To what extent do organizations need to involve employees in decision-making processes? Base your answer on a country of your choice.
tinykitt
148hrm_-_employee_voice_involvement__participation.pptxToday’s session
To introduce and try to clarify some rather blurry concepts:
Employee Voice
Employee Representation
Employee Involvement
Employee Participation
1
What do we mean by ‘critique’?
1
An attempt to simplify…
Voice = ‘having a say’
But weaker term than presentation because doesn’t necessarily involve influence
May be just ‘spitting in the wind’
Voice necessary for participation but necessarily lead to participation
Voice = multiple meanings and interpretations
2
Voice
Direct communication /involvement
Direct participation
Indirect participation /representation
Non-union
Indirect participation /representation
Union
Voice
Degree - extent to which employees able to influence decisions
Level – Task, dept., establishment, corporate
Range – subject matter, trivial or strategic?
Form - Indirect participation (thru representatives)
- financial participation
- Direct involvement with individuals (‘empowerment’)
So useful to deconstruct it into
Degree, Form, Level and Range
Degree – simply informed, or consulted or actually make decisions?
See escalator next slide
Range – trivial e.g. canteen food, or strategic e.g. investment strategies
Form – direct = face-to-face or written communication
3
‘Escalator of participation’ (Wilkinson et al. 2013)
Information
Communication
Consultation
Co-determination
Control
Teams
Works Committee
CB/Worker Directors
Worker Co-ops
Newsletter
4
ICE Regulations cont’d
Gives employees in orgs with 50+ staff right to collective consultation through Joint Consultation Committees (JCCs)
1 representative per 50 employees (with max of 25)
Directly elected by secret ballot of whole workforce
No rules on the frequency of meetings
NB
Joint consultation committees are not new – ICE regulation makes them a legal right for employees
5
Joint Consultative Committees (JCCs)
Incidence of JCCs in 2011
All workplaces (5 + employees) = 8%
workplaces with 5-49 employees = 4%
workplaces with 50-99 employees = 27%
workplaces with 100-149 employees = 45%
Workplaces with 150-249 employees = 53%
Workplaces with 250-999 employees = 62%
Workplaces with 1000+ employees = 75%
Extent of consultation and negotiation
JCCs more likely & more robust where unions in workplace - appear to complement union recognition rather than replace it
1/3 of JCCs exclusively non-union. These less likely to be involved in change programmes and meet less frequently than JCCs with a union rep
JCCs more likely where extensive use of other voice methods and IiP accreditation
High degree of trust between reps and managers, and willingness to cooperate in managing change
Direct communication/involvement
Downward communication
Upward problem-solving
Task-based participation
Team-working and self-management
8
Downward communication
Only conveys info
Neutral info (e.g. car parking arrangements)
Or method of reinforcing managerial prerogative (conveying management expectations about employee behaviour)?
9
Upward problem-solving
Tap into employee knowledge and ideas
Individual suggestion schemes
Problem-solving groups
Encourage acceptance of change
10
Task-based participation
Integral to job – part of everyday
Responsibility for greater range of tasks
Horizontal – more variety at same level
Vertical – adding supervisory responsibilities e.g. design and planning of tasks
More discretion or more stress?
Horizontal – alleviate boredom or accumulation of meaningless tasks?
Vertical
11
Team-working and self-management
Central to work processes
But level, scope and subject matter can vary widely
Most far-reaching form
Level, scope etc. – how much freedom/discretion? Can team recruit it’s own members etc?
12
Informal voice
Preferred method for most employees and managers
But formal methods needed to ensure informal voice happens
Formal methods provide ‘safety net’
Surveys (e.g. WERS) can’t tell us about informal methods
How relevant to essay?
13
Direct participation
Substantial increase in 1990s
But stalled 2000s
Macleod Report 2009 – how to engage employees for improved performance
Recommends employers provide ‘meaningful’ work and voice opportunities over workplace and org. decisions.
2012 CIPD study - >40% of employees not engaged at work
‘engaged’ – willingly contributing intellectual effort to think about how they could do job better
14
Direct participation cont’d
Main obstacle = pervasive presence of ‘climate of low trust’
2012 Gov launches ‘Engage for success’ campaign
But recession – engagement employers’ priority?
Low levels of job discretion
Sign of managers’ reluctance to relinquish control
Reluctance to invest in necessary training
Role of line managers – often reluctant to implement EI – afraid of consequences of relinquishing control, lack of trust and training
15
Extent of implementation
Difficult to assess
BREADTH – no. of practices operating in workplace
DEPTH - frequency
- opportunity to raise issues
- relevance & importance of subject matter
WERS – positive correlation between breadth, depth & commitment, job satisfaction
Breadth – more will have more effect because reinforcing
16
EIP in practice in Britain
The 2011 Workplace Employment Relations Study, FIRST FINDINGS, p. 18
Upward problem solving
Downward communication
17
Concluding thoughts
Last 20 years – managers increasing interest in EI and voice - Part of quest for enhanced performance.
Boxall and Purcell (2003:187)
“Few voice systems (..) will exist, or exist for long unless they are valued in their own right as (..) morally necessary activities regardless of the performance outcomes”
18
Is voice morally necessary?
How much voice is morally necessary?
What kind of voice?
How can it be guaranteed?
19
CIPD Factsheets and WERS survey results (all on Moodle)
Very useful paper from ACAS:
http:// www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/g/7/Voice_and_Participation_in_the_Modern_Workplace_challenges_and_prospects.pdf
20
References
20
