[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wdi/papers/2010-993.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Innovative Workplace Practices Foster Mutual Gains? Evidence From Croatia

Author

Listed:
  • Derek C. Jones
  • Srecko Goic
Abstract
New survey data for more than 470 employees (more than 80% of production workers) in a single Croatian manufacturing firm exhibits large variation in participation in innovative work practices (IWPs) notably online teams, offline teams, employee ownership, and incentive pay. Amongst IWPs, probit estimates reveal that membership in offline teams most often yields favorable outcomes for firms, notably enhanced provision of discretionary effort by employees and more likelihood of peer monitoring, as well as improved worker outcomes, including enhanced job satisfaction and higher employee involvement. Other IWPs usually are associated with similar favorable outcomes for firms and workers. Participation in sets of IWPs, that include offline teams and financial incentives, is found to yield benefits to both employees and firms. Our findings provide support for the proposition that IWPs will produce mutual gains and also help to identify key channels through which different IWPs work. Women also perceive that they are less empowered and report less willingness to engage in peer monitoring.

Suggested Citation

  • Derek C. Jones & Srecko Goic, 2010. "Do Innovative Workplace Practices Foster Mutual Gains? Evidence From Croatia," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp993, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    • Handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2010-993
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/133006/1/wp993.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alchian, Armen A & Demsetz, Harold, 1972. "Production , Information Costs, and Economic Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 777-795, December.
    2. Richard B. Freeman & Morris M. Kleiner & Cheri Ostroff, 2000. "The Anatomy of Employee Involvement and Its Effects on Firms and Workers," NBER Working Papers 8050, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. P Dewe & S Dunn & R Richardson, 1991. "The Impact of Employee Share Ownership on Worker Attitudes. A Longitudinal Case Study," CEP Discussion Papers dp0024, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2001. "How To Compete: The Impact Of Workplace Practices And Information Technology On Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 434-445, August.
    5. Stafford, Frank & Duncan, Greg J., 1979. "The Use of Time and Technology by Households in the United States," Working Paper Series 21, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    6. David Neumark & Peter Cappelli, 1999. "Do "High Performance" Work Practices Improve Establishment-Level Outcomes?," NBER Working Papers 7374, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Michael J. Handel & Maury Gittleman, 1999. "Is There a Wage Payoff to Innovative Work Practices?," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_288, Levy Economics Institute.
    8. Stafford, Frank P. & Cohen, Malcolm S., 1974. "A model of work effort and productive consumption," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 333-347, March.
    9. John Godard, 2004. "A Critical Assessment of the High‐Performance Paradigm," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 42(2), pages 349-378, June.
    10. Harvie Ramsay & Dora Scholarios & Bill Harley, 2000. "Employees and High‐Performance Work Systems: Testing inside the Black Box," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 38(4), pages 501-531, December.
    11. Casey Ichniowski & Kathryn Shaw, 2004. "Using "Insider Econometrics" to Study Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 217-223, May.
    12. repec:cdl:indrel:146107 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Goldberg, Victor P., 1980. "Bridges over contested terrain : Exploring the radical account of the employment relationship," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 249-274, September.
    14. John S. Heywood & Uwe Jirjahn & Georgi Tsertsvadze, 2005. "Getting along with Colleagues – Does Profit Sharing Help or Hurt?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 557-573, November.
    15. Shapiro, Carl & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1984. "Equilibrium Unemployment as a Worker Discipline Device," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 433-444, June.
    16. Kruse, Douglas & Blasi, Joseph & Freeman, Richard B., 2004. "Monitoring colleagues at work: profit-sharing, employee ownership, broad-based stock options and workplace performance in the United States," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 19943, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Susan Helper, 1997. "Complementarity and Cost Reduction: Evidence from the Auto Supply Industry," NBER Working Papers 6033, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Rooney, Patrick Michael, 1992. "Employee ownership and worker participation : Effects on health and safety," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 323-328, July.
    19. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1990. "Shirking or Productive Schmoozing: Wages and the Allocation of Time at Work," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 43(3), pages 121-1-133-, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Derek C. Jones & Takao Kato, 2011. "The Impact of Teams on Output, Quality, and Downtime: An Empirical Analysis Using Individual Panel Data," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 64(2), pages 215-240, January.
    2. Burdin, Gabriel & Kato, Takao, 2021. "Complementarity in Employee Participation Systems: International Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 14694, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Ferreira, Pedro & Porto, Nelida & Portela, Marta, 2010. "Women's participation in high performance work practices: a comparative analysis of Portugal and Spain," MPRA Paper 36404, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    4. John T. Addison, 2005. "The Determinants Of Firm Performance: Unions, Works Councils, And Employee Involvement/High‐Performance Work Practices," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 52(3), pages 406-450, July.
    5. Tushar Kanti Nandi, 2006. "Employee Participation and Wages: An Empirical Investigation with Selectivity Correction," Department of Economics University of Siena 483, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    6. Annalisa Cristini & Tor Eriksson & Dario Pozzoli, 2013. "High-Performance Management Practices and Employee Outcomes in Denmark," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 60(3), pages 232-266, July.
    7. Alex Bryson & Lucy Stokes & David Wilkinson, 2023. "Is pupil attainment higher in well-managed schools?," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 129-144, January.
    8. Riccardo Leoni, 2013. "Organization of work practices and productivity: an assessment of research on world- class manufacturing," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Michael Waldman, 2012. "Theory and Evidence in Internal LaborMarkets [The Handbook of Organizational Economics]," Introductory Chapters,, Princeton University Press.
    10. Takao Kato & Ju Ho Lee & Jang-Soo Ryu, 2010. "The productivity effects of profit sharing, employee ownership, stock option and team incentive plans: evidence from Korean panel data," Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, in: Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, pages 111-135, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    11. Matias Ramirez & Frederick Guy & David Beale, 2007. "Contested Resources: Unions, Employers, and the Adoption of New Work Practices in US and UK Telecommunications," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 45(3), pages 495-517, September.
    12. Gu, Wulong Gera, Surendra, 2004. "The Effect of Organizational Innovation and Information Technology on Firm Performance," The Canadian Economy in Transition 2004007e, Statistics Canada, Economic Analysis Division.
    13. Michael White & Alex Bryson, 2018. "HPWS in the Public Sector: Are There Mutual Gains?," DoQSS Working Papers 18-10, Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London.
    14. Michael Barry & Alex Bryson & Rafael Gomez & Bruce Kaufman & Guenther Lomas & Adrian Wilkinson, 2018. "The ''Good Workplace'': The Role of Joint Consultative Committees, Unions and HR policies in Employee Ratings of Workplaces in Britain," DoQSS Working Papers 18-08, Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London.
    15. Dow,Gregory K., 2019. "The Labor-Managed Firm," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107589650.
    16. Ola Kvaløy & Trond E. Olsen, 2008. "Cooperation in Knowledge-Intensive Firms," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(4), pages 410-440.
    17. Bryson, Alex & Dale-Olsen, Harald & Barth, Erling, 2009. "How does innovation affect worker well-being?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27781, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Frederick Guy & Peter Skott, 2008. "Information and Communications Technologies, Coordination and Control, and the Distribution of Income," Journal of Income Distribution, Ad libros publications inc., vol. 17(3-4), pages 71-92, September.
    19. Flores-Fillol, Ricardo & Iranzo, Susana & Mane, Ferran, 2017. "Teamwork and delegation of decisions within the firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1-29.
    20. Barry, Michael & Bryson, Alex & Gomez, Rafael & Kaufman, Bruce E. & Lomas, Guenther & Wilkinson, Adrian, 2018. "The," IZA Discussion Papers 11860, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    innovative work practices; employee ownership; Croatia; econometric case study.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2010-993. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: WDI (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wdumius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.