Re-engagement with the employee participation debate: beyond the case of contested and captured terrain

Abstract

This e-special issue showcases employee participation research published in Work, Employment and Society over the last few decades. The editorial introduction provides an overarching review of the literature and also sets an agenda for future research. In particular, this article is concerned with the question of whether employee participation really brings employees increased voice and well-being, or whether it is simply an agenda that promotes the interests of employers. The article examines the evolution of employee participation and variation in its meanings and forms, and discusses research focused on its antecedents and outcomes. The paradox in the evolution of employee participation, and the mixed findings of outcomes, especially those from the perspectives of employees, highlights a need for interdisciplinary re-examination of the legitimacy of employee participation -when and how it works well for both employers and employees in changing organizational and societal contexts -and suggests looking beyond the conventional debate of contested versus captured terrain.

An Integrative Review of Employee Voice: Identifying a Common Conceptualization and Research Agenda

“…We turn Employee Voice: Review and Research Agenda our attention now to the consideration of the factors, or antecedents, influencing an employee to voice. The scope of this paper does not allow for a comprehensive review of these factors, which can range from skill and staffing levels, the influence of worker interests and the policy framework (see Gollan and Xu 2014;Marchington 2007; for a discussion of a broader range of HRM/ER factors) through to individual differences, emotions and beliefs, and organizational attitudes and perceptions (refer to Klaas et al (2012) and Morrison (2011Morrison ( , 2014 for the range of OB antecedents). In this paper, we focus on the management-employee interaction to illustrate a common antecedent between the OB and HRM/ER disciplines, and in doing so, we provide an integrative review of the OB and HRM/ER studies that have looked at the management of employee voice, including voice climate and leadership.…”

“…Of course, it could be said that the HRM/ER discipline's reviews of the employee voice and silence literature have also tended to focus on their own perspective (e.g. Gollan 2007;Gollan and Xu 2014;Marchington 2007) or a critique of the OB literature (e.g. Barry, M. and Wilkinson, A., unpublished data;Donaghey et al 2011;Godard 2014).…”

Voices unheard: employee voice in the new century

“…The Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) literature provides a useful lens through which to examine 'how governance and representation structures of participation are embedded in particular institutional contexts that have deep historical and cultural roots' (Barry, Wilkinson, Gollan, & Kalfa, 2014, p. 523). For example, in many continental European countries the State plays a role in supporting employee voice (Gollan & Xu, 2014;Gollan & Wilkinson, 2007). Other countries, including the USA or Australia, place much less emphasis on statutory provisions for employee voice and instead focus on the preferences of managers and unions to establish their own arrangements, which are contextually specific and shape the practice of voice on an organisational level (Block & Berg, 2010;Frege & Godard, 2010).…”

Leaders’ Timely Succession: Neither Term Limits nor “Golden Parachutes,” Rather Periodic Tests of Trust Ascendance

“…Such senior staff members are essential in a constituency that shall be devised to decide succession together with directors and executives. Cooperative students and advocators of workplace democracy prefer decisions made by all employees (Cloke and Goldsmith 2002; Erdal 2011; Gollan and Xu 2015; Semler 1993; Shapira 2008). Business firms can profit from inclusion of knowledgeable senior staff members in the succession constituency.…”