High-involvement models of working are associated with high levels of worker influence over the work process, identified through worker perceptions of their jobs and working environment. This article reviews what is known about the conditions that foster the adoption of such models. Drawing on studies of worker participation in management since the 1950s, the article seeks to understand what explains the dispersion of high-involvement work processes in the private sector. In terms of understanding the potential for worker involvement in decision-making, the article argues that it is important to analyse the way in which managers develop production systems in firms. A range of conditions in manufacturing and in services are then discussed. While economic incentives are critical, the ongoing existence of societal differences, including a pronounced ‘Nordic effect’, suggests that economically unattractive environments do not necessarily lack opportunities to enhance worker well-being through greater involvement.
AdlerP (1993) Time-and-motion regained. Harvard Business ReviewJanuary–February, 97–108.
2.
AmableB (2003) The Diversity of Modern Capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.
AppelbaumEBaileyTBergPKallebergA (2000) Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay Off. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
4.
AshforthBSaksA (2000) Personal control in organizations: A longitudinal investigation with newcomers. Human Relations53(3): 311–339.
5.
AshtonDSungJ (2002) Supporting Workplace Learning for High-Performance Working. Geneva: International Labour Organization.
6.
AutorDLevyFMurnaneR (2003) The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics118: 1279–1233.
7.
BattR (2000) Strategic segmentation in front-line services: Matching customers, employees and human resource systems. International Journal of Human Resource Management11(3): 540–561.
8.
BauerT (2004) High Performance Workplace Practices and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Europe. Discussion Paper No. 1265. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labour (IZA).
9.
BélangerJEdwardsPWrightM (2003) Commitment at work and independence from management: A study of advanced teamwork. Work and Occupations30(2): 234–252.
10.
BélangerJGilesAMurrayG (2002) Towards a new production model: Potentialities, tensions and contradictions. In: MurrayGBélangerJGilesALapointeP (eds) Work and Employment Relations in the High Performance Workplace. London: Continuum, pp. 15–71.
11.
BillettS (2001) Learning through work: Workplace affordances and individual engagement. Journal of Workplace Learning13(5): 209–214.
12.
BlaunerR (1964) Alienation and Freedom: The Factory Worker and His Industry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
BoxallPMackyK (2009) Research and theory on high-performance work systems: Progressing the high-involvement stream. Human Resource Management Journal19(1): 3–23.
14.
BoxallPMackyK (2014) High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being. Work, Employment and Society28(6): 963–984.
15.
BoxallPAngSHBartramT (2011) Analysing the ‘black box’ of HRM: Uncovering HR goals, mediators and outcomes in a standardized service environment. Journal of Management Studies48(7): 1504–1532.
16.
BrassD (1985) Technology and the structuring of jobs: Employee satisfaction, performance and influence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes35: 216–240.
17.
BreaughJ (1985) The measurement of work autonomy. Human Relations38(6): 551–570.
18.
BurnsTStalkerG (1961) The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
19.
CampionM (1988) Interdisciplinary approaches to job design: A constructive replication with extensions. Journal of Applied Psychology73(3): 467–481.
20.
ChernsA (1976) The principles of sociotechnical design. Human Relations29(8): 783–792.
21.
CleggC (1984) The derivation of job designs. Journal of Occupational Behavior5(2): 131–146.
22.
CorderyJMorrisonDWrightBWallT (2010) The impact of autonomy and task uncertainty on team performance: A longitudinal field study. Journal of Organizational Behavior31(2–3): 240–258.
CullinaneS-JBosakJFloodPDemeroutiE (2013) Job design under lean manufacturing and its impact on employee outcomes. Organizational Psychology Review3(1): 41–61.
25.
DanfordARichardsonMStewartPet al. (2004) High performance work systems and workplace partnership: A case study of Aerospace workers. New Technology, Work and Employment19(1): 14–29.
26.
DeerySIversonR (2005) Labor–management cooperation: Antecedents and impact on organizational performance. Industrial and Labor Relations Review58(4): 588–609.
27.
DelbridgeRWhitfieldK (2001) Employee perceptions of job influence and organizational participation. Industrial Relations40(3): 472–489.
28.
Della TorreESolariL (2013) High-performance work systems and the change management process in medium-sized firms. International Journal of Human Resource Management24(13): 2583–2607.
29.
De SitterUden HertogFDankbaarB (1997) From complex organizations with simple jobs to simple organizations with complex jobs. Human Relations50(5): 497–534.
30.
De TrevilleSAntonakisJ (2006) Could lean production job design be intrinsically motivating? Contextual, configurational, and levels-of-analysis issues. Journal of Operations Management24(2): 99–123.
31.
DobbinFBoychukT (1999) National employment systems and job autonomy: Why job autonomy is high in the Nordic countries and low in the United States, Canada and Australia. Organization Studies20(2): 257–291.
32.
DoellgastVHoltgreweUDeeryS (2009) The effects of national institutions and collective bargaining arrangements on job quality in front-line service workplaces. Industrial and Labor Relations Review62(4): 489–509.
33.
DoorewaardHMeihuizenH (2000) Strategic performance options in professional service organisations. Human Resource Management Journal10(2): 39–57.
34.
EdwardsPRamM (2006) Surviving on the margins of the economy: Working relationships in small, low-wage firms. Journal of Management Studies43(4): 895–916.
35.
EdwardsPWrightM (2001) High-involvement work systems and performance outcomes: The strength of variable, contingent and context-bound relationships. International Journal of Human Resource Management12(4): 568–585.
36.
Eurofound (2012) Work Organisation and Innovation. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
37.
Eurofound (2013) Work Organisation and Employee Involvement in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
FelsteadAGallieDGreenFZhouY (2010) Employee involvement, the quality of training and the learning environment: An individual level analysis. International Journal of Human Resource Management21(10): 1667–1688.
40.
Fenton-O’CreevyM (1998) Employee involvement and the middle manager: Evidence from a survey of organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior19(1): 67–84.
41.
FreemanRKleinerM (2006) Who benefits most from employee involvement: Firms or workers?AEA Papers and Proceedings90(2): 219–223.
42.
FreseMZapfD (1994) Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. In: DunnetteMTriandisHHoughL (eds) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 4, 2nd edn. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, pp. 271–340.
43.
GallieD (ed.) (2007a) Employment Regimes and the Quality of Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
GallieD (2007b) Production regimes and the quality of employment in Europe. Annual Review of Sociology33: 85–104.
45.
GallieD (2013) Direct participation and the quality of work. Human Relations66(4): 453–473.
46.
GallieDZhouY (2013) Job control, work intensity, and work stress. In: GallieD (ed.) Economic Crisis, Quality of Work, and Social Integration: The European Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 115–141.
47.
GallieDFelsteadAGreenF (2004) Changing patterns of task discretion in Britain. Work, Employment and Society18(2): 243–266.
48.
GallieDZhouYFelsteadAGreenF (2012) Teamwork, skill development and employee welfare. British Journal of Industrial Relations50(1): 23–46.
49.
GardellB (1977) Autonomy and participation at work. Human Relations30(6): 515–533.
50.
GoergenMBrewsterCWoodG (2009) Corporate governance and training. Journal of Industrial Relations51(4): 459–487.
51.
GoosMManningASalomonsA (2009) Job polarization in Europe. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings99(2): 58–63.
52.
GospelH (1973) An approach to a theory of the firm in industrial relations. British Journal of Industrial Relations11(2): 211–228.
53.
GreenF (2006) Demanding Work: The Paradox of Job Quality in the Affluent Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54.
GreenF (2008) Leeway for the loyal: A model of employee discretion. British Journal of Industrial Relations46(1): 1–32.
55.
GustavsenB (2007) Work organization and ‘the Scandinavian model’. Economic and Industrial Democracy28(4): 650–671.
56.
GustavsenB (2011) The Nordic model of work organization. Journal of the Knowledge Economy2(4): 463–480.
57.
HackmanJOldhamG (1980) Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
58.
HallPASoskiceD (2001) An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In: HallPASoskiceD (eds) Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundation of Competitive Advantage. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–70.
59.
HarleyB (1999) The myth of empowerment: Work organisation, hierarchy and employee autonomy in contemporary Australian workplaces. Work, Employment and Society13(1): 41–66.
60.
HoldenLRobertsI (2004) The depowerment of European middle managers: Challenges and uncertainties. Journal of Managerial Psychology19(3): 269–287.
61.
HolmanD (2013) Job types and job quality in Europe. Human Relations66(4): 475–502.
62.
HolmanDFrenkelSSorensenOWoodS (2009) Work design and outcomes in call centers: Strategic choice and institutional explanations. Industrial and Labor Relations Review62(4): 510–532.
63.
HughesJ (2008) The high-performance paradigm: A review and evaluation. Learning as Work Research Paper, No. 16. Learning as Work Team, Cardiff School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University.
64.
HunterL (2000) What determines job quality in nursing homes?Industrial and Labor Relations Review53(3): 463–481.
65.
IngvaldsenJRolfsenM (2012) Autonomous work groups and the challenge of inter-group coordination. Human Relations65(7): 861–881.
66.
JohnsonJJohanssonGHallE (1988) Introduction. International Journal of Health Services18(4): 629–634.
67.
JonesDKalmiPKauhanenA (2010) How does employee involvement stack up? The effects of human resource management policies on performance in a retail firm. Industrial Relations49(1): 1–21.
68.
KarasekR (1979) Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly24(2): 285–308.
69.
KarasekRTheorellT (1990) Healthy Work: Stress, Productivity and the Reconstruction of Working Life. New York: Basic Books.
70.
KaufmanB (2010) SHRM theory in the post-Huselid era: Why it is fundamentally misspecified. Industrial Relations49(2): 286–313.
71.
KaufmanBMillerB (2011) The firm’s choice of HRM practices: Economics meets strategic human resource management. Industrial and Labor Relations Review64(3): 526–557.
72.
KenneyMGoeWContrerasOet al. (1998) Learning factories or reproduction factories? Labor–management relations in the Japanese consumer electronics maquiladoras in Mexico. Work and Occupations25(3): 269–304.
73.
KleinJ (1991) A reexamination of autonomy in light of new manufacturing practices. Human Relations44(1): 21–38.
74.
KorczynskiM (2001) The contradictions of service work: Call centre as customer-oriented bureaucracy. In: SturdyAGrugulisIWillmottH (eds) Customer Service: Empowerment and Entrapment. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 79–101.
75.
LangfredCW (2005) Autonomy and performance in teams: The multilevel moderating effect of task interdependence. Journal of Management31(4): 513–529.
76.
LawlerE (1986) High-Involvement Management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
77.
LloydCPayneJ (2013) Delivering better forms of work organization: Comparing vocational teachers in England, Wales and Norway. Economic and Industrial Democracy33(1): 29–49.
78.
LorenzEValeyreA (2005) Organisational innovation, human resource management and labour market structure: A comparison of the EU-15. Journal of Industrial Relations47(4): 424–442.
79.
McGrathR (2001) Exploring learning, innovative capacity, and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal44(1): 118–131.
80.
MarchJSimonH (1958) Organizations. New York: Wiley.
81.
MollemanE (1998) Variety and the requisite of self-organization. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis6(2): 109–131.
82.
MorgesonFCampionM (2002) Minimizing tradeoffs when redesigning work: Evidence from a longitudinal quasi-experiment. Personnel Psychology55: 589–612.
83.
NiepceWMollemanE (1996) Characteristics of work organization in lean production and sociotechnical systems: A case study. International Journal of Operations and Production Management16(2): 77–90.
84.
OliverNWilkinsonB (1988) The Japanization of British Industry. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
85.
OrtegaJ (2009) Why do employers give discretion? Family versus performance concerns. Industrial Relations48(1): 1–26.
86.
OstermanP (1994) How common is workplace transformation and who adopts it?Industrial and Labor Relations Review47(2): 173–188.
87.
OstermanP (2000) Work reorganization in an era of restructuring: Trends in diffusion and effects on employee welfare. Industrial and Labor Relations Review53(2): 179–196.
88.
ParkerS (2003) Longitudinal effects of lean production on employee outcomes and the mediating role of work characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology88(4): 620–634.
89.
ParkerS (2014) Beyond motivation: Job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. Annual Review of Psychology65: 661–691.
90.
PenroseE (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Blackwell.
91.
PilFMacDuffieJ (1996) The adoption of high involvement work practices. Industrial Relations35(3): 423–455.
92.
PorterMSiggelkowN (2008) Contextuality within activity systems and sustainability of competitive advantage. Academy of Management Perspectives22(2): 34–56.
93.
PotFKoningsveldE (2009) Quality of working life and organizational performance – two sides of the same coin?Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health35(6): 421–428.
94.
PruijtJ (2003) Teams between neo-Taylorism and anti-Taylorism. Economic and Industrial Democracy24(1): 77–101.
95.
RafiqMAhmedP (1998) A customer-oriented framework for empowering service employees. Journal of Services Marketing12(50): 379–396.
96.
SlocumJSimsH (1980) A typology for integrating technology, organization, and job design. Human Relations33(3): 193–212.
97.
StewartPDanfordARichardsonMPulignanoV (2010) Workers’ experiences of skill, training and participation in lean and high performance workplaces in Britain and Italy. Employee Relations32(6): 606–624.
98.
SusmanG (1975) Technological prerequisites for delegation of decision making to work groups. In: DavisLChernsA (eds) The Quality of Working Life: Vol. 1 – Problems, Prospects and the State of the Art. New York: Free Press.
99.
TaplinI (2001) Managerial resistance to high performance workplace practices. Research in the Sociology of Work10(1): 1–24.
100.
ThompsonJ (1967) Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
101.
TownsendKWilkinsonABurgessJ (2013) Filling the gaps: Patterns of formal and informal participation. Economic and Industrial Democracy34(2): 337–354.
102.
TristEBamforthK (1951) Some social and psychological consequences of the long-wall method of coal-getting. Human Relations4(1): 3–38.
103.
TristEHigginGMurrayHPollockA (1963) Organizational Choice: Capabilities of Groups at the Coalface under Changing Technologies. London: Tavistock Publications.
104.
VallasS (2006) Empowerment redux: Structure, agency, and the remaking of managerial authority. American Journal of Sociology111(6): 1677–1717.
105.
VandenbergRJRichardsonHAEastmanLJ (1999) The impact of high involvement work processes on organizational effectiveness: A second-order latent variable approach. Group and Organization Management24(3): 300–339.
106.
Van der ZwaanAMollemanE (1998) Self-organising groups: Conditions and constraints in a sociotechnical perspective. International Journal of Manpower19(5): 301–318.
107.
VidalM (2007a) Lean production, worker empowerment, and job satisfaction: A qualitative analysis and critique. Critical Sociology33(1–2): 247–278.
108.
VidalM (2007b) Manufacturing empowerment? ‘Employee involvement’ in the labour process after Fordism. Socio-Economic Review5(2): 197–232.
109.
WallTCorbettMMartinRet al. (1990) Advanced manufacturing technology, work design and performance: A change study. Journal of Applied Psychology75(6): 691–697.
110.
WallTCorderyJCleggC (2002) Empowerment, performance, and operational uncertainty: A theoretical integration. Applied Psychology: An International Review51(1): 146–169.
111.
WallTWoodSLeachD (2004) Empowerment and performance. In: CooperCLRobertsonIT (eds) International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology19. London: Wiley, pp. 1–46.
112.
WhitfieldKPooleM (1997) Organizing employment for high performance: Theories, evidence and policy. Organization Studies18(5): 745–764.
113.
WilkinsonBGambleJHumphreyJet al. (2001) The new international division of labour in Asian electronics: Work organization and human resources in Japan and Malaysia. Journal of Management Studies38(5): 675–695.
114.
WintertonJ (1994) Social and technological characteristics of coal-face work: A temporal and spatial analysis. Human Relations47(1): 89–118.
115.
WomackJJonesDRoosD (1990) The Machine that Changed the World. New York: Rawson.
116.
WoodS (1993) The Japanization of Fordism. Economic and Industrial Democracy14(4): 535–555.
117.
WoodSNolteSBurridgeMet al. (2015) Dimensions and location of high-involvement management: Fresh evidence from the UK Commission’s 2011 Employer Skills Survey. Human Resource Management Journal25(2): 166–183.
118.
WoodSVan VeldhovenMCroonMDe MenezesL (2012) Enriched job design, high involvement management and organizational performance: The mediating roles of job satisfaction and well-being. Human Relations65(4): 419–445.
119.
WrightBCorderyJ (1999) Production uncertainty as a contextual moderator of employee reactions to job design. Journal of Applied Psychology84(3): 456–463.
120.
ZoghiCMohrR (2011) The decentralization of decision making and employee involvement within the workplace: Evidence from four establishment datasets. British Journal of Industrial Relations49(4): 688–716.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
