Academic research on employee participation has lost some of the radicalism and commitment to progressive practice that was evident through much of the 20th century, becoming more detached and coldly evaluative. While idealistic concerns are still apparent in the regular condemnation of inauthentic participation, the focus of scholarly activity is largely restricted to analysis and explanation, without following through to an explicit logic of practice. Recalling how value commitments influenced the work of earlier generations of theorist practitioners, this article aims to reinvigorate debate about role definitions and the scope of academic contributions. By engaging with recent, though rare, examples of practically focused output in the traditions of socio-technical systems thinking and critical management studies, it argues for a grounded idealism that anchors applied research to local rather than `top driven' insights and priorities.
Alasoini, T. (2006) `In Search of Generative Results: A New Generation of Programmes to Develop Work Organisation', Economic and Industrial Democracy27(1): 9-37.
2.
Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (1992) `On the Idea of Emancipation in Management and Organisation Studies', Academy of Management Review17(3): 432-64.
3.
Batstone, E. (1979) `Systems of Domination, Accommodation and Industrial Democracy', in T. Burns et al. (eds) Work and Power, pp. 249-72. London: Sage.
4.
Beirne, M. (2006) Empowerment and Innovation: Managers, Principles and Reflective Practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
5.
Berggren, C. (1992) The Volvo Experience: Alternatives to Lean Production in the Swedish Auto Industry. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
6.
Bolweg, J. (1976) Job Design and Industrial Democracy. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
7.
Brown, R. (1992) Understanding Industrial Organisations. London: Routledge.
8.
Burnes, B. (2004) `Kurt Lewin and the Planned Approach to Change: A Re-appraisal', Journal of Management Studies41(6): 977-1002.
9.
Burns, T. (1967) `Sociological Explanation', British Journal of Sociology18(4): 353-69.
10.
Clarke, T. (1977) `Industrial Democracy: The Institutionalized Suppression of Industrial Conflict?', in T. Clarke and L. Clements (eds), Trade Unions Under Capitalism, pp. 351-82. Glasgow: Fontana/Collins .
11.
Collins, D. (2000) Management Fads and Buzzwords. London: Routledge.
12.
Cotton, J. (1993) Employee Involvement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13.
Elias, N. (1987) Involvement and Detachment. Oxford: Blackwell.
14.
Fay, B. (1987) Critical Social Science. Cambridge : Polity Press.
15.
Fincham, R. (1989) `Natural Workgroups and the Process of Job Design' , Employee Relations11(6): 17-22.
16.
Goulding, D. and Currie, D. (eds) (2000) Thinking About Management: A Reflective Practice Approach. London: Routledge.
17.
Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (eds) (1991) Design at Work. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
Gustavsen, B. (1979) `Liberation of Work and the Role of Social Research' , in T. Burns et al. (eds) Work and Power, pp. 341-56. London: Sage.
19.
Gustavsen, B., Finne, H. and Oscarsson, B. (2001) Creating Connections: The Role of Social Research in Innovation Policy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
20.
Harley, B.,Hyman, J. and Thompson, P. (eds) ( 2005) Participation and Democracy at Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
Heller, F. (2003) `Participation and Power: A Critical Assessment' , Applied Psychology52(1): 144-63.
22.
Hindess, B. (1982) `Power, Interests and the Outcomes of Struggles' , Sociology16(4): 498-511.
23.
Hyman, J. and Mason, R. (1995) Managing Employee Involvement and Participation . London: Sage.
24.
Kelly, J. (1985) `Management's Redesign of Work', in D. Knights, H. Willmott and D. Collinson (eds) Job Redesign , pp. 30-51. Aldershot: Gower.
25.
Legge, K. (1978) Power, Innovation and Problem Solving in Personnel Management. London: McGraw Hill .
26.
Lewin, K. (1946) `Action Research and Minority Problems', in G. Lewin (ed.) Resolving Social Conflict, pp. 201-16. London: Harper & Row.
27.
Loverage, R. (1980) `What is Participation?', British Journal of Industrial Relations18(3): 297-317.
28.
Lukes, S. (1976) Power: A Radical View. London : Macmillan.
29.
Mandel, E. (1973) `The Debate on Workers' Control', in G. Hunnius et al. (eds) Workers Control, pp. 344-73. New York: Random House.
30.
Mueller, K., Procter, S. and Buchanan, D. (2000) `Teamworking in its Context(s)', Human Relations53(11): 1387-1424.
31.
Nord, W. and Jermier, J. (1992) `Critical Social Science for Managers', in M. Alvesson and H. Willmott (eds) Critical Management Studies, pp. 202-22. London : Sage.
32.
Purser, R. and Cabana, S. (1998) The Self-Managing Organization. New York: Free Press.
33.
Ramsay, H. (1977) `Cycles of Control: Worker Participation in Sociological and Historical Perspective', Sociology11(3): 481-506.
34.
Ramsay, H. (1980) `Phantom Participation: Patterns of Power and Conflict' , Industrial Relations Journal11(3): 46-59.
35.
Sandberg, A. (ed.) (1995) Enriching Production. Aldershot: Avebury.
36.
Selznick, P. (1966) TVA and the Grass Roots. New York: Harper & Row.
37.
Smith, C. and Thompson, P. (1998) `Re-Evaluating the Labour Process Debate', Economic and Industrial Democracy, 19(4): 551-77.
38.
Thompson, P. (1986) `Crawling from the Wreckage: The Labour Process and the Politics of Production', paper to the 4th Aston/UMIST Conference on Organization and Control of the Labour Process, April 1986.
39.
Thompson, P. (2005) `Brands, Boundaries and Bandwagons', in C. Grey and H. Willmott (eds) Critical Management Studies: A Reader, pp. 364-82. Oxford : OUP.
40.
Trist, E. (1963) Organisational Choice. London : Tavistock.
41.
Warhurst, C. (2005) `The Knowledge Economy: An Opportunity for Radical Workplace Intervention?' Budapest Management Review30(7/8): 78-83.
42.
Watson, T.J. (2004) `HRM and Critical Social Science Analysis', Journal of Management Studies41(3): 447-67.
