CORRELACIÓN DE VARIABLES

Within the debate over the theories and frameworks of employee participation, different degrees and forms of participation also underlie the argument. As has been discussed above in relation to unitarist and pluralist theories of employee participation, the degree of employee participation can range from nil or low level employee participation to high level employee participation or employee control. The forms of employee participation include financial, direct and indirect participation and are discussed in further detail in this section.

The first of these categories, financial participation, encompasses the situation where employees have some form of participation in the financial affairs of the organisations. The second of these categories, direct participation, can encompass a broad range of activities in terms of work life programs and social based activities. Thirdly, there is indirect participation whereby employees participate in organisational decision making which is the specific context explored in this thesis and explored in greater detail in the next section of this chapter (Summers and Hyman, 2005). The form of participation in decision making in this thesis focuses on indirect participation in managing workplace change.

A further aspect of participation in decision making besides the form of participation is how broad or narrow is the context of the issues under consideration. The extent to which the process of participation in decision making is formal or informal also needs to be assessed. These issues are captured in the literature which examines the six dimensions of participative decision making (Dachler and Wilpert, 1978; Locke and Schweiger, 1979; Cotton et al, 1988; Black and Gregersen, 1997). These six dimensions were well summarised by Black and Gregersen (1997) as: rationale; structure, form, issues, decision processes and degree of involvement. These dimensions of participative decision making are explored in the nest section.

2.6.1 Dimensions of Participative Decision Making

The first dimension argues that it is necessary to understand the ‘rationale’ for fostering participation in the decision making process. Black and Gregersen (1997)

identified two basic rationales for fostering employee participation that included a humanistic rationale which: ‘argues that people have the right to participate in decisions that affect their lives’ as well as a pragmatic rationale which, ‘contends that participative decision making is an instrumental way to achieve higher productivity, efficiency, profits, or other valued organisational results’ (1997:861).

The second and third dimensions of participative decision-making are ‘structure’ and ‘form’. Dachler and Wilpert (1978) described the dimension of structure as involving a continuum from formal to informal, and the dimension of form involving a continuum of direct to indirect. These two dimensions are important to understanding the manner in which employees participate in decision-making, and will be further explored in the context of the Australian HE sector in more detail in Chapter 6.

The fourth dimension can be described as the ‘decision issues’ related to participative decision making. These issues concern how the nature of the decision impacts on the nature of the participation in the decision making process. They describe the types of decision issues as including: work and task design; working conditions; strategy issues; and capital and investment issues.

The fifth and sixth dimensions of participative decision making are the ‘degree of involvement’ and the ‘decision process’. Black and Gregersen (1997) described the ‘degree of involvement’ as the extent to which employees were afforded the opportunity to participate in the decision making processes of the organisation whilst the ‘decision process’ was in essence the form in which the employee participated in the decision making and the manner in which they were able to impact on the decision making process.

Margulies and Black (1987) developed a model that integrates the last two dimensions: degree of participation and decision process, and described this as providing an effective framework in which to assess the nature of participative decision making within an organisational context. Their model explored the nature of the participation in decision making and they argued that, ‘the degree of involvement could range from none to full participation for each of the five decision making processes’ (1987:392).

In considering the role of employees in participating in decision making it is important to consider the roles that can be undertaken by employees. This concept was examined by Thompson and Kahnweiler (2002:273) who conducted a comprehensive analysis of the varying debates within the employee participation literature and identified four key themes in relation to the decision making processes:

• organisational systems and the environment must be created and maintained to support participation in decision making

• management must behave in ways that encourage and support participation in decision making

• employees must be motivated and have the skills to participate in the decision making process

• human performance and organisational outcomes will be different when participation in decision making occurs

These four themes provide a context in which to consider the nature of employee participation in decision making and the factors that need to be present for the participation to be effective for management and the employees. Further to this consideration about the roles of employees whilst participating in decision making, it is also necessary to consider the types and outcomes associated with participative decision making.

Cotton et al (1988) sought to examine the differing types of participative decision making and the different outcomes that may result. In determining what the distinct types of participative decision making were, they identified a classification system based on four distinct attributes: formal versus informal participation; direct versus indirect participation; the degree of employee participation; and the context of the decisions in which participation took place.

The Formal and informal designation of participation considered the context in which the participation of employees was formalised either through management agreement and workplace structures or whether it was more akin to other influences within the

organisation. Direct versus indirect participation was described as the manner in which the participation of employees took place and the extent to which it was via direct participation of employees or through indirect representation via a third party such as a trade union. Finally, the degree of employee participation considered the nature of the participation and the extent to which employees could influence workplace decisions whilst the context considered the nature of what decisions had they influence over (Cotton et al, 1988).

Formal versus informal participation as well as direct versus indirect participation built upon the earlier work of Patemen (1970) and Dachler and Wilpert (1978) and essentially provided a matrix approach along which the mode of participation could be assessed. Such a matrix oriented approach results in employee participation being considered in one of four dimensions: direct/formal; direct/informal; indirect/formal; indirect/informal.

Based this matrix oriented approach, Cotton et al (1988) identified what they believed were six distinct types of participative decision making as indicated in Table 2.1:

Table 2.1: Degree of Employee Participation

TYPES OF PARTICIPATIVE DECISION MAKING

SUMMARY EXPLANANTION

1. Participation in work decisions Focuses on the work, how it is organised, what is done and who does what

2. Consultative participation Employees give their opinions, but typically do not have a veto

3. Short-term participation Workers have complete influence but of limited duration and setting

4. Informal participation Participation occurs informally through interpersonal relationships with managers 5. Employee ownership Employees influence decisions through

mechanisms such as boards of directors

6. Representative participation Employees participate through representatives on boards or via unions

Source: Cotton et al (1988)

These six types of employee participation provide an intersection of the degree as well as the context of the decision. In other words, the model represents a framework that allows for employee participation in decision making to be considered and evaluated based on the extent of influence the employee exercises in the decision making process as well as organisational context in which the decision is being undertaken.

This research allowed a closer scrutiny of the relationship between levels of participative decision making and associated outcomes. That is the extent to which the participation of employees in decision making is fostered and the subsequent outcome it in turn achieves within the organisation. The key findings of Cotton et al (1988) was that the satisfaction with, and the performance of, participative decision making schemes were reliant primarily on the degree and form of participation.

As such, and having considered the nature of employee participation, and identified a primary focus of this thesis on participative decision making, two key questions remain to be considered before considering employee participation in the context of workplace change. First, what degree of influence do employees have in participation schemes? And second, what form does participation take? These questions are considered in the next section which examines the degree and form of employee participation in decision making.