IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbr/cbrwps/wp368.html

Governance Processes, Employee Voice and Performance Outcomes in the Construction of Heathrow Terminal 5

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Deakin
  • Aristea Koukiadaki

Abstract

The Major Projects Agreement (MPA) is a framework agreement designed to improve performance in large mechanical and electrical engineering projects. It is built on integrated team working and includes the trade union as a partner in strategic, organizational and employment decisions. The agreement was recently implemented in the construction of Heathrow Terminal 5 (T5). The use of the MPA at T5 illustrates how the promotion of a framework that legitimizes a role for unions in continuing dialogue with employers can positively affect organizational outcomes in large construction projects. While serving as a reminder that mechanisms exist within UK corporate governance for the representation and articulation of the interests of non-shareholder constituencies, T5 may be a unique case: the currently uncertain future of the MPA is indicative of wider constraints on the adoption of the partnership model in Britain.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Deakin & Aristea Koukiadaki, 2008. "Governance Processes, Employee Voice and Performance Outcomes in the Construction of Heathrow Terminal 5," Working Papers wp368, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp368
    Note: PRO-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cbrwp368.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Linda Clarke & Maria Gribling, 2008. "Obstacles to diversity in construction: the example of Heathrow Terminal 5," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(10), pages 1055-1065.
    2. Andrei Shleifer & Lawrence H. Summers, 1988. "Breach of Trust in Hostile Takeovers," NBER Chapters, in: Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences, pages 33-68, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Howard Gospel & Andrew Pendleton, 2003. "Finance, Corporate Governance and the Management of Labour: A Conceptual and Comparative Analysis," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 41(3), pages 557-582, September.
    4. E. Paul Durrenberger, 2005. "Labour," Chapters, in: James G. Carrier (ed.), A Handbook of Economic Anthropology, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. John Armour & Simon Deakin & Suzanne J. Konzelmann, 2003. "Shareholder Primacy and the Trajectory of UK Corporate Governance," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 41(3), pages 531-555, September.
    6. Alan J. Auerbach, 1988. "Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number auer88-1, August.
    7. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461, Enero-Abr.
    8. Howard Gospel & Jan Druker, 1998. "The Survival of National Bargaining in the Electrical Contracting Industry: A Deviant Case?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 36(2), pages 249-267, June.
    9. Simon Deakin & D. Hugh Whittaker, 2007. "Re‐embedding the Corporation? Comparative perspectives on corporate governance, employment relations and corporate social responsibility," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 1-4, January.
    10. Sarah Oxenbridge & William Brown & Simon Deakin & Cliff Pratten, 2003. "Initial Responses to the Statutory Recognition Provisions of the Employment Relations Act 1999," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 41(2), pages 315-334, June.
    11. John Armour & Simon Deakin & Suzanne J. Konzelmann, 2003. "Shareholder Primacy and the Trajectory of UK Corporate Governance," Working Papers wp266, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    12. David E. Guest & Riccardo Peccei, 2001. "Partnership at Work: Mutuality and the Balance of Advantage," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 39(2), pages 207-236, 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. Neil Conway & Simon Deakin & Suzanne Konzelmann & Héloïse Petit & Antoine Rebérioux & Frank Wilkinson, 2008. "The Influence of Stock Market Listing on Human Resource Management: Evidence for France and Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 46(4), pages 631-673, December.
    2. Lippert, Inge, 2008. "Perspektivenverschiebungen in der Corporate Governance: Neuere Ansätze und Studien der Corporate-Governance-Forschung," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Knowledge, Production Systems and Work SP III 2008-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    3. Azimjon Kuvandikov & Andrew Pendleton & David Higgins, 2014. "Employment Change after Takeovers: The Role of Executive Ownership," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(2), pages 191-236, June.
    4. François Belot & Timothée Waxin, 2017. "Labor Conflicts in French Workplaces: Does (the Type of) Family Control Matter?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 591-617, December.
    5. Simon Deakin & Richard Hobbs, 2006. "False dawn for CSR? Shifts in regulatory policy and the response of the corporate and financial sectors in Britain," Working Papers wp333, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    6. Marc van Essen & J. (Hans) van Oosterhout & Pursey P. M. A. R. Heugens, 2013. "Competition and Cooperation in Corporate Governance: The Effects of Labor Institutions on Blockholder Effectiveness in 23 European Countries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 530-551, April.
    7. Tim Baldenius & Xiaojing Meng & Lin Qiu, 2021. "The value of board commitment," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 1587-1622, December.
    8. Lukáš Marek, 2012. "Institutional Differences Between the British and German Economic Models: Corporate Sector and Labour Market [Institucionální odlišnosti britského a německého ekonomického modelu. S důrazem na firemní sféru a trh práce]," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2012(1), pages 25-38.
    9. Teresa Chu & In-Mu Haw & Simon S. M. Ho & Xu Zhang, 2020. "Labor protection, ownership concentration, and cost of equity capital: international evidence," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1351-1387, May.
    10. Jeroen Veldman & Hugh Willmott, 2017. "Social ontology and the modern corporation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 41(5), pages 1489-1504.
    11. Arouri, Mohamed & Gomes, Mathieu & Pukthuanthong, Kuntara, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility and M&A uncertainty," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 176-198.
    12. Heyman, Fredrik & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Sjöholm, Fredrik, 2006. "Acquisitions, Multinationals and Wage Dispersion," Working Paper Series 675, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    13. Jun-Koo Kang & Jungmin Kim, 2020. "Do Family Firms Invest More than Nonfamily Firms in Employee-Friendly Policies?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1300-1324, March.
    14. Petri Böckerman & Eero Lehto, 2006. "Enemy of Labour? Analysing the Employment Effects of Mergers and Acquisitions," Working Papers 221, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    15. Jaepil Choi & Heli Wang, 2007. "The Promise of a Managerial Values Approach to Corporate Philanthropy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 345-359, November.
    16. Randall Morck & Bernard Yeung, 2003. "Agency Problems in Large Family Business Groups," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(4), pages 367-382, October.
    17. Simon Deakin & Giles Slinger, 1999. "Company Law as an Instrument of Inclusion: Re-regulating Stakeholder Relations in the Context of Takeovers," Working Papers wp145, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    18. Phillippe Desbrières & Alain Schatt, 2002. "The Impacts of LBOs on the Performance of Acquired Firms: The French Case," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5‐6), pages 695-729.
    19. Barone, Elisabetta & Ranamagar, Nathan & Solomon, Jill F., 2013. "A Habermasian model of stakeholder (non)engagement and corporate (ir)responsibility reporting," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 163-181.
    20. Levine, Ross & Zervos, Sara, 1998. "Capital Control Liberalization and Stock Market Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1169-1183, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J52 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Dispute Resolution: Strikes, Arbitration, and Mediation
    • K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law
    • K31 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Labor Law
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cbr:cbrwps:wp368. 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: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk .

    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.