IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iae/iaewps/wp2002n18.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Pro-Reformers Better Performers?

Author

Listed:
  • Tim R.L. Fry

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

  • Kelly Jarvis

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

  • Joanne Loundes

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

There appears to be widespread consensus in industry and government that a switch from centralized bargaining to an enterprise based system benefits productivity. However, research suggests that the link between bargaining structures and worker productivity is dubious and that empirical research has been unable to discover a relationship between them. In this paper we use data from Australian companies at the enterprise level and examine the links between performance and a range of human resources, industrial relations and management variables to determine whether bargaining structures do impact on performance. In particular, we investigate whether organisations that have incorporated aspects of the industrial relations reform agenda have outperformed organisations that have not. The results from the application of a treatment effects regression model show evidence that organisations adopting the industrial relations reform agenda report significantly higher levels of self-assessed labour productivity relative to their competitors, even after controlling for a number of different factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Tim R.L. Fry & Kelly Jarvis & Joanne Loundes, 2002. "Are Pro-Reformers Better Performers?," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n18, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    • Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2002n18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2002n18.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wadhwani, Sushil & Wall, Martin, 1990. "The Effects of Profit-Sharing on Employment, Wages, Stock Returns and Productivity: Evidence from UK Micro-data," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(399), pages 1-17, March.
    2. Mark Wooden & Joanne Loundes & Yi-Ping Tseng, 2002. "Industrial Relations Reform and Business Performance: An Introduction," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n02, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    3. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques, 1995. "Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 263-293, January.
    5. Guyonne Kalb & Jenny Williams, 2002. "Industrial Relations Reform and Business Performance: An Introduction," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n04, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    6. Kruse, Douglas L, 1992. "Profit Sharing and Productivity: Microeconomic Evidence from the United States," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(410), pages 24-36, January.
    7. Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2001. "How To Compete: The Impact Of Workplace Practices And Information Technology On Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 434-445, August.
    8. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," Working Papers 93-31, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    9. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    10. Sue Fernie & David Metcalf, 1995. "Participation, Contingent Pay, Representation and Workplace Performance: Evidence from Great Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 379-415, September.
    11. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1995. "Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 179-208, April.
    12. repec:bla:scandj:v:94:y:1992:i:0:p:s51-70 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Anne Hawke & Mark Wooden, 1998. "The Changing Face of Australian Industrial Relations: A Survey," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 74(224), pages 74-88, March.
    14. Cable, John & Wilson, Nicholas, 1989. "Profit-Sharing and Productivity: An Analysis of UK Engineering Firms," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(396), pages 366-375, June.
    15. Cable, John & Wilson, Nicholas, 1990. "Profit-Sharing and Productivity: Some Further Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 550-555, June.
    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. Tim Fry & Kelly Jarvis & Joanne Loundes, 2003. "Industrial Relations Reform at the Enterprise and Workplace," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2003n07, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.

    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. Joanne Loundes, 2000. "Management and Industrial Relations Practices and Outcomes in Australian Workplaces," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2000n12, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Derek Jones & Panu Kalmi & Mikko Mäkinen, 2010. "The productivity effects of stock option schemes: evidence from Finnish panel data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, February.
    3. Eric Bartelsman & Andrea Bassanini & John Haltiwanger & Ron Jarmin & Stefano Scarpetta & Thorsten Schank, 2002. "The Spread of ICT and Productivity Growth: Is Europe Really Lagging Behind in the New Economy?," Working Papers halshs-00289168, HAL.
    4. Möller, Iris, 2000. "Produktivitätswirkung von Mitarbeiterbeteiligungen (Productivity effect of employee participation in asset formation)," Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 33(4), pages 565-582.
    5. Möller, Iris, 2000. "Produktivitätswirkung von Mitarbeiterbeteiligungen (Productivity effect of employee participation in asset formation)," Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 33(4), pages 565-582.
    6. Yao, Shujie, 1997. "Profit Sharing, Bonus Payment, and Productivity: A Case Study of Chinese State-Owned Enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 281-296, June.
    7. Shujie Yao, 1995. "Does profit-sharing work in a centrally-planned economy? Evidence from the Chinese state industries," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(4), pages 126-129.
    8. Wenxin Guo & Joseph A. Clougherty, 2022. "Cross-border acquisition activity by Chinese multinationals and domestic-productivity upgrading," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 659-695, June.
    9. Pedro de Faria & Francisco Lima, 2012. "Interdependence and spillovers: is firm performance affected by others’ innovation activities?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(36), pages 4765-4775, December.
    10. G Cameron, 1996. "Innovation and Economic Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0277, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    12. Dai, Lu & Zhang, Jiajun & Luo, Shougui, 2022. "Effective R&D capital and total factor productivity: Evidence using spatial panel data models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    13. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    14. Takao Kato & Ju Ho Lee & Jang-Soo Ryu, 2010. "The productivity effects of profit sharing, employee ownership, stock option and team incentive plans: evidence from Korean panel data," Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, in: Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, pages 111-135, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    15. Rosa Capolupo, 2005. "THE NEW GROWTH THEORIES AND THEIR EMPIRICS, Discussion Paper in Economics, University of Glasgow, N. 2005-04 (http://www.gla.ac.uk/Acad/Economics," GE, Growth, Math methods 0506003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Stefania Cardinaleschi & Mirella Damiani & Fabrizio Pompei, 2020. "Knowledge-intensive sectors and the role of collective performance-related pay," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 480-512, May.
    17. Lei JI, 2012. "Rethinking Directed Technical Change with Endogenous Market Structure," DEGIT Conference Papers c017_037, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    18. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    19. Olfa Aissa, 2016. "A Meta-Analysis of the Financial Participation Impact on Firm Performance," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(8), pages 186-186, July.
    20. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Innovation and the competitiveness of industries: comparing the mainstream and the evolutionary approaches," MPRA Paper 27523, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J53 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Labor-Management Relations; Industrial Jurisprudence
    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models

    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:iae:iaewps:wp2002n18. 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: Sheri Carnegie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.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.