
Rosa, Hartmut, Klaus Dörre, and Stephan Lessenich (2017) “Appropriation, activation and acceleration: the escalatory logics of capitalist modernity and the crises of dynamic stabilization”. Theory, Culture & Society 34, 1, 53–73.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276416657600
Runnel, Pille, Pille Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt, and Kristina Reinsalu (2009) “The Estonian Tiger leap from post-communism to the information society: from policy to practices”. Journal of Baltic Studies 40, 1, 29–51.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01629770902722245
Schütz, Alfred and Thomas Luckmann (1974) The structures of the life-world. London: Heinemann.
Shore, Cris and Susan Wright (2015) “Governing by numbers: audit culture, rankings and the new world order”. Social Anthropology 23, 1, 22–28.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12098
Siibak, Andra (2009) Self-presentation of the ‘digital generation’ in Estonia. PhD Thesis, University of Tartu, Estonia.
Székely, Levente (2015) “The typology of multitasking activity”. European Journal of Communication 30, 2, 209–225.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323114567842
The SIGJ2 Writing Collective (2012) “What can we do? The challenge of being new academics in neoliberal universities”. Antipode 44, 4, 1055–1058.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2012.01011.x
van der Schuur, Winneke A., Susanne E. Baumgartner, Sindy R. Sumter, and Patti M. Valkenburg (2015) “The consequences of media multitasking for youth”. Computers in Human Behavior 53, 204-215.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.035
Vihalemm, Triin and Marju Lauristin (2017) “Ajakasutussuutlikkus ja kihistumine Eesti ühiskonnas”. [Personal time capital and social stratification in Estonian society.] In Peeter Vihalemm, Marju Lauristin, Veronika Kalmus, and Triin Vihalemm, eds. Eesti ühiskond kiirenevas ajas: Uuringu ‘Mina. Maailm. Meedia’ 2002–2014 tulemused, 437–454. [Estonian society in an accelerating time: findings of the survey ‘Me. The World. The Media’ 2002−2014.] Tartu: University of Tartu Press.
Vihalemm, Triin, Signe Opermann and Veronika Kalmus (forthcoming) “Personal time use capability as a social transformation mechanism”. In Veronika Kalmus, Marju Lauristin, Signe Opermann and Triin Vihalemm, eds. Researching Estonian transformation: morphogenetic reflections. Tartu: University of Tartu Press.
Vostal, Filip (2016) Accelerating academia: the changing structure of academic time. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137473608
Wajcman, Judy (2015) Pressed for time: the acceleration of life in digital Capitalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226196503.001.0001
Williams, Jeffrey J. (2012) “Deconstructing Academe”. The Chronicle of Higher Education 19 February. Available online at <https://www.chronicle.com/article/An-Emerging-Field-Deconstructs/130791>. Accessed on 10.06.2019.
Zherebin, Vsevolod, Olga Vershinskaia, and Olga Makhrova (2015) “The modern perception of time and acceleration of the pace of life”. Sociological Research 54, 3, 189–202.https://doi.org/10.1080/10610154.2015.1098297
