IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v46y2008i1p1-32.html

Leeway for the Loyal: A Model of Employee Discretion

Author

Listed:
  • Francis Green

Abstract

This article examines the factors underlying task discretion from an economist's perspective. It argues that the key axis for understanding discretion is the trade‐off between the positive effects of discretion on potential output per employee and the negative effects of greater leeway on work effort. In empirical analysis using matched employer–employee data, it is shown that discretion is strongly affected by the level of employee commitment. In addition, discretion is generally greater in high‐skilled jobs, although not without exceptions, and lower where employees are under‐skilled. Homeworking and flexitime policies raise employee discretion. The impact of teamworking is mixed. In about half of cases team members do not jointly decide about work matters, and the net effect of teams on task discretion in these cases is negative. In other cases, where team members do decide matters jointly, the impact is found to be neutral according to employees' perceptions, or positive according to managers' perceptions. There are also significant and substantial unobserved establishment‐level factors which affect task discretion.

Suggested Citation

  • Francis Green, 2008. "Leeway for the Loyal: A Model of Employee Discretion," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 46(1), pages 1-32, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:46:y:2008:i:1:p:1-32
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00666.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00666.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00666.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. Bryson, Alex & Freeman, Richard B., 2007. "Doing the right thing? does fair share capitalism improve workplace performance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 4964, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Frederick Guy & Peter Skottz, 2005. "Power-Biased Technological Change and the Rise in Earnings Inequality," Working Papers 06, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    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. Bryson, Alex & Freeman, Richard, 2008. "How does shared capitalism affect economic performance in the UK?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51596, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. David Marsden & Richard Belfield, 2010. "Institutions and the Management of Human Resources: Incentive Pay Systems in France and Great Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 48(2), pages 235-283, June.
    3. Heywood, John S. & Jirjahn, Uwe, 2009. "Profit sharing and firm size: The role of team production," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 246-258, August.
    4. Frederick Guy & Peter Skott, 2008. "Power, Productivity, and Profits," Springer Books, in: Matthew Braham & Frank Steffen (ed.), Power, Freedom, and Voting, chapter 20, pages 385-403, Springer.
    5. James Arrowsmith & Paul Marginson, 2011. "Variable Pay and Collective Bargaining in British Retail Banking," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(1), pages 54-79, March.
    6. repec:bdu:ijecon:v:1:y:2016:i:2:p:31-47:id:154 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Skott, Peter & Guy, Frederick, 2007. "A model of power-biased technological change," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 124-131, April.
    8. Andrew Pendleton & Andrew Robinson, 2010. "Employee Stock Ownership, Involvement, and Productivity: An Interaction-Based Approach," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 64(1), pages 3-29, October.
    9. Karl-Josef Laumann & Olaf Scholz & Claus Schäfer & Oliver Stettes & Alexander Gunkel, 2007. "Mitarbeiterbeteiligung: Welches Modell sollte gewählt werden?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 60(16), pages 03-18, August.
    10. John T. Addison & Clive R. Belfield, 2008. "The Determinants of Performance Appraisal Systems: A Note (Do Brown and Heywood's Results for Australia Hold Up for Britain?)," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 521-531, September.

    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:46:y:2008:i:1:p:1-32. 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.