Adoption of Techno-Organizational Innovations, and Industrial Relations in Manifacturing Firms: An Analysis for Local Industrial System

Both practitioners and those who contribute to the economic and managerial literature recognize that improving firm performance requires both organizational and technological innovation. For the most part, the literature, both theoretical and empirical, concentrates on one or the other aspect, but since the two types of innovation are likely to co-evolve with mutual influence, empirical analysis should concentrate on both. This paper primarily addresses the relevance of labour participation and human resource management practices to both types of innovation. It results from a project designed to study various forms of flexibility in labour management and industrial relations in a sample of industrial firms in Reggio Emilia, a province within the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy. The core of the paper looks at the innovations managers have adopted and the extent to which employee involvement played a part in the process. A crucial distinction is between the direct involvement of employees, and indirect involvement mediated by union organisation and union officials. We see the factors which lead to techo-organizational innovations and their diffusion as operating within an industrial relations context, the nature and quality of which constrains managers' innovative initiative. The econometric work focuses on the explaining factors of techno-organisational innovations, being firm performance indicators, industrial relations indices, measures of labour flexibility and of structural characteristics of the firms. The variables which seem to be important are: firm size, the flatness of the hierarchical structure, the use of flexible contracts in new hiring, the quality of industrial relations, past profitability, access to capital markets, and low levels of labour productivity. The significance of these various factors varies with the type of innovation.

[1]  E. Tortia,et al.  ORGANISATIONAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS IN MANUFACTURING FIRMS: DIFFUSION AND DETERMINANTS , 2003 .

[2]  S. Mizrahi.  Workers' Participation in Decision-Making Processes and Firm Stability , 2002 .

[3]  Takao Kato,et al.  The Productivity Effects of Participatory Employment Practices: Evidence from New Japanese Panel Data , 2002 .

[4]  Nicolai Juul Foss,et al.  Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics Authority and Discretion : Tensions, Credible Delegation and Implications for New Organizational Forms Authority and Discretion: Tensions, Credible Delegation and Implications for New Organizational Forms , 2022 .

[5]  A. Kalleberg.  Organizing Flexibility: The Flexible Firm in a New Century , 2001 .

[6]  Clive Belfield,et al.  Updating the Determinants of Firm Performance: Estimation using the 1998 UK Workplace Employee Relations Survey , 2001 .

[7]  Rick Delbridge,et al.  Employee Perceptions of Job Influence and Organizational Participation Employee Perceptions , 2001 .

[8]  R. Lansbury,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Developments in Industrial Democracy , 2001 .

[9]  Saul A. Rubinstein.  A Different Kind of Union: Balancing Co‐Management and Representation , 2001 .

[10]  John Godard,et al.  Beyond the High-Performance Paradigm? An Analysis of Variation in Canadian Managerial Perceptions of Reform Programme Effectiveness , 2001 .

[11]  Sandra E. Black,et al.  How to Compete: The Impact of Workplace Practices and Information Technology on Productivity , 1997, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[12]  C. Antonelli.  Collective Knowledge Communication and Innovation: The Evidence of Technological Districts , 2000 .

[13]  Xiangdong Wei,et al.  Worker participation and firm performance : evidence from Germany and Britain , 2000 .

[14]  Keith Leslie Whitfield,et al.  High-Performance Workplaces, Training, and the Distribution of Skills , 2000 .

[15]  Roderick D. Iverson,et al.  Industrial Relations Climate, Attendance Behaviour and the Role of Trade Unions , 1999 .

[16]  Philip Cooke,et al.  Small Firms, Social Capital and the Enhancement of Business Performance Through Innovation Programmes , 1999 .

[17]  Stephen Wood,et al.  Getting the Measure of the Transformed High-Performance Organization , 1999 .

[18]  Paul Thompson,et al.  THE POLITICS OF PARTNERSHIP ? INNOVATION IN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS IN THE SCOTTISH SPIRITS INDUSTRY , 1998 .

[19]  Stephen Procter,et al.  British Manufacturing Organization and Workplace Industrial Relations: Some Attributes of the New Flexible , 1998 .

[20]  J. S. Long,et al.  Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables , 1997 .

[21]  John Paul Macduffie,et al.  The Adoption of High‐Involvement Work Practices , 1996 .

[22]  David Metcalf,et al.  Participation, contingent pay, representation and workplace performance: evidence from Great Britain , 1995 .

[23]  Leon A.G. Oerlemans,et al.  National Systems of Innovation : Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning , 2012 .

[24]  Leslie E. Papke,et al.  Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates , 1993 .

[25]  R. Melnick.  The Politics of Partnership , 1985 .

[26]  Masahiko Aoki,et al.  A Model of the Firm as a Stockholder-Employee Cooperative Game , 2013 .

[27]  Peter E. Kennedy,et al.  A Guide to Econometrics , 1980 .