New Roads in Organizational Participation?

Gollan, Paul J.; Poutsma, Erik; Veersma, U.

doi:10.1111/j.1468-232x.2006.00441.x

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies typically focus on indirect (or representative) forms via trade unions (Heery and Frege 2006) that are located at the establishment level or above, and focus on more strategic decisions. However, there has recently been a growing interest in forms of non-union EIP and its comparison specifically with participation in unionized organizations (Gollan, Poutsma, and Veersma 2006;Tarras and Kaufman 2006;for example). Although such contributions are valuable, they still privilege forms of employee representation that have little immediate relevance for most workers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A distinction needs to be made between formal and informal EIP; the former relates to codified, pre-arranged, and regular practices/concrete structures whereas the latter refers to ad hoc or non-programmed interactions between managers and their staff which provide opportunities for information passing, consultation, and the seeking of ideas. Relatively little attention has been paid to informal EIP, and most definitions refer to methods, mechanisms, and structures rather than processes and face-to-face dialogue (e.g., Dundon and Rollinson 2004;Gollan, Poutsma, and Veersma 2006;Wilkinson et al 2010), as do special issues of journals on the topic (Budd, Gollan, and Wilkinson 2010;Wilkinson and Fay 2011). Some imply that informal EIP is included but analysis is restricted primarily to formal structures (Bryson 2004;, with informal interactions between managers and staff at workplace level typically being ignored.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Where Informality Really Matters: Patterns of Employee Involvement and Participation (EIP) in a Non‐Union Firm

Marchington¹,

Suter²

2012

Industrial Relations

105

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Industrial relations scholars have long been interested in notions of employee involvement, participation, voice, and industrial democracy but the terminology is so elastic that the types of practices covered are extremely broad. In this article, following a brief discussion that categorizes employee involvement and participation (EIP) in terms of degree, level, and scope, we focus on the relatively dilute formal and informal practices which operate at workplace level in non‐union firms. Although researchers now examine direct—as well as representative—forms of EIP, we argue the focus is still on formal systems. This finding is understandable both from a methodological and a theoretical angle, but it leaves a gap in our awareness of how EIP functions at workplace level, and in particular, the role played by line managers in developing informal communication and consultation in non‐union firms. In this article, we examine formal and informal EIP within a large non‐union firm in the UK hospitality sector; a context characterized by intense product and labor market pressures and limited union presence. Our principal conclusion is that informality takes centre stage in this organization, driven by managerial and worker preferences for informal EIP in the context of close working relations at the customer interface. Moreover, customer pressures and flexible working patterns make it difficult to sustain formal EIP in the context of a capability framework that puts a primacy on managers using informal approaches. However, it is argued that informal EIP needs to be combined with the formal system to operate effectively.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where Informality Really Matters: Patterns of Employee Involvement and Participation (EIP) in a Non‐Union Firm

Marchington¹,

Suter²

2012

Industrial Relations

105

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Again, it could be argued that their use will be more pronounced in Mozambique than Portugal. Although performance-related pay may be viewed as a component of hardline approaches to HRM (Gollan, Poutsma, & Veersma, 2006), in the developing world many organizations will simply opt for paying the lowest rate that the external labour market will bear. In such circumstances, piece work, a simple form of performance related pay, represents an alternative.…”

Section: Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional legacies and HRM: similarities and differences in HRM practices in Portugal and Mozambique

Dibben

Brewster

Brookes

et al. 2016

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As Pendleton (2006: 754) notes, agency theory has increasingly been used to analyse financial participation, bringing assumptions about 'rational choice' individualism that discount workplace solidarities. It is assumed that workers will police their peers to maximize individual returns from group performance (Gollan et al, 2006). The latter approaches have accompanied the rise of 'harder' or more instrumental approaches to HRM, with the intention of promoting individualism rather than collectivism (Storey, 2001).…”

Section: The Differing Motives Types and Effects Of Financial Particmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such schemes may be used to head off union organizing drives, by giving employees an individual stake in the firm and undermining the basis of collectivism. Financial participation may represent a strategy aimed at promoting consensus, with workers foregoing union representation for essentially paternalistic concessions (Gollan et al, 2006). Given this, unions are often hostile to such initiatives (D'Art and Turner, 2000).…”

Section: Financial Participation and Collective Voicementioning

confidence: 99%

Context, strategy and financial participation: A comparative analysis

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates where financial participation is most likely to be encountered, and explores its compatibility with collective forms of employee voice. It is based on the findings of a major international survey of human resource management (HRM) practices. We found that financial participation was not affected by collective employee voice, but that national context and associated HRM strategies had significant effects on its nature and extent. As financial participation is likely to make for greater variation in wage rates, it tends to weaken industry-level bargaining. By re-casting the fundamental determinants of wages, it is also likely to facilitate greater wage dispersion within the firm. Hence, it was found that financial participation is more commonly encountered in liberal market contexts, and in firms practising calculative HRM, where countervailing employee power is weak, whether or not collective bargaining is formally present.

show abstract

New Roads in Organizational Participation?

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

Where Informality Really Matters: Patterns of Employee Involvement and Participation (EIP) in a Non‐Union Firm

Where Informality Really Matters: Patterns of Employee Involvement and Participation (EIP) in a Non‐Union Firm

Institutional legacies and HRM: similarities and differences in HRM practices in Portugal and Mozambique

Context, strategy and financial participation: A comparative analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About