|
WORKER PARTICIPATION AND PRODUCTIVITY-A STUDY OF GIANT ENTERPRISES
1
Author(s):
ASHVANI SHARMA
Vol - 5, Issue- 2 ,
Page(s) : 93 - 102
(2014 )
DOI : https://doi.org/10.32804/CASIRJ
Abstract
This paper measures the productivity impact of automobile and textile employee involvement. Productivity has become the buzzword of our times. Everyone wants only one thing-more the productivity, the better it is improvement in technology is considered as the most effective intervention for increasing productivity. The change in technology brings in a host of things. In this article, relationship of workers participation and productivity has been explored. It provides insight which can be used to control the variable. The perception of management and that of the workers may differ. After all this intervention is to be implemented through workers. Human factors need to be kept in view. It simultaneously takes account of endogeneity of participative work organization by variable regressions.
- Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., Kalleberg, A., 2000. Manufacturing Advantage– Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay off. ILR Press, Ithaca.
- Arellano, M., Bond, S., 1998. Dynamic Panel Data Estimation Using DPD98 for
- GAUSS: A Guide for Users. Mimeo.
- Black, S. and Lynch, L., 2001. How to Compete: The Impact of Workplace Practicesand Information‚ Technology on Productivity. Review of Economics and
- Statistics 83, 434 – 445.
- Campbell, J.P., Campbell, R.L., and Associates (1988), Productivity in organizations: New Perspective from industrial and organization Psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Cooke, W., 1994. Employee Participation Programs, Group-Based Incentives, and
- Company Performance. A Union-Nonunion Comparison. Industrial and Labor
- Relations Review 47, 594 – 609.
- Davidson, R., MacKinnon, J.G., 1993. Estimation and Inference in Econometrics.
- Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- Frick, B., Sadowski, D., 1995. Works Councils, Unions and Firm Performance: The Impact of Workers’ Participation in Germany. In: Buttler, F., Franz, W.,
- Schettkat, R., Soskice, D., (eds.) Institutional Frameworks and Labor Market
- Performance: Comparative Views on the U.S. and German Economies.
- Routledge, London, 46 – 81.
- Godard, J., Delaney, J., 2000. Reflections on the “High Performance” Paradigm’s
- Implications for Industrial Relations as a Field. Industrial and Labor Relations
- Review 53, 482 – 502.
- Hübler, O., Jirjahn, U., 2003. Works Councils and Collective Bargaining in
- Germany: The Impact on Productivity and Wages. Scottish Journal of Political Economy 50, 471 – 491.
- Huselid, Mark A.(1995), “ The impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity and Corporate Financial Performance.” Academy of Management Journal, 38(3): 635-72.
- Ichniowski, C., Kochan, T.A., Levine, D., Olson, C., Strauss, G., 1996. What Works at Work: Overview and Assessment. Industrial Relations 35, 356 – 374
- Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., Prennushi, G., 1997. The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines.
- American Economic Review 87, 293 – 313.
- Kato, T., Morishima, M., 2002. The Productivity Effects of Participatory
- Employment Practices: Evidence from New Japanese Panel Data. Industrial Relations 41, 487 – 520.
- Levitan, Sar A. and Wernake, Diane (1984). “Worker Participation and Productivity Change,” Monthly Labour Review, 107.
- Levine, D., Tyson, L., 1990. Participation,Productivity, and the Firm’s Environment. In: Blinder, A. (ed.), Paying for Productivity. Brookings Institution, Washington, 183 – 236.
- Lindsay, Craig (2004). Labour Market Trends, Labour market Division, ILO.
- Ramsey, H., Scholarios, D., Harley, B., 2000. Employees and High Performance
- Work Systems: Testing Inside the Black Box. British Journal of Industrial
- Relations 38, 501 – 531.
- Workers, Participation in Management (2008). Available online at http://www.managementparadise.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-22874.html(on april 24, 2011).
|