German studies already have supported the existing positive economic effects of works councils, but failed to explain how these effects are produced. New case study based research from the Netherlands has provided a theory consisting of three channels to create economic impact, also including a set of necessary conditions. This article presents a secondary analysis of this theory with the use of a large data set. This quantitative analysis further supports the theory and contains interesting nuances about how the channels work, in particular about the role of the availability of sufficient works council candidates at elections.
AddisonJT (2005) The determinants of firm performance: Unions, works councils, and employee involvement/high performance work practices. Scottish Journal of Political Economy52: 406–450.
2.
AddisonJT (2009) The Economics of Codetermination. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
AddisonJTBellmanLSchnabelCWagnerJ (2003) German works councils old and new: Incidence, coverage, and determinants. Schmollers Jahrbuch123(3): 339–358.
4.
DilgerA (2002) Ökonomik betrieblicher Mitbestimmung [Economy of Company Level Codetermination]. München/Mehring: Reiner Hampp Verlag.
5.
DriscollCStarikM (2004) The primordial stakeholder: Advancing the conceptual consideration of stakeholder status for the natural environment. Journal of Business Ethics49(1): 55–73.
6.
EtzioniA (1971) A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations: On Power, Involvement, and their Correlates. New York: The Free Press.
7.
FitzroyFRKraftK (1987) Efficiency and internal organization: Works councils in West-German firms. Economica, New Series 54(216): 493–504.
8.
FreemanRBLazearEP (1995) An econometric analysis of works councils. In: RogersJStreeckW (eds) Works Councils: Consultation, Representation and Cooperation in Industrial Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 27–52.
9.
FregeC (2002) A critical assessment of the theoretical and empirical research on German works councils. British Journal of Industrial Relations40(2): 221–248.
10.
FrenchJRPRavenB (1968) The basis of social power. In: CartwrightDZanderA (eds) Group Dynamics, Research and Theory, 3rd edn.New York: Harper and Row, pp. 259–269.
11.
GuestDMichieJSheehanMConwayN (2000) Getting inside the HRM–performance relationship. ESRC Future of Work Programme Working Paper 8, Academy of Management Conference, Toronto, 4–9 August 2000.
12.
HüblerOJirjahnU (2003) Works councils and collective bargaining in Germany: The impact on productivity and wages. Scottish Journal of Political Economy50: 1–21.
13.
JirjahnU (2009) The introduction of works councils in German establishments: Rent seeking or rent protection?British Journal of Industrial Relations47(3): 521–545.
14.
JirjahnU (2010) Ökonomische Wirkungen der Mitbestimmung in Deutschland: Ein Update [Economic Effects of German Codetermination: An Update]. Arbeitspapier 186, Hans Böckler Stiftung.
15.
LooiseJK (1996) Sociale innovatie moet, maar hoe? [Social Innovation is Necessary, but How?]. Inaugural lecture, University of Twente.
16.
LooiseJKDruckerM. (2003) Dutch works councils in times of transition: The effects of changes in society, organizations and work on the position of works councils. Economic and Industrial Democracy24(3): 379–409.
17.
MitchellRKAgleBRWoodDJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review22(4): 853–886.
18.
MüllerS (2011) Works councils and firm profits revisited. British Journal of Industrial Relations49(2): 27–43.
19.
NienhüserW (2009) The effects of different types of works councils on bargaining outcomes: Results of an empirical study. Economic and Industrial Democracy30(3): 372–400.
20.
OssewaardeRNijhofAHeyseL (2008) Dynamics of NGO legitimacy: How organising betrays core missions of INGOs. Public Administration and Development28(1): 42–53.
21.
PaauweJ (2004) HRM and Performance: Achieving Long Term Viability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
PfeiferC (2011) The heterogeneous economic consequences of works council relations. Schmollers Jahrbuch131(1): 59–71.
23.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJY (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(5): 879–903.
24.
SmithSC (1991) On the economic rationale for co-determination law. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization16(3): 61–81.
25.
SuchmanMC (1995) Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review20(3): 571–610.
26.
SummersJHymanJ (2005) Employee Participation and Company Performance: A Review of the Literature. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
27.
TeulingsAWM (1985) Prominenten en volgers. Recht, macht en invloed van ondernemingsraden op de besluitvorming [Prominent and Following Councils: Rights, Power and Influence of Works Councils in Decision Making]. Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsvraagstukken1(1): 51–64.
28.
Van den BergA (2004) The contribution of work representation to solving the governance structure problem. Journal of Management and Governance8(2): 129–148.
29.
Van den BergAGriftYVan WitteloostuijnA (2011) Managerial perceptions of works councils’ effectiveness in the Netherlands. Industrial Relations50(3): 497–513.
30.
Van den TillaartHCremersJ (eds) (2002) Invloed en Herkenbaarheid van OR-werk. Macht en Onmacht Herzien [Influence and Visibility of Works Councils: Power and Impotence Revisited]. ‘s Gravenhage: Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie.
31.
Van het KaarRHLooiseJC (1999) De Volwassen OR: Groei en Grenzen van de Nederlandse Ondernemingsraad: Resultaten van het Grote OR-Onderzoek [The Mature Works Council: Development and Limitations of the Dutch Works Council. Outcomes of the Large Works Council Survey]. Alphen aan den Rijn: Samson.
32.
WigboldusJE (2011) Bron van Meerwaarde. De Economische Effecten van de Ondernemingsraad [Source of Added Value: The Economic Effects of the Works Council]. Assen: Van Gorcum.
