Search results

The purpose of this paper is to give an updated overview of the research on employee ownership. What does the scientific literature reveal about advantages and disadvantages? What can be learned from different models used in Italy, France, Mondragon (Spain), UK and US with many employee-owned firms in contrast to Denmark.

A structured review of the literature on employee. The paper identifies different mechanisms leading to effects on productivity, job stability, distribution, investment etc., and reviews the empirical evidence. The main barriers and drivers are identified and different models for employee ownership in Italy, France, Mondragon (Spain), UK and US are reviewed to identify potential models for a country like Denmark with few employee-owned firms.

The article gives an overview over the theoretical predictions and the main empirical evidence of the effects of employee ownership. The pros are greater employee identification with the firm and increased productivity reinforced by increased participation. Employee-owned firms have more equal distribution of wages and more stable employment, and they have greater mutual control between employees and fewer middle managers. The motivation effects may be smaller for large firms and lack of capital may lead to lower levels of investments and capital per employee.

Comprehensive and updated literature review on the effects and successful formats of employee ownership to identify models for implementation in countries with few employee-owned firms.

In this paper, my claim is that employee ownership of industrial companies enables economic survival, democracy, and joint responsibility. My main focus is a case study of Ljuders Nickelsilfverfabrik and its change to employee ownership. In 1980, 36 of the 42 employees became owners. My research question is how have the economy and democracy in an employee-owned industrial company changed over the years? My main research method includes a 35-year in-depth longitudinal case study of Ljuders Nickelsilfverfabrik since its employee takeover. The empirical material includes documents, interviews, participant observations, and informal talks over the entire study period. My theory is based on the study by Connell Fanning and McCarthy (1983, 1986), who have compiled the critical literature on employee-owned companies and have asked why so few employee-owned companies exist in Western economies. They formulate six non-viability hypotheses for employee ownership, against which I present my empirical study and conclude that employee ownership is possible. From my case study in combination with the literature about organizational changes, I formulate a recipe for a successful employee takeover and collective entrepreneurship. The experience of Ljuders Nickelsilfverfabrik shows that a more complete business idea can subsequently unfold with the help of different people’s knowledge and experiences. Degeneration from democratic to more traditional ownership and control can be avoided by placing new people in leadership positions. The management must create legitimacy for a different organizational form for internal and external stakeholders.

The purpose of this study is to understand how majority employee-owned firms responded to the pandemic compared to firms that were not majority employee-owned. The Employee Ownership Foundation partnered with Rutgers University and the SSRS survey firm to survey ESOP and non-ESOP firms about their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. A key purpose of the survey was to estimate firm-level changes in employment from mid-January to August (current employment figures were adjusted to August 5 using BLS industry employment trends). The survey also looked at other forms of adjustment and responses to the pandemic as reviewed below. The focus in this study is on the differences between firms that are majority owned by ESOPs and those that are not.

The survey included 247 executives from ESOP Association member companies and 500 executives from an SSRS business panel constructed to be representative of US companies with 50 or more employees. The survey started on August 5 and ended on September 23, 2020.

(1) Majority ESOP firms had employment declines from January to August that were on average only one-fourth as large as for other firms. The difference is maintained when controlling for industry membership. (2) Majority ESOP firms were more likely to be declared “essential,” but the lower employment cutbacks among majority ESOP firms remain among essential and non-essential businesses. As essential businesses, majority ESOP firms were more likely receive Paycheck Protection Program or other government pandemic assistance, but both assistance recipients and non-recipients had lower employment cutbacks among majority ESOP firms. (3) The extent of employment cutbacks was higher for non-managers than for managers, but the manager/non-manager gap was higher among other firms than among majority ESOP firms.

This study supports empirical findings done previously.

This study suggests to non-EO firms what they can do.

This study suggests strengths of EO firms.

A very original and one-of-a-kind dataset.

One of the surprising developments in the privatization processes of post-socialist economies was the high incidence of employee ownership. However, the available evidence suggests that the number of employee-owned firms is declining quite rapidly. This paper approaches the decline by using data on individuals in Estonian employee-owned firms. The key idea is that employee ownership can be sustainable only if it is extended also to new, incoming employees.We analyze the determinants of ownership in employee-owned firms and find out that new employees are excluded from ownership. While this finding is consistent with the literature on “degeneration” of employee-owned firms, it is not consistent with earlier empirical research. We argue that in developed economies, there are many countervailing forces that prevent the decline, but these are not in operation in Estonia. The peculiarity of Estonian findings is explained by different motives of entry of employee ownership vs. advanced market economies. However, the findings from this study may carry over to other transition economies as well.

The paper traces the development of employee ownership in the UK since the 1980s. It proposes that employee ownership is a function of macro-level contexts and micro-level decisions, with the latter framed and guided by the former. The macro context comprises the regulatory framework and the provision of incentives to adopt employee ownership. The paper shows how the evolution of these has led to a steep increase in employee ownership in the last eight years.

The paper draws on several sources of empirical data to chart the development of employee ownership in the UK since the 1980s and to identify the current features of employee ownership. Two firm-level surveys conducted in 2015 and 2020/21 are supplemented by qualitative case study data collected in the early 1990s. An annual census of all employee-owned firms facilitates a comprehensive overview of the current state of UK employee ownership.

It is found that there has been a steep increase in the number of UK employee-owned firms since 2014 after several decades of uneven growth. This is attributed to the introduction of new incentives and to refinements of the regulatory framework. Over the period, there has been a shift from hybrid employee ownership, combining direct and indirect forms, to indirect ownership associated with the employee ownership trust model.

The paper provides an original history of employee ownership in the UK using rich and unique data, along with the most comprehensive picture of current employee ownership to date.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate how the public at large perceives employee ownership, and how public perceptions of employee ownership translate into consumer valuation of goods and/or services produced by employee-owned firms. To the extent that consumer interest regarding the governance and ownership structure of firms matters in their purchasing decision, an employee-owned certification label could be an instrument by firms to segment consumer demand, differentiate products and potentially realize a competitive advantage.

Three specific questions are evaluated using the fifth price, experimental Vickrey valuation auction. First, the author obtains estimates of willingness to pay (WTP) premia for a specific item (coffee) differentiated in a controlled setting by the certifications labels that signal various non-market attributes. Specifically, the author examines the WTP premium for coffee that is eligible for the Certified Employee-Owned^SM label, the Fair Trade Certified^TM Certified label, as well coffee that qualifies for both labels. Second, the author introduces a treatment to evaluate how the provision of information produced by the third party certifiers affects WTP estimates. And third, the author exploits the use of a controlled setting to evaluate how passive sensory information (i.e. taste) may influence the WTP valuation of the labels.

WTP premia for coffee carrying only the EO label only increase by 67 cents relative to conventional coffee, which was not significantly different from zero. Bids for both FT and EO&FT labeled coffee were, however, positive ($1.22 and $2.17, respectively) and are also statistically significant. The circulation of information to subjects about the certification programs resulted in increased bids. These bid differences were statistically significant for FT and EOFT coffee, but again, not for EO labeled coffee. Finally, differences in tastes did not appear to drive significant differences in bidding behavior, suggesting that WTP consumer decisions are strongly influenced by non-market attributes.

Marketers, economists and others have an interest in determining the monetary value individuals place on non-market goods for a variety of reasons; from forecasting new product success to understanding consumer and individual behavior. Unfortunately, many currently available stated preference techniques suffer from hypothetical bias while revealed preference techniques rely on indirect measures. Experimental auctions mitigate some of these issues since they involve individuals exchanging real money for real goods in an active market. WTP valuation has been conducted on a wide variety or products, but none that capture consumer valuation of employee ownership.

Following critiques of shareholder capitalism and calls for reform of the corporation, employee-owned firms have attracted public and government attention in the UK and elsewhere, based on the view that these alternative organizations serve a broader public purpose. However, despite attempts to broaden the measures for evaluating organizations and take seriously the social effects of business decisions, we lack a holistic framework for evaluating this public purpose that addresses aspirations like participation, democracy, equality, solidarity, and strong community relations alongside financial resilience and profitability. This study proposes that a solution can be found in Selznick’s concept of “moral community.” Selznick argued that community, conceived as a response to the perceived unravelling of the social fabric, plays a vital role in countering the excesses of capitalism. Using this as a yardstick to evaluate employee ownership (EO) in the UK, the author argues that the EO organizational field is indeed an embodiment of a moral community. It successfully infuses a broad range of social values into economic pursuits, nurtures an inclusive sense of the “common good,” and mitigates the alienation resulting from an increasingly marketized society. At the same time, the EO moral community does not reject capitalism as such, aspiring to connect with and reform existing political, financial, and legal structures as opposed to positioning its own institutions as an alternative to them. There are, therefore, limits to the challenge that the EO community levels against the current socioeconomic order.

The purpose of this paper is to give an updated overview over the development of employee-ownership in Italy, France, Spain including Mondragon, the UK and the US with relatively many employee-owned firms. How have the barriers for employee-ownership been overcome in these countries?

The overview is based on updated descriptions of the development of employee-ownership included in this special issue. The analysis follows the structure of overcoming five barriers: the organization problem; the problem of entry and exit of employee-owners; the startup and takeover problem; the capital- and the risk problem.

Italy, France and Spain have overcome the barriers by specific legislation for worker cooperatives, this includes rules for entry and exit of employee members. Cooperative support organizations play an important role for monitoring and managing the startup problem and for access to capital. The Mondragon model includes individual ownership elements and a group structure of cooperatives. The EOT and ESOP models are well suited for employee takeovers, financing are eased by tax advantages and they are all-employee schemes. While the EOT has no individual risks, the ESOP model has the possibility for capital gains for employees but also the risk of losing these gains.

Comprehensive and updated overview of the development in employee-ownership in the five countries to identify successful formats of employee-ownership for implementation in countries with few employee-owned firms.

This case explores the context in which decisions related to the composition of the board of directors are made at a company with a strong, participatory culture and strong values of accountability, responsibility, and community.

This case study seeks an in-depth understanding of a 100% ESOP company’s (Carris Reels, Inc.) values, culture, and processes related to broad-based employee participation in decision-making and governance of the company. Data were collected from formal and informal interviews and discussions with Carris Reels’ employees, observation, and company archival data, including newsletters, meeting minutes, and announcements.

Goals may be sufficiently different at highly participatory, majority employee-owned ESOP companies such that regulatory guidelines for board structure for public or privately held companies that are not employee-owned should be evaluated in the context of that company’s stakeholders.

A trend toward external members for boards of directors should be given careful consideration in the case of majority ESOP companies whose employee-owned and governed status is central to the company’s vision.

This case study provides an in-depth look at a company’s board of directors’ composition-related decision-making in the context of broad-based participatory processes and the desire to maintain a profitable and fully employee-owned and governed enterprise.

The purpose of this research was to investigate how Mid South Building Supply, a 100% employee-owned company, survived the Great Recession. Research has found that employee-owned companies are more likely to survive recessions than other companies. Why this happens was unclear. Thus, this research was conducted to learn why this might happen.

The case study approach was chosen to uncover the causes because this approach has played a significant role in uncovering organizational phenomena. Moreover, the industry was chosen because of the vulnerability of firms in it to recessionary forces.

Mid South uses practices that enhance both financial and psychological ownership. Prior research has suggested that both are important.

Case study research is limited because only a single frim is investigated. Thus, additional studies need to be performed to confirm the results.

Although this is a single case study, the practical implication is that enterprises that want to improve their probability of surviving should apply the findings of this study.

Firms that provide employment stability to employees are more likely to survive. In turn, research would suggest that this is associated with greater family and community stability.

Whereas prior studies have used across-industry data to find that employee-owned firms are more likely to survive recessions than others, what such firms do differently was unclear. A literature review failed to reveal a prior study that looked at the internal practices that may cause this to happen.