Search Results

This chapter begins with an explanation of the focus of the book: corporate governance and labour management. It then discusses national systems of corporate governance and labour management and mechanisms linking corporate governance and labour management. An overview of the chapters included in this volume is presented.

The labour-management relationship has been vital not just for its substantial impact within the organization, but also because of its effect on Britain’s wider social, political, and economic development. Until the 1970s, employers used externalization and sub-contracting. This ultimately caused a loss of control at the shop-floor level to unions and their members through fragmented bargaining when the labour market changed to high employment, with consequences for industrial conflict and management authority and legitimacy. There was a slow transition to internalization and professionalization of labour management, and a delay in the development of appropriate systems and methods of modern management in the personnel field. The last two decades have, however, seen an assertion of control by employers.

This chapter details the different dynamics of economic adjustment in Britain, Germany, and France from the postwar period until today. For Britain, it describes the problems of business in the postwar period and the impact of the radical therapy of the Thatcher years that brought the country closer to the market capitalist ideal by making business relations more distant, government relations more arm's length, and labour relations more market‐reliant. For Germany, it outlines the minimal change from the postwar period until the 1990s, followed by efforts to make the managed capitalist system more competitive, which have left the system under strain, as interfirm relations have loosened, labour‐management relations have become less cooperative, and government has sought to facilitate adjustment, often unsuccessfully. For France, finally, the chapter examines the major transformation in state capitalism since the mid‐1980s with the move away from state‐led capitalism to a more state‐enhanced variety, where business is more autonomous and labour more market‐reliant, but the state still has a role to play.

This chapter examines German corporate governance within a sociological framework. It first examines the basic features of post-war German corporate governance and HRM, as they existed through the late 1980s. It then considers the institutional linkages between these features. The chapter also outlines the changes in corporate ownership and finance in Germany during the 1990s, in particular the declining role of banks and the emerging market for corporate control. These changes are related to observed changes in employment and industrial relations, particularly issues of remuneration and codetermination. It is argued that linkages do exist between corporate governance and labour management, although studies often overestimates the extent to which such linkages are tight and coherent.

The Dutch system of corporate governance exhibits an interesting combination of the Anglo-Saxon market-outsider system and the German relational-insider system. Various phenomena suggest that the degree and locus of power and decision-making is changing within this hybrid Dutch system. Traditional systems of governance are being destabilized and new arrangements are emerging. A ‘western wind’ is blowing, that is, that an ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ of corporate governance and labour management is taking place. This chapter assesses the extent and importance of these changes in the Netherlands. Firstly it describes the framework of the research and the historical background and business structure there. The chapter then outlines the changes in financial structure and corporate governance that are taking place and shows how labour management changes are linked to these shifts. The next section assesses the proposition that ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ of corporate governance is affecting labour management.

This chapter assesses the impact of the ownership and governance system on labour management in large companies in the United Kingdom. It shows that the nature of the UK finance/governance system provides a clear set of parameters and constraints on management decision-making. To this extent, the UK case is consistent with the critiques and analysis found in the stakeholder capitalism and varieties of capitalism literatures.

This chapter presents a more explicit comparative analysis and draws out broader conclusions raised by the country case studies. It recommends the need to disaggregate the broad types found in the literature and understand links in a more configurational manner. The chapter identifies a number of major developments across countries. In terms of corporate governance, it suggests there is a shift towards stronger shareholder rights and more capital market orientation; firms are divesting from non-core and less profitable businesses; and differences in the area of financing, ownership patterns, corporate law and regulations, and executive compensation systems are narrowing. In terms of labour management, there is also a move towards more marketized systems. It is argued that differences in both corporate governance and labour management will narrow, but not disappear. Patterns of change will continue to be complex, with different starting points, different degrees and mixes of marketization, and often piecemeal adaptation. In future, differences may be more ones of degree than of kind.

This chapter adds to the ‘varieties of capitalism’ literature by demonstrating that economic practices of countries are not converging on a one‐size‐fits‐all neo‐liberal model of capitalism, despite the fact that all have become more market‐oriented. Instead, they continue to be differentiable into not just two varieties of capitalism, conforming to liberal or coordinated market economies, but three, along lines of development from the original three postwar models of capitalism. The chapter contrasts the three varieties of capitalism in terms of interfirm relations, business‐government relations, and management‐labour relations; outlines the differential national pathways of adjustment of the countries conforming to the three varieties; highlights their continuing differences using indicators related to the financial markets and production systems; and considers their comparative advantages and disadvantages. It concludes that while British market capitalism has gone farther in its traditional market‐oriented direction, German managed capitalism is under strain, while French state capitalism has been transformed but has become neither market nor managed capitalist.

This chapter analyzes the modernization of the silk-reeling industry, focusing on the most prosperous silk reeling district of Suwa. The rapid growth of silk reeling in Suwa is attributed to the establishment of an efficient factory system. Its capacity to supply large amounts of high quality raw silk matched the rising demand from the mechanized silk weaving industry in the United States, resulting in strong competitiveness in the export market.

This chapter presents a meta-analysis of work on German corporate governance and labour management from an Economics perspective. It discusses two characteristics of the German system of corporate governance about which there has been considerable debate: (i) the German system of corporate governance may provide a competitive advantage for German firms, but it may well be detrimental to firm performance; and (ii) according to the Works Constitution Act, works councils have specific rights to information, consultation, and codetermination. They may either use their powers for the good of the company or they may exert a negative influence on the personnel policies (and, thereby, on the economic performance) of German firms. It is argued that the employee voice in German corporate governance has a positive effect on labour productivity and economic performance. Recent changes in the legal framework will give even greater support for the works councils in medium and small companies.

This chapter examines how GroupCare Hospital expressed its commitment to reducing uncertainty in health care not only in the way that it managed its doctors but also in the partnerships it worked to establish among different constituencies within the organization. Thoughout GroupCare, the language of partnership abounded—patients “partnered” with the organization, physicians “partnered” with one another, and nurses and ancillary workers “partnered” with doctors and managers. The logic—at least according to administrators—was that the mitigation of status distinctions allowed the organization to evolve into a “culture of continuous improvement.” The chapter also considers the limits of rationalization at GroupCare as well as the labor-management partnership at the hospital. Finally, it explains how GroupCare used the language and practices of “partnership” as a strategy for securing a compliant workforce, noting that there was a certain egalitarianism among different constituencies within the organization.

The dominant view in the labour movement was that Labour under Neil Kinnock could win the next election, only 18 months away, and that the main way to combat the uncertainties and weaknesses among union members was to unite around certain common principles; hence the increasing momentum behind the merger. There was a new Prime Minister and a new war in the Gulf, and there seemed to be a rush to push through reforms in health, education, and local government so as to make them very difficult to reverse. The National and Local Government Officers Association’s (NALGO) first and only elected general secretary, NALGO and the poll tax, the anti-union laws, economics, and the movements towards merger are discussed in detail. The labour management and the markets, as well as the reports of the death of collective bargaining, are shown.

This chapter describes two decades of effort at AT&T, starting with shopfloor worker participation with labour-management supervision; and gradually extending to dealing with strategic concerns including technological change, marketing, productivity, etc. Despite success in both economic and human terms, the effort ultimately fell victim to turbulence in the telecommunications industry. The chapter describes the importance of management and union leadership.

This chapter summarizes the path of economic development and capital formation during the half-century after the Korean War, and evaluates the means used for South Korea's success. The chapter also assesses the prospects for South Korea's future economic development and capital formation under a democratically elected government, still in its infancy. It speculates on South Korea's chances of attaining the levels reached by neighboring countries such as Taiwan, Singapore, China, and even Japan, and the challenges it faces to achieve this. Five major challenges faced by South Korea are discussed: improving the government's management ability, progress in technology, better labor-management relations, equitable income distribution, resolution of the so-called jaebeol problems, and the reunification of North Korea and South Korea.

This chapter introduces industrial relations, which emphasizes reason over “emotion” in dealing with labor. Confronted with the failure of previous approaches, and facing a postwar strike wave and immigration restrictions, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) leaders adopted this more moderate, professional-industrial-relations approach to labor management in the 1920s. Still committed to a union-free workplace, NAM reconceived the open shop as good industrial relations. This paved the way for the employment of “nontraditional” workers, such as women, the disabled, and, later, people of color. While unions remained focused on skilled workers, this more modern approach to management was necessarily inclusive of all employees. Indeed, one of its hallmark features was attention to the social demographics of workforces in order to understand how employees might work better together.

Using census data, plantation records, and narrative evidence, we investigate whether the popular expression "factories in the field" appropriately characterizes antebellum cotton plantations. Based on micro-samples of farms, plantations, and manufacturing plants in 1859, we compare the size distributions and input mixes of operations. We inquire whether management practices on cotton plantations were closely aligned with those of modern business enterprises or with Taylor’s scientific management. We find that, by some measures, plantations were an intermediate form of enterprise located between the family farm and the contemporary factory, and in some ways, closer to the factory than to the farm. However, by other more important measures, plantations were very different from factories. We argue that the direct analogies between plantations and factories and labor systems employing modern management techniques obscure more than they reveal.

This chapter discusses variation among individual insurance firms. As the life insurance business relies heavily on sales agents, manufacturing a productive sales force is the core organizational task of a life insurance firm. However, some insurers are more effective than others in orchestrating a committed and spirited sales force. This chapter details the labor management techniques at various insurance firms, showing how the Sino-American joint venture, Pacific-Aetna, was most effective in motivating its sales agents and boosting their morale; whereas the Sino-German joint venture, Allianz-Dazhong, was least capable of doing so. It also shows how the domestic insurer Ping An adopted a paternalistic approach to control their agents, while the American insurer AIA used a mix of professional and missionary models. These differences across firms are attributed to the cultural capital of their top managers, which in part stems from the organizational cultures of their former workplaces, and their previous institutional and cultural environments.

This chapter offers a explanation of the proliferation of occupational pension plans after World War II. Principally, it shows that private pension development was neither the result of policy interventions before the end of the war nor the simple result of union strength in postwar collective bargaining disputes. Instead, the turn to occupational pensions was caused by policymakers intervening in labor-management disputes—not principally to compel businesses to adopt occupational pension plans, but rather to establish labor peace in order to capture capitalist growth opportunities abroad. The chapter begins by considering why the Congress of Industrial Organizations was unable to expand the pension benefits offered by the Social Security program after the New Deal, roughly between 1939 and 1968, before turning to the expansion of private pensions.

This chapter shows that much continuity existed in the management of female factory labor during wartime and into the postwar era. By the early 1940s, the textile industry had almost totally collapsed, as the war cut off Japanese access to raw cotton and to foreign markets for finished goods. But textile-industry labor management provided a template for the state as it sought to mobilize women to work in the war economy. With defeat came the temporary resurgence of the industry, which for about two decades after the war was used to jump-start Japan's war-ravaged economy. Analysis of the Omi Kenshi Spinning strike of 1954 and Japan's Olympic gold-medal women's volleyball team of 1964, which was composed of female textile employees, help to understand better bhow postwar labor-management practices and the position of women in factory labor compared to the prewar situation.