Labor Relations in Transition: Wages, Employment, and Industrial Conflict in Russia.

fore exists for studying the effects of organizational practices on individuals with variables measured at the organizational level rather than based on the self-reports of individuals. Some peculiarities of the study will be evident to readers with an interest in industrial relations, and I will mention two. First, several of the papers consider the effects of labor markets on organizational structure and HR practice, but in each case the measure of labor market conditions is a local unemployment rate from 1986. Those who believe that HR practices must be understood in the context of the supply of labor may be unsettled by this measure, for there is little explanation of the choice, nor is there discussion of possible effects of the lag between the measure and the 1991 NOS. Second, the survey's treatment of unionization is unusual. Rather than ask directly what share of which employees in establishments were unionized, the NOS asked respondents to provide indirect measures (such as a subjective assessment of the importance of collective bargaining in determining wage levels). The NOS, and the chapters in Organizations in America, are full of theory and data that could inspire future researchers from a variety of disciplines. The work here draws heavily on the sociological literature, as well as on recent advances in industrial relations research (for example, the MIT "Transformation" school is prominently featured), and effectively conceptualizes, models, and explains the effects surrounding institutions have on organizations. The authors give less detailed attention to what might be seen as efficiency-related rivers of practice. They are unable to unravel many of the effects of technology on organizations; here, they correctly advocate more contextualized, sector-specific research. They also draw relatively little from theoretical developments in nascent sub-fields such as the Economics of Organizations or Strategic Human Resource Management. The authors conclude by encouraging further work with the NOS data. Not only do they issue researchers a direct invitation, but they also provide an Appendix telling readers where and how to obtain the data. (A minor point: the authors might also have included the full NOS questionnaire itself. While a reader can piece together most of the questions, there is no way to tell exactly what was and was not included in the survey.) Regardless of theoretical bent, a researcher undertaking to explain why different organizations adopt different HR practices will find Organizations in America an excellent resource.