IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v44y2006i1p125-145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Bases of Compromise in the Workplace: A Theoretical Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Edwards
  • Jacques Bélanger
  • Martyn Wright

Abstract

Schemes for workplace participation have long been promoted and vilified. Such conflicting views have been brought into sharp focus by the highly variable results of such practices as teamwork. Yet a theoretical framework to grasp workplace co‐operation is lacking. This paper develops a framework on the basis of theory and a review of a wide range of empirical studies. Capital and labour each have two sets of ‘concerns’: over ‘control’ of the workplace and the longer term ‘development’ of the productive forces. Cross‐classifying these concerns produces a matrix of patterns of workplace relations. Each cell of the matrix represents a different combination of the interests of capital and labour. The matrix can be used to map participation schemes so as to capture their varying features. The next task, pursued elsewhere, is to identify the conditions leading to locations in different cells of the matrix.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Edwards & Jacques Bélanger & Martyn Wright, 2006. "The Bases of Compromise in the Workplace: A Theoretical Framework," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 44(1), pages 125-145, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:44:y:2006:i:1:p:125-145
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8543.2006.00490.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2006.00490.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2006.00490.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tolliday, Steven & Zeitlin, Jonathan, 1986. "Between Fordism and Flexibility: The Automobile Industry and its Workers - Past, Present and Future," CEPR Discussion Papers 131, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Edwards, 2016. "Book review symposium: Huw Beynon, Working for Ford: Men, Masculinity, Mass Production and Militancy," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 30(1), pages 174-176, February.
    2. Surhan Cam & Serap Palaz, 2023. "Mutual interests management with a purposive approach: Evidence from the Turkish shipyards for an amorphous impact model between (subjective) well‐being and performance," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 40-70, January.
    3. Thomas Hastings & Danny MacKinnon, 2017. "Re-embedding agency at the workplace scale: Workers and labour control in Glasgow call centres," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(1), pages 104-120, January.
    4. Mark Bray & John W. Budd & Johanna Macneil, 2020. "The Many Meanings of Co‐Operation in the Employment Relationship and Their Implications," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 58(1), pages 114-141, March.
    5. Krzywdzinski, Martin & Pfeiffer, Sabine & Evers, Maren & Gerber, Christine, 2022. "Measuring work and workers: Wearables and digital assistance systems in manufacturing and logistics," Discussion Papers, Research Group Globalization, Work, and Production SP III 2022-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    6. Paul Edwards, 2015. "Critical social science and emancipation: II, development and application," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 275-292, July.
    7. Valeria Pulignano, 2023. "Management divided: Contradictions of labor management By Matt Vidal. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022. 384 pp. ISBN 9780198795278, $100 (hardcover)," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 988-990, December.
    8. Monica Rolfsen, 2013. "Transfer of labour-management partnership in multinational companies," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 316-331, May.
    9. Paul Edwards, 2015. "Industrial relations, critical social science and reform: I, principles of engagement," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 173-186, May.
    10. Jacques Bélanger & Paul Edwards, 2007. "The Conditions Promoting Compromise in the Workplace," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 45(4), pages 713-734, December.
    11. Allen, Matthew M.C. & Allen, Maria L., 2015. "Companies’ Access to Finance, Co-operative Industrial Relations, and Economic Growth: A Comparative Analysis of the States of South Eastern Europe," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 167-177.
    12. Jimmy Donaghey & Niall Cullinane & Tony Dundon & Adrian Wilkinson, 2011. "Reconceptualising employee silence," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 25(1), pages 51-67, March.
    13. Daniel Nyberg & Graham Sewell, 2014. "Collaboration, Co-operation or Collusion? Contrasting Employee Responses to Managerial Control in Three Call Centres," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(2), pages 308-332, June.
    14. Paul Edwards & Andy Hodder, 2022. "Conflict and control in the contemporary workplace: Structured antagonism revisited," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 220-240, May.
    15. Knut Laaser, 2016. "‘If you are having a go at me, I am going to have a go at you’: the changing nature of social relationships of bank work under performance management," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 30(6), pages 1000-1016, December.
    16. Chiara Benassi & Andreas Kornelakis, 2021. "How Do Employers Choose between Types of Contingent Work? Costs, Control, and Institutional Toying," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 74(3), pages 715-738, May.
    17. Bill Harley & Leisa Sargent & Belinda Allen, 2010. "Employee responses to ‘high performance work system’ practices: an empirical test of the disciplined worker thesis," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 24(4), pages 740-760, December.

    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.

      More about this item

      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:bla:brjirl:v:44:y:2006:i:1:p:125-145. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.