Supporting Employee Participation: Attitudes and Perceptions in Trainees, Employees and Teams

Abstract

Research in employee participation has tended to focus on participation outcomes rather than the process of successful implementation, and to evaluate program success in terms of (a) employee attitudes (e.g. satisfaction) post-participation and (b) productivity or effectiveness. We argue that such approaches ignore the process component of successful implementation such as the long-term maintenance of interest in and support for participation among employees. A second problem is that although some research confronts this issue, the factors that moderate attitudes and perceptions of participation have not been examined in detail, nor acknowledged in current models of participation. Two projects are reported. The first examined the effect of seniority and training experience on personal support for participation, perceptions of program reputation and outcomes, and perceived organizational support for participation. Shop floor workers reported less personal support for employee participation and perceived less organizational support for participation than did special function workers and managers. Trainees held more positive perceptions of program outcomes, and they also reported more personal support for employee participation than did trained or untrained employees (regardless of seniority), although they perceived less organizational support for participation. The second study explored goal commitment in employee participation teams on the shop floor. Both prior team experience and task type predicted (perceived) status and influence within the team, which in turn predicted goal commitment. Teamwork training predicted perceived value of external relations, which in turn predicted goal commitment. Results are discussed in terms of implications for successful program implementation.

Mental models, team mental models, and performance: Process, development, and future directions

“…Teamworking means groups having common valued goals, multiple tasks and complementary skills, internal interdependence and coordination, being mutually accountable for methods, resource use and outcomes, and taking on extended (managerial) responsibility. Originally, their growth was on the basis of sociotechnical systems theory (Langan-Fox, 2003;Langan-Fox, Code, Gray, & Langfield-Smith, 2002) and quality of work life movements, followed by stagnation in the 1980s. They have had a renaissance in application and research in the past 15 years, within safety-critical industries, manufacturing, the military, and the service sector (Genaidy, Karwowski, Succop, Kwon, & Alhemoud, 2000;Zolnierczyk-Zreda, 2000).…”

“…Too often, research tends to focus on outcomes rather than processes (Langan-Fox, Armstrong, Anglim, & Balvin, 2002;Langan-Fox, Code, Gray, & Langfield-Smith, 2002). Likewise, it is important to understand the process through which TMMs develop and are modified.…”

Participants' appraisals of process issues and the effects of stress management interventions

“…However, several pieces of evidence indicate that there is a need to better understand these processes. There is some direct evidence of inter-participant variability in perceptions of interventions: this suggests that employees actively appraise the interventions they experience (Kompier & Kristensen, 2001;Kompier, Cooper, & Geurts, 2000;Langan-Fox, Code, Gray, & Langfield-Smith, 2002). This could be important because perception and appraisal play such a crucial role in validated models of work stress and models of change in health behaviour (Ajzen, 1991;Lazarus, 1966;Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).…”

“…However, participants' direct appraisals of the sufficiency of the intervention content have rarely been investigated. Moreover, these appraisals may function as part of a mediating mechanism between participation and intervention outcomes (Eklöf, Ingelgård, & Hagberg, 2004;Langan-Fox et al, 2002). For example, participants whose active appraisal of an intervention leads to the view that the intervention was weak may report less change in the outcome measures than those whose active appraisal led them to the view that the same intervention was of high quality.…”

The Experience of Participatory Research: Perceptions of Oncology Employees Participating in a Workplace Study

“…As has been pointed out (Minkler and Pies, 1999), behind the euphemism of participation, the realities of power imbalances often remain. For example, Langan-Fox et al (2002) found that participation in an employee participation program was likely to be affected by organizational seniority. There are no apparent solutions to this dilemma.…”