2012
DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2012.661993
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bargaining regimes, variable pay and financial participation: some survey evidence on pay determination

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the world's leading experts on financial participation, Erik Poutsma, with colleagues (Poutsma, Ligthart, and Schouteten 2005), found that what they called "Anglo-Saxonization" had a significant effect on the likelihood of share schemes and profit sharing, both those aimed just at management and the broad-based schemes, and that this CONTEXT AND HRM: THEORY, EVIDENCE, AND PROPOSALS applied both to the LME economies and to the influence of U.S. MNEs within European economies. Kalmi, Pendleton, and Poutsma (2012) used the Cranet data to explore financial participation, and variable pay, in 13 European countries, and found a complex picture. They found that team-based variable pay is most common in centralized pay regimes, and employee share ownership most common in decentralized regimes.…”
Section: Compensationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the world's leading experts on financial participation, Erik Poutsma, with colleagues (Poutsma, Ligthart, and Schouteten 2005), found that what they called "Anglo-Saxonization" had a significant effect on the likelihood of share schemes and profit sharing, both those aimed just at management and the broad-based schemes, and that this CONTEXT AND HRM: THEORY, EVIDENCE, AND PROPOSALS applied both to the LME economies and to the influence of U.S. MNEs within European economies. Kalmi, Pendleton, and Poutsma (2012) used the Cranet data to explore financial participation, and variable pay, in 13 European countries, and found a complex picture. They found that team-based variable pay is most common in centralized pay regimes, and employee share ownership most common in decentralized regimes.…”
Section: Compensationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compensation practices are impacted by considerable differences in national pay structures, and fiscal policies (Fay, 2008;Festing, Engle, Dowling, & Sahakiants, 2012), and are frequently regulated at the national level in terms of statutory pay or minimum benefits. Financial participation schemes, as part of compensation packages, are also subject to local legislation, tax concessions, and industrial relations systems and ideologies (Pendleton & Poutsma, 2012). Institutional constraints are high for compensation practices, as they are path dependent, tied into local norms, traditions, and corporate governance mechanisms (Festing & Sahakiants, 2010).…”
Section: Institutional Context Of Hrm Practicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, industry memberships (two-digit Standard Industrial Classification [SIC] codes) were controlled for because industry performance tends to influence the average profits of firms in that industry (Kroll, Walters, & Le, 2007;Zahra, 1996). We also included union density and capitalization to control for the institutional backgrounds of countries (Croucher et al, 2010;Kalmi et al, 2012;Williams, 2018). Finally, we controlled for debt ratio due to the potential differences in the interests of creditors and shareholders.…”
Section: Control Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, at the organizational level, organizational practices (e.g., employee participation, empowerment) and contexts (e.g., trustworthy climate, span of control) alter the effectiveness of employee stock ownership (Blasi, Freeman, & Kruse, 2016; A. M. Robinson & Wilson, 2006). At the country level, institutional contexts such as (de)centralization of pay determination and collective bargaining coverage affect the adoption (Croucher, Brookes, Wood, & Brewster, 2010;Kalmi, Pendleton, & Poutsma, 2012) and the effectiveness (Williams, 2018) of employee stock ownership.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%