IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v45y2007i4p713-734.html

The Conditions Promoting Compromise in the Workplace

Author

Listed:
  • Jacques Bélanger
  • Paul Edwards

Abstract

A previous article developed a framework to understand workplace co‐operation. We now elaborate on the key structuring conditions (technology, product markets and institutional regulation) generating different patterns and illustrate from field research how these different workplace regimes develop. Conditions generating positive and sustainable outcomes for both capital and labour are feasible but rare; stronger ‘beneficial constraints’ are needed if they are to be made more frequent. This article provides an alternative to current interpretations of labour–management co‐operation in the industrial relations literature.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:45:y:2007:i:4:p:713-734
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00643.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00643.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00643.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. 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.
    2. Wajcman, Judy, 2005. "The Politics of Working Life," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199271917 edited by Edwards, Paul.
    3. Maxine Robertson & Jacky Swan, 2003. "‘Control – What Control?’ Culture and Ambiguity Within a Knowledge Intensive Firm," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 831-858, June.
    4. Chris Smith, 2006. "The double indeterminacy of labour power," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 20(2), pages 389-402, June.
    5. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Gregor Gall & Jane Holgate, 2018. "Rethinking Industrial Relations: Appraisal, application and augmentation," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 39(4), pages 561-576, November.
    5. Bjarke Refslund & Jens Arnholtz, 2022. "Power resource theory revisited: The perils and promises for understanding contemporary labour politics," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(4), pages 1958-1979, November.
    6. Valeria Pulignano & Karol Muszyński & Maite Tapia, 2024. "Variations of Freelancers’ “Effort-Bargain†Experiences in Platform Work: The Role of Skills," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 77(5), pages 742-769, October.
    7. Xiaotian Li, 2023. "Managerial Technique and Worker Subjectivity in Dialogue: Understanding Overwork in China’s Internet Industry," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 37(6), pages 1699-1716, December.
    8. Carlos Martin-Rios, 2016. "Innovative management control systems in knowledge work: a middle manager perspective," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 181-204, May.
    9. Ariel C. Avgar & Niti Pandey & Kiwook Kwon, 2012. "Discretion in Context: A Moderated Mediation Model of the Relationship between Discretion and Turnover Intentions," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 106-128, January.
    10. Gregor Murray & Jeremy Waddington, 2005. "Innovations for union renewal," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 11(4), pages 489-495, November.
    11. Dean Stroud & Peter Fairbrother & Claire Evans & Joanne Blake, 2018. "Governments matter for capitalist economies: Regeneration and transition to green and decent jobs," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 39(1), pages 87-108, February.
    12. Agnieszka Wojtczuk-Turek, 2017. "In Search of Key HR Practices for Improvement of Productivity of Employees in the KIBS Sector," Contemporary Economics, Vizja University, vol. 11(1), March.
    13. 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.
    14. Sharon C. Bolton, 2009. "Getting to the heart of the emotional labour process: a reply to Brook," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 23(3), pages 549-560, September.
    15. George Saridakis & Yanqing Lai & Stewart Johnstone, 2020. "Does workplace partnership deliver mutual gains at work?," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 41(4), pages 797-823, November.
    16. Maddy Janssens & Chris Steyaert, 2009. "HRM and Performance: A Plea for Reflexivity in HRM Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 143-155, January.
    17. George Kandathil & Jerome Joseph, 2019. "Normative Underpinnings of Direct Employee Participation Studies and Implications for Developing Ethical Reflexivity: A Multidisciplinary Review," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 685-697, July.
    18. Alex Veen & Tom Barratt & Caleb Goods, 2020. "Platform-Capital’s ‘App-etite’ for Control: A Labour Process Analysis of Food-Delivery Work in Australia," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(3), pages 388-406, June.
    19. Gupta, Vishal, 2013. "Development of a Causal Framework linking High Perofrmance HRM Practices, Positive Psychological Capital, Creative Behaviours," IIMA Working Papers WP2013-03-05, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    20. John Geary & Aurora Trif, 2011. "Workplace Partnership and the Balance of Advantage: A Critical Case Analysis," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(Supplemen), pages 44-69, June.

    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:45:y:2007:i:4:p:713-734. 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.