“Don’t forget to submit your timesheet”: the case of a management device degrading work and reorganizing the activity

"Management devices" play a central role in the world of work. The sociology of management views them as "cognitive traps designed by management to produce a singular representation of the organization and thus order the actions to be taken" (Metzger, Mauger, 2014). Among contemporary devices, timesheets hold a prominent position in an increasing number of companies. These are "electronic time accounting sheets" (Linhart, 2015) that fit into a broader system of controlling and streamlining working time by the employer.Timesheets serve as a device for objectifying productivity by juxtaposing the time worked, tasks completed, and other elements such as billable hours. They allow for the quantification of work while overlooking the quality of what is accomplished. Used in fields like consulting, research, and advertising, they represent the transposition of financialization logic into the production aspect of traditionally "white-collar" professions. We argue that this type of tool contributes to the degradation of white collar working conditions and, consequently, they contribute to the disappearance of the "white-collar" / "blue-collar" distinction.This paper draws upon approximately forty semi-structured interviews with white collar from the consulting, communication, and advertising sectors. These ongoing interviews were carried out between November 2022 and October 2023, and have been conducted with professionals in various roles and positions, primarily in France.This empirical contribution will align with theoretical discussions on the restructuring of classes and the class positioning (Vatan, Miliband, Poulantzas) of the French category named "cadres" (a specific category slightly different from executives or managers) in light of their professional practices.Furthermore, these timesheets have an impact on professionals, their identities, and their practices. For instance, we will see that for some consultants, these timesheets contribute to a sense of exploitation as they reveal the gap between expected autonomy and the actual amount of work performed. We will analyze how the consequences of these timesheets constrain professions in research or creative fields by excluding certain professional practices from objectified time and work, leading to a reduction in practices and a standardization of creative work. This, once again, affects how interviewees perceive their work. From this perspective, the timesheets make visible the alienation of "increasing portions of the working population" (Braverman, 1976), but also for some interviewees, the realization of this situation.More broadly, these timesheets also embody a paradox as they fit into debates regarding the status of managerial roles. The very use of these timesheets in organizations challenges the status of managers, especially in terms of the desire for autonomy. In this context, timesheets introduce changes in the work process by influencing professional practices and the distinction between billable and non-billable working hours