Paul Glennie and Nigel Thrift posit an alternative perspective on the development of time-consciousness in "Reworking E. P. Thompson's 'Time, Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism'" (1996). According to Glennie and Thrift, Thompson and subsequent theorists on modern time competence in England have theorized that industrial work-discipline centered on the clock is responsible for spreading a unitary concept of time rooted in materialist realities. In contrast, Glennie and Thrift explore the role of symbolic, qualitative, and multiple time-senses in the West. Different kinds of work and multiple means of measuring time problematize the centrality of factory work and the clock. Generally, they argue that time-discipline was evident before the spread of industrialization and that it did not trigger a significant change in time-sense. Because it rests on the argument that disparate, spatial temporalities can not be unified, critics have argued that their analysis seems incomplete. In short, they offer poignant critiques of the dominant theory without positing a stronger theory in its place.