How Does Shared Capitalism Affect Economic Performance in the United Kingdom?

Moderating effect of pay dispersion on the relationship between employee share ownership and labor productivity

“…Even though there is much debate about the precise mechanisms through which these schemes impact on performance, there is strong theoretical support and empirical evidence to suggest that ESO schemes are associated with higher labor productivity (Freeman, Blasi & Kruse, 2010; Kim & Ouimet, 2014; Park & Song, 1995) and performance in organizations (Bryson & Freeman ; Blasi, Freeman, Mackin, & Kruse, 2010; Fernie & Metcalf, ; Kruse et al, 2010b; Long, ; McNabb & Whitfield, ; O’ Boyle et al, 2016; Pendleton, ; Sengupta, ; Sengupta et al, ). In a meta‐analysis of 27 studies, Kruse and Blasi (1995, p. 26, in O'Boyle et al, ) concluded that studies on employee ownership and firm productivity or profitability frequently “indicate better or unchanged performance.” A more recent meta‐analysis of 102 studies representing 56,984 firms from around the world found that employee ownership had a small but a positive and statistically significant relationship with firm performance (O'Boyle et al, ).…”

“…The single most overriding empirical result from various studies, however, supports the view that while there are some independent effects of share ownership, it is the positive combination of compensation and labor practices that seem to be the key factor of share ownership success (Bryson & Freeman, ; Freeman, Blasi & Kruse, 2010; Kruse et al, 2010a). This follows from the increasingly popular “complementarity thesis,” which argues that advanced labor practices work most effectively when bundled together into a consistent high‐performance work system (Ichniowski, Kochan, Levine, Olson, & Strauss, ; Pil & Macduffie, , in Bryson & Freeman, , p. 206). This hypothesis implies that firms should adopt shared capitalist modes of pay and complementary forms of work organization as a package rather than introducing them individually (Bryson & Freeman, , p. 206).…”

“…This follows from the increasingly popular “complementarity thesis,” which argues that advanced labor practices work most effectively when bundled together into a consistent high‐performance work system (Ichniowski, Kochan, Levine, Olson, & Strauss, ; Pil & Macduffie, , in Bryson & Freeman, , p. 206). This hypothesis implies that firms should adopt shared capitalist modes of pay and complementary forms of work organization as a package rather than introducing them individually (Bryson & Freeman, , p. 206). This fits with the broader strategic management framework, which emphasizes the salience of vertical (or alignment with firm strategy and business strategy) and horizontal (or alignment between HR practices) fit in maximizing the effectiveness of HRM practices (Gerhart, , in O'Boyle et al, ).…”

New social cooperation model in service oriented economy: the case of employee financial participation in the Baltic states

“…Preference for some schemes depends on country-level factors. Some schemes are more related to possibility improved labour productivity and performance (Blasi et al, 2010a;O'Boyle et al, 2016;Bryson & Freeman, 2010). Among various schemes, share ownership has the clearest positive association with productivity, but its impact is the largest when firms combine it with other forms of participation (Bryson & Freeman, 2010;Poutsma & Braam, 2012).…”

“…It is claimed that employees who participate in the ownership and financial results of a firm become more dedicated to the company and focus on performance goals. However, economic studies have shown that companies often either switch between schemes or use several of them (Bryson & Freeman, 2010;Poutsma & Braam, 2012). ESO is understood by scholars and some practitioners as a means of enhancing labour-management 'partnerships' and, this way, extending industrial democracy (Poole & Jenkins, 2013;Pendleton, 2001).…”