Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership最新文献

{"title":"Guest editorial: Introduction to the special issue “diversity and employee participation”","authors":"Nathalie Magne, V. Pérotin, Fathi Fakhfakh","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-06-2023-031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-06-2023-031","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133696940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Employee empowerment, equality plans and job satisfaction: an empirical analysis of the demand-control model","authors":"Tolulope Ibukun, V. Pérotin","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0014","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe paper investigates the effects of individual employees' empowerment on different forms of job satisfaction in British workplaces while controlling for the presence of job demands and whether these effects depend on the presence of an equality plan in the workplace. The demand-control model that the authors test proposes that imbalances between the demands placed on employees and the control they have in their job negatively affect employee well-being and health. Control may also be strengthened, and demands mitigated, by effective equality policies. This study looks at nine forms of job satisfaction and examines the individual effects of job demands, job control, the interaction of control and demands and their joint effects with equality plans.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses matched employee–employer British data from the 2011 Workplace Employment Relations Survey (WERS). The authors conduct principal component analysis (PCA) and logit estimations and estimate a recursive simultaneous bivariate probit model.FindingsEmployee empowerment, or job control, is a key predictor of job satisfaction, and job demands are negatively associated with various aspects of job satisfaction. The presence of equality plans strengthens the positive effects of job control and mitigates the detrimental effects of job demands. Consistent with the demand-control model, employees are more likely to be satisfied in low strain jobs (jobs with low demands and high control) than in high strain jobs (jobs with high demands and low control). Employees in passive jobs (jobs with low demand and low control) on the other hand are less likely to be satisfied with achievement and influence than employees in low strain job.Originality/valueMuch of the empirical literature has focused on collective empowerment practices and none has tested the demand-control model. This paper adds to the literature on employee empowerment practices with a focus on individualised job control and the way its effects interact with equality plans. In the process, the authors provide novel and rigorous empirical evidence on an extended version of the demand-control model.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"444 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133269486","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disability, workplace inclusion and organizational citizenship behavior: an exploratory study of the legal profession","authors":"Fitore Hyseni, D. Kruse, Lisa A. Schur, P. Blanck","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0017","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeMany workers with disabilities face cultures of exclusion in the workplace, which can affect their participation in decisions, workplace engagement, job attitudes and performance. The authors explore a key indicator of engagement—perceptions of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)—as it relates to disability and other marginalized identities in the workplace.Design/methodology/approachUsing an online survey, legal professionals answered questions about their workplace experiences. Ordinary least squares (OLS) multivariate regression analysis with progressive adjustment was used to investigate the effect of demographic and organizational factors on perceptions of OCB.FindingsThe authors find that employees with disabilities have lower perceptions of OCB, both before and after controlling for other personal and job variables. The disability gap is cut nearly in half, however, when controlling for workplace culture measures of co-worker support and the presence of an effective diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policy. Disability does not appear to interact with gender, race/ethnicity and LGBTQ + status in affecting perceptions of OCB.Originality/valueThe results point to the workplace barriers faced by people with disabilities that affect their perceptions of engagement, and the potential for supportive cultures to change these perceptions.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129114668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Inequalities in democratic worker-owned firms by gender, race and immigration status: evidence from the first national survey of the sector","authors":"Sarah Reibstein, Laura Hanson Schlachter","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0016","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeWorker cooperative practitioners and developers often claim that democratic worker ownership advances egalitarianism within and beyond the workplace, but most of the empirical evidence in the USA is based on ethnographic case studies or small-scale surveys. This study aims to leverage the first national survey about individuals' experiences in these unique firms to test for the presence of inequalities by gender, race and immigration status in the broader sector.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a 2017 survey comprising a sample of 1,147 workers from 82 firms. This study focuses on measures of workplace benefits that capture material and psychological ownership, wealth accumulation, wages, workplace autonomy and participation in governance. This study uses ordinary least squares regression models with fixed effects alongside pooled models to determine the effects of gender, race, immigration status and the intersection of gender and race on these outcomes, both within and between firms.FindingsThis study finds no evidence of wage gaps by gender, race or immigration status within worker cooperatives, with job type, tenure and worker ownership status instead explaining within-firm variation in pay. Still, this study documents sector-wide disparities in material and non-material outcomes by gender, race and immigration status, reflecting differences in individual-level human capital and job characteristics as well as widespread occupational segregation and homophily.Originality/valueThe paper offers a novel contribution to the literature on workplace empowerment and inequality in participatory firms by analyzing race, gender and immigration status in the most robust dataset that has been collected on worker cooperatives in the USA.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"195 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133698083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Defining employee ownership: four meanings and two models","authors":"Christopher Mackin","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-10-2022-0019","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe field of broad-based employee ownership within corporations is a specific application of the foundational topic of property ownership. It is situated at the intersection of a broad range of scholarly disciplines including economics, law, finance and management. Each discipline contributes vocabulary and distinctions describing this field. That broad spectrum of disciplinary inquiry is a strength but it also lends a “ships passing in the night” quality to discussions of employee ownership. This paper attempts to unravel the narrative diversity surrounding this topic. Four meanings of ownership are introduced. Those meanings are in turn embedded within two abstract models of the corporation; the corporation as property and the corporation as social institution.Design/methodology/approachThere is no experimental design The paper presents a conceptual overview and introduces a taxonomy of four meanings and two models of ownership.FindingsFour meanings of ownership are introduced. The meanings are ownership as compensation, investment, retirement and membership. Those meanings are in turn embedded within two abstract models of the corporation; the corporation as property and the corporation as social institution.Research limitations/implicationsNo hypotheses are advanced. This is not a research paper. A conceptual overview that makes use of taxonomy of meanings and models is introduced to help clarify confusions abundant in the field of employee ownership. Readers may differ with the categories of meanings and models introduced in this conceptual overview.Practical implicationsThe ambition of the paper is to describe the various meanings and models of employee ownership presently in use in both academic and applied settings. It is not necessary or desirable to assert the primacy of a single meaning or model in order to achieve progress. The analysis provided here surfaces a range of assumptions about ownership that have heretofore been implicit in both scholarship and in practice. Making those assumptions explicit should prove useful to both scholars and practitioners of employee ownership.Social implicationsThe concept of employee ownership enjoys a relatively broad appeal with the public. Among the academic disciplines that have trained their lights upon it, a more mixed reception prevails. Much of the academic and policy controversy derives from confusion about the nature and structure of employee ownership. This paper attempts to address that confusion by presenting a taxonomy of meanings and models that may prove useful for future research.Originality/valueThis study is one of the first efforts to comprehinsively map the various meanings and models of broad-based employee ownership.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121162025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Bringing workers into ownership of platform companies","authors":"T. Gonza, D. Ellerman","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-10-2021-0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-10-2021-0019","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeIn addition to increased regulation and platform co-operatives, this paper proposes a third option to address the problem posed by the labor-based platform (LBP) companies and companies' treatment of de facto employees as “independent contractors,” thus avoiding the usual employee benefits.Design/methodology/approachThe paper outlines the history and structure of Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) as a mechanism to achieve partial worker ownership of companies.FindingsThe possibility of establishing ESOPs in the local subsidiaries of platform companies is outlined as the third option to reform LBPs.Practical implicationsWhether this option is available in the United States of America is not clear without new litigation or legislation since the existing USA ESOP is for “employees” and the problem is that the LBPs do not classify these platforms' full-time workers as “employees.” Hence, this third option may be mainly relevant to other countries for LBPs that are not already established.Originality/valueThe ESOP approach to changing LBPs is a new suggestion in addition to the usual approaches of increased public regulation and establishing new worker-owned platform co-operatives. The ESOP is a new tool in the hands of municipal and national governments to require in order for the LBPs to be able to operate.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"306 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132555382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CCP committees, worker benefits and firm performance: empirical evidence from Chinese private firms","authors":"Cheryl X. Long, Jin Yang","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-09-2021-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-09-2021-0015","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeWith an increasing number of Chinese private firms establishing primary level CPC Party committees, it is important to study the role of Party organizations in these firms. Using a nationwide survey of private firms in 2006, we empirically study the firm-level CCP committee's effect on workers' benefits and firm performance.Design/methodology/approachTo overcome the potential endogeneity, we employ the regression discontinuity approach by utilizing the following rule from the Constitution of the CCP: Primary party committees should be established in any basic work unit with more than 3 full party members.FindingsOur empirical results show that party committees in private firms have positive and statistically significant effects on many types of workers' benefits, including pension, unemployment insurance and workplace safety.Originality/valueThis paper highlights CCP committees as an important alternative mechanism in coordinating labor relationships in China when formal labor protecting institutions are weak.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129011793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Governance and culture within employee-owned companies","authors":"Richard M. Van Doel, George F. Howell","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-09-2020-0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-09-2020-0026","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the type of governance dominant within employee-owned companies established as an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOPs) and to ascertain if governance follows the agency or stewardship theory of governance.Design/methodology/approachA sequential mixed method (Quantitative/Qualitative) research design was used with a convenience sample of employee-owned companies who were members of The ESOP Association (TEA). The Stewardship Climate Scale (SCS) was used as the quantitative instrument and structured interviews were used as the qualitative instrument.FindingsA majority (96%) of ESOPs participating in the study self-identified as stewardship governance, only 6 of the 154 companies (4%) self-identified as having agency governance.Research limitations/implicationsThere is a potential of self-report bias based on the use of convenience sampling which should be minimized based on the large number of participants. The study was not able to examine the relationship between stewardship and productivity.Originality/valueThis is the first large scale research study examining governance within employee-owned companies.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121546451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Property, ownership and employee ownership: employee control in ESOPs","authors":"Mark J. Kaswan","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-11-2020-0028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-11-2020-0028","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeMost people associate ownership with the ability to control something. In the USA, employee share (or stock) ownership plans (ESOPs) are one of the principal forms of employee ownership. However, most ESOPs give employees very limited rights of control over the company they own. This paper explore this conflict by examining theories of property and ownership to determine whether the right to participate in decision-making is inherent in the idea of ownership as it is generally understood. Ultimately, the author argues that the law governing ESOPs should be revised to give employees a larger role in the governance of their companies.Design/methodology/approachThis paper considers the concept of ownership both historically and analytically. The author examines the roots of property theory in the work of John Locke and contemporary theorists, as well as contemporary theorizing about ownership.FindingsThere are two kinds of ownership: legal ownership and psychological ownership. In legal ownership, the right to participation is inherent but alienable, so one can legally be an owner of something but have no right of participation. Psychological ownership primarily arises from a sense of control. Legal ownership confers some part of the bundle of rights associated with property. Psychological ownership conveys a feeling of efficacy, responsibility and control, but no formal rights. The author argues that, for employee ownership to be more than mere property-holding, it must include meaningful participation in decision-making, including governance.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper is only concerned with ESOPs in the USA. Although the findings may be applicable, it does not address other forms of employee ownership or employee ownership outside of the USA.Practical implicationsPeople associate ownership with the ability to control something, so when workers are told they own their company but then find they have few control rights, it may undermine their sense of ownership. This then has negative implications for the company's success. To ensure meaningful levels of governance rights, policy-makers should revise the laws governing ESOPs to require greater involvement by employees.Social implicationsClarifying ambiguities around ownership will help support arguments for affording employee-owners greater control rights in their companies, which will have various spill-over effects.Originality/valuePractitioners and scholars alike deploy the term, “ownership” but ascribe different meanings to it. The distinction between legal and psychological ownership is largely lacking in the ESOP literature. Clarifying this distinction will help to move the discussion forward regarding employee participation in ESOPs. In addition, the paper provides an original analysis of property that demonstrates the importance of the right to control, showing that the traditional ESOP structure may violate important aspects of that right.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114537540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Employee ownership and firm R&D investment: evidence from China","authors":"Ting Ren, Youzhi Xiao, Danieli Pinto, Hongyan Yang","doi":"10.1108/jpeo-02-2020-0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpeo-02-2020-0004","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeAs majority of studies of employee ownership (EO) take place in developed markets and primarily focus on the impact on firm performance, scholars have recently called for other markets, especially large developing markets to be considered, as well as alternative outcome measures.Design/methodology/approachThrough the examination of the implementation of EO by Chinese listed firms during the period of 2011–2019 with total 3,473 firms and 21,204 observations, the authors provide empirical evidence on the positive effect of EO on firm R&D investment within the rapidly growing Chinese market.FindingsThe authors find that the adoption of EO promotes higher level of firm R&D investment. This positive relationship is more evident among small firms, non-state-owned firms and local state-owned-firms, compared with their counterparts. As for the plausible channels, the authors find that adopting EO provides a favorable institutional environment, which attracts more technical staff, improves workplace quality, and encourages job stability and greater employee effort, leading to greater R&D investment.Originality/valueThough the connection between R&D investment/innovation and firm survival performance has been known for decades, the innovation side of outcomes has been ignored by EO research. Therefore, the authors explore the relationship between EO implementation and firm R&D investment within the rapidly growing Chinese market.","PeriodicalId":354541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133804880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}