Search results

In this research, the authors try to answer the question of when broad-based employee share ownership (ESO) is more likely to be used and how it can be managed more effectively from the vertical fit perspective in strategic human resource management (HRM).

The study analyzes an unbalanced panel sample of 614 organizations (1,601 organization-year data points) in South Korea, utilizing hierarchical linear modeling (HLM).

The analysis demonstrates that organizations are more likely to adopt broad-based ESO when they utilize the prospector and analyzer strategies as opposed to the defender strategy. The analysis also reveals that the relationship between broad-based ESO and labor productivity is positive only when organizations utilize the prospector strategy as opposed to other types of strategies (i.e. analyzer and defender strategies).

The findings first indicate that the decision to adopt a broad-based ESO in organizations should be informed by their business strategy if they want to enhance labor productivity. Specifically, the results demonstrate that only the prospector firms, rather than defenders or analyzers, can reap the productivity benefit of broad-based ESO. Second, since innovation is a major source of productivity for prospector firms, the findings demonstrate that a broad-based ESO can be a vehicle that drives innovation. As a result, firms may want to consider utilizing broad-based ESOs to foster innovation.

The findings emphasize the relevance of the “vertical fit” perspective in examining the broad-based ESO and firm productivity relationship. Most past research utilized the “horizontal fit” framework in refining the relationship between broad-based ESO and productivity. Thus, the study emphasizes the need to utilize the “vertical fit” perspective, and not only the “horizontal fit” perspective, in the broad-based ESO research. Through this, the study meaningfully extends the research on the productivity effect of broad-based ESO by adding an important moderator (i.e. strategy) to the model.

This chapter maps existing patterns of broad-based worker ownership and control in contemporary advanced capitalism and considers future possibilities for expanding democracy within firms. Section one discusses worker ownership and control arrangements in relation to different theories of the firm and shows how these arrangements map onto different national systems. Section two compares Germany, which is characterized by worker control without ownership, and the United States, which is marked by worker ownership without control. Section three explores three pathways through which broad-based worker ownership and control might be deepened and more strongly coupled in the future.

The purpose of this paper is to review the historical background for broad-based ownership in the USA, the development of forms of employee ownership and profit sharing in the USA, the research literature on employee ownership and profit sharing and related employee participation, the development of policy and options for new policies.

It is a literature review.

There are four reasons to be interested in employee stock ownership and profit sharing today: first, employee share ownership and profit sharing can increase worker pay and wealth and broaden the overall distribution of income and wealth, a key ingredient for a successful democracy. To be a tool for reducing inequality, employee stock ownership and profit sharing must be spread more widely and meaningfully than it is today. Second, employee share ownership and profit sharing provide incentives for more effort, cooperation, information sharing and innovation that can improve workplace performance and company productivity. Third, employee share ownership and profit sharing can save jobs by enhancing firm survival and employment stability, with wider economic benefits that come from decreasing unemployment. Fourth, employee share ownership and profit sharing can create more harmonious workplaces with greater corporate transparency and increased worker involvement in their work lives through access to information and participation in workplace decisions.

Growth has been extraordinarily sluggish in the recovery from the Great Recession and has weakened in advanced countries over a longer period, leading some analysts to believe that the authors have entered a new economic era of small to modest growth. This may turn out to be true, which will increase the importance of growth-enhancing policies. The evidence that firms with employee stock ownership and/or profit-sharing perform better than others suggests that policies that extend ownership would boost the country’s lagging growth rate. The evidence that employee share ownership firms preserve jobs and survive recessions better than others suggests that policies that extend ownership could help stabilize the economy when the next recession comes down the pike.

Because there may be informational or institutional barriers about the benefits of ownership and sharing and the ways firms can introduce such programs that government can help overcome. Government has often played a role in promoting performance-enhancing work practices to enhance overall economy-wide outcomes from higher productivity and innovation, such as the long history of agricultural extension services (since 1887) to spread information on best practices in farming, and employer education on safety practices conducted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Because of the “externalities” – effects that extend beyond the firm and its members – that greater ownership/profit sharing can bring us. If employee ownership and profit sharing lead to fewer layoffs and firm closures, this can reduce recession-created drops in consumer purchasing power and aggregate demand; government expenditures on unemployment compensation and other forms of support; decreased tax base for supporting schools and infrastructure; and potentially harmful social and personal effects, such as marital breakups and alcohol abuse. Apart from unemployment, more broadly shared prosperity and lower inequality may also have wider benefits for macroeconomic growth, stability and societal outcomes, as described by a number of social scientists. To the extent the ownership and profit sharing is a public good, a nudge in policy to consider the idea makes sense.

Because it is hard to find policy options that are as bipartisan as the shares policy. In The Citizens’ Share, and in other articles and venues, the authors lay out the areas in which there is evidence or logic for in-depth development of, and experimentation with, several broad policy directions, with the details to be worked out by members of Congress based on their deliberations.

Taking an international comparative approach, this chapter investigates the variance in the adoption of employee share ownership and stock option arrangements across countries. In particular, we investigate the influence of multinational enterprises (MNEs), industrial relations factors, HRM strategies, and market economies on the adoption and spread of the arrangements across countries. We find that industrial relations factors do not explain the variance in adoption by companies in their respective countries. MNEs and HRM strategies are important drivers of adoption. Market economy does not moderate the influence of MNEs on adoption, suggesting that MNEs universally apply the arrangements across borders.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

Across 614 organizations in South Korea, regarding the operation of the country’s broad-based ESO scheme – known as “Ulisaju” – this is more likely to be offered to employees working on companies with a prospector strategy or an analyzer strategy, rather than a defender strategy. Because prospector firms are most focused on achieving and sustaining innovation. Prospector strategy firms yielded 13% higher productivity from their people. The choice of business strategy influences productivity, since broad-based ESO drives better productivity in prospector firms only.

The briefing saves busy executives, strategists and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

Employee ownership has attracted much attention across the globe. Whether affected by the global financial crisis (GFC), or not, this paper seeks to canvass what is known about employee ownership in neo‐liberal political economies.

This paper is a literature review, cross cultural analysis and critique.

The findings indicate future research directions.

The paper suggests a reconsideration of organizational configurations for possible greater application in the future.

The paper hightlights the re‐regulation of neo‐liberal markets.

The paper focuses on employee share ownership schemes.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the incidence of employee financial participation (EFP) schemes in Europe and examine the factors that influence the likelihood of (i) a company offering EFP schemes and (ii) employees taking up EFP schemes.

Using a combination of descriptive and econometric techniques, the paper provides information on the incidence of EFP schemes in the EU and profiles a typical company and a typical employee that, respectively, offers and takes up EFP schemes. The empirical investigation is based on two models employing probabilistic techniques. Data used for this analysis include the European Company Survey (ECS) conducted in 2009 and three rounds of the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS) conducted in 2000, 2005, and 2009.

Results display a significant rise in EFP in the EU-27 in the last decade. In addition, results seem to suggest that the employees’ and companies’ characteristics, as well as sector and region of operation explain some of the variation in likelihoods of companies and employees, respectively, offering and taking up EFP schemes.

Due to data limitation, our analysis lacks a dynamic assessment of the relationship between parameters. Studies that exploit longitudinal data are suggested to follow this paper.

This paper contributes to the existing empirical literature by examining jointly the determinants of financial participation from both employers’ and employees’ perspective.

The purpose of this article is to examine the outcomes of a substantial broad‐based employee share‐ownership scheme for employee attitudes and behaviour in a privatised firm.

Results are based on a survey of 711 employees in Eircom, an Irish telecommunications firm, which is 35 percent employee‐owned.

The ESOP has created sizable financial returns and has had extensive influence in firm governance at the strategic level. However, findings show only a limited impact on employee attitudes and behaviour. This is attributed to a failure in creating a sense of employee participation and line of sight between employee performance and reward.

The aim of employee share‐ownership often includes aligning employee objectives with those of other shareholders, and thus improving labour performance. The findings in this study highlight a need to provide employees with a sense of ownership and control. Findings also question the assumption that where employees have a substantial shareholding, they will focus on securing the long‐term prospects of the firm.

Little research has examined the impact of a large employee shareholding on attitudes and behaviour within a public‐quoted firm. The substantial and unparalleled size of the Eircom ESOP presented a unique opportunity to conduct such a study.

This paper investigated the effect of employee share ownership, mediated through psychological ownership, on organizational citizenship behavior. The analysis included the possible complementary role of High Performance Ownership systems. This paper investigated these relationships by analyzing employee survey data from a Dutch organization that has implemented employee share ownership. We used PLS, a variance-based structural equation model to test the hypotheses. The results showed a direct influence of employee ownership on organizational citizenship behavior, but the relationship was not mediated by psychological ownership. Unexpectedly, the results show that a High Performance Work System bundle without employee ownership generates psychological ownership, but this does not influence organizational citizenship behavior. This research could not confirm the comprehensive model in which employee ownership, HRM system, and psychological ownership are positively related to each other. We choose a deliberate set of HR practices on theoretical grounds, but future research could investigate other sets of HR practices that may produce the expected effects. This research showed that employee ownership has a positive influence on organizational citizenship behavior. Organizations are therefore advised to consider implementing employee ownership. The results also show that a set of HR practices positively influences psychological ownership. The results suggest that organizations should strive for a consistent message, which makes the employees feel that they are taken serious as and deserve to be owners. We analyzed the influence of a configuration of high performance ownership system on psychological ownership and organizational citizenship behavior that is not done before.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss diverse matters concerning the field of Participation and Employee Ownership (PEO) coinciding with the launch of the JPEO.

This paper used mixed methods including bibliometric analysis.

Significant gaps exist in our knowledge of the scope and nature of PEO. Citation counts illustrate both the changing composition of research within PEO and faster relative growth than terms used to describe related fields such as labor unions and trade unions. Based on manually collected citation data I identify the most highly cited studies within PEO. Few of these studies attain a “home-run” citation count. However, PEO scholars are cited 19 percent more than economists in top 30 schools and the median C5 (total citations for the author’s five most highly cited papers) is more than 260 percent of the median for economists in “top 30” institutions. There is also some weak evidence that the citation bias in economics against female scholars is not as marked in PEO as elsewhere. A qualitative assessment of PEO studies suggests markedly uneven progress in empirical work across types of PEO.

No similar review has been done before.