Labor-Management Cooperation: Antecedents and Impact on Organizational Performance

Abstract

This study examines the antecedents and outcomes of labor-management cooperation. Data were drawn from 305 branches of a large unionized Australian-based multinational banking organization. The authors find that perceptions of a cooperative labor relations climate were positively influenced by procedural justice, the union's willingness to adopt an integrative approach to bargaining, and management's willingness to share information freely with the union. The findings also indicate that a cooperative labor-management relationship contributed to higher productivity and improved customer service. In addition, organizational commitment was found to have a positive effect on branch-level productivity and customer service, and union loyalty was associated with lower absenteeism.

Exploring the Effects of Union–NGO Relationships on Corporate Responsibility: The Case of the Swedish Clean Clothes Campaign

“…We are thereby able to confirm the old adage that there are no winners in wars. These findings regarding the benefits of co-operation and drawbacks of conflict are consistent with the findings of numerous other studies focused more broadly on generic concepts of co-operation and conflict (e.g., Smith et al, 1995;Nomura and Abe, 2001;Zeng and Chen, 2003;Deery and Iverson, 2005). In sum, not only are union-NGO relationships becoming increasingly common, but the way in which these relationships are managed is also crucial in attempts to improve workers' rights.…”

Industrial Relations Climate and Union Commitment: An Evaluation of Workplace‐Level Effects

“…In some studies this has involved single-respondent (managers or union officials) assessments of organizational IR climate and organizational performance, typically finding positive associations between climate and performance (Wagar 1997a;1997b;. Others have used employee assessments aggregated to the workplace level, suggesting positive associations between workplace-level IR climate on the one hand, and workplace-level organizational commitment and union loyalty on the other (Deery and Iverson 2005).…”

“…One suggestion, from social exchange theory, is that there is a credit effect as members value a positive IR climate as part of a positive social exchange and credit both the union and the organization with responsibility for this, resulting in higher commitment to both (Magenau, Martin and Peterson, 1988;Deery and Iverson 2005). There may also be a cognitive consistency effect (Angle and Perry 1986;Magenau, Martin and Peterson, 1988).…”

Perceived Influence and Friendship as Antecedents of Cooperation in Top Management Teams: A Network Approach

“…Studying the extant literature (for an overview see Yilmaz and Hunt 2001) reveals that the antecedents of collaborative networks can be assigned to two different levels: First, scholars have examined individual-level determinants of collaborative behavior such as educational background (Hinds and Kiesler 1995); differences in race, sex, and citizenship (Chatman and Barsade 1995); cultural differences (Chen, Xiao-Ping, andMeindl 1998, Wagner 1995); organizational identification (Polzer 2004); identity confirmation (Milton and Westphal 2005); and individual predisposition to cooperate (Chatman andBarsade 1995, Deery andIverson 2005). Secondly, the effects of organizational variables have been investigated, e.g., physical distance between organizational members (Beersma, Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Moon, Conlon, and Ilgen 2003), procedural justice and open communication (Deery andIverson 2005, Kim andMauborgne 1998), communication technology (Hinds and Kiesler 1995), organizational climate (Iacobucci and Hopkins 1992), reward structures and sanction systems (Beersma, Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Moon, Conlon, and Ilgen 2003, Polzer 2004, Tenbrunsel and Messick 1999, as well as the size of the organization or work group respectively (Wagner 1995).…”

“…Secondly, the effects of organizational variables have been investigated, e.g., physical distance between organizational members (Beersma, Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Moon, Conlon, and Ilgen 2003), procedural justice and open communication (Deery andIverson 2005, Kim andMauborgne 1998), communication technology (Hinds and Kiesler 1995), organizational climate (Iacobucci and Hopkins 1992), reward structures and sanction systems (Beersma, Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Moon, Conlon, and Ilgen 2003, Polzer 2004, Tenbrunsel and Messick 1999, as well as the size of the organization or work group respectively (Wagner 1995). However, most studies have focused on employees and lower or middle managers, thereby limiting our knowledge about collaborative networks among top executives.…”