دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی مکانیسم صدای گروهی، HRM و عملکرد سازمانی در شرکت های تولیدی - الزویر 2018

abstract

The literature on employee voice has grown enormously over the past decades. However, the relationships between different employee voice mechanisms and organizational performance are far from being fully understood, and the existing research shows mixed evidence. Moreover, the HRM literature tends to concentrate on individual voice mechanisms (e.g. employee involvement) and to underestimate the role that collective voice may have in the HRM performance relationship. This paper aims to analyze how collective employee voice mechanisms (i.e. union voice and team voice) affect organizational productivity and how these relationships vary when voice mechanisms are adopted in combination with other HRM practices (i.e. variable pay, training, performance appraisals and multitasking). The analysis of a sample of 223 Italian manufacturing firms matched with an external database (AIDA) containing balance sheet information found that union voice is positively related to labor productivity, while team voice does not show any significant relationship with labor productivity. Moreover, both union and team voice have important moderation effects in the HRM-performance relationship. Union voice moderates positively the relationship between variable pay and performance and negatively the relationship between training and performance. Team voice positively moderates the relationship between training and performance. The implications of these findings are discussed.

 Conclusion

The aim of this paper was to contribute to the advancement of the debate on employee voice and performance by analyzing how collective employee voice mechanisms (i.e., union voice and team voice) affect organizational productivity and how these relationships vary when voice mechanisms are adopted in combination with other HRM practices. Despite the debate on union decline and the (supposed) superiority of direct voice, union voice was found to be positively related to labor productivity, whereas team voice did not show any significant relationship with organizational performance. Interestingly, collective voice mechanisms were also found to moderate the relationship between some high-performance HRM practices and productivity, such as variable pay and training. Specifically, the positive relationship between variable pay and productivity is significant only at the high level of union voice, whereas the positive relationship of training is stronger when team voice is high and when union voice is low. Overall, these results confirm the need to adopt research frameworks that are able to integrate different theoretical perspectives when analyzing the role of employee voice in contemporary workplaces (Townsend & Wilkinson, 2014; Barry & Wilkinson, 2016; and Kaufman, 2015). Focusing only on direct (and individual) voice mechanisms means, at best, having a partial representation of the contribution thatemployee voice can make to organizational performance.