Jag efterforskade lite efter jag skapade tråden. Hittade följande dokument
"Ideas about industrial democracy are quite old, and may be traced back to the industrial revolution.
Two prominent writers in the Anglo-Saxon tradition were the political and social theorists J.S. Mill,
in the nineteenth century, and G.D.H. Cole, an Oxford academic, in the early twentieth century. (For
a discussion of their ideas, see Pateman, 1970)"
John Stuart Mill anses ju vara grundaren av den moderna liberalismen. Även då jag inte håller med om hans teser etiskt (utilitarism) ibland kan detta vara något då jag i grunden ser mig som liberal, och det var detta som intresserade mig för detta koncept. Vilket gör att detta gör mig minst sagt positivt förvånad. "I'm not alone"
Argument för självförvaltning enligt det dokumentet är följande.
""Given that there has been much debate about participation, it is important to examine the evidence to ascertain what support it gives to theories of participation. The general benefits which are claimed to arise from greater participation, for both employees-and management, include the following increased employee job satisfaction and personal fulfilment, encouragement of greater initiative and reduction in worker alienation, less industrial conflict, greater productivity and efficiency, reduced absenteeism and labour turnover, and greater flexibility and adaptability to increasing technological change. It is clear that these arguments can be divided broadly into two categories: psychological and economic. Moreover, they are susceptible to empirical testing, and some evidence arising from this is reviewed below. Another type of argument has also been advanced in favour of greater participation. The view has been put that the qualities of good citizenship and active participation in the wider political sphere can only be fostered by greater worker participation in industry. Pateman argues that a genuinely healthy political democracy depends on developing widespread grassroots participation in the workplace and industry generally. (Pateman 1970, 1983) This type of argument may be regarded as essentially moral in nature, and as such cannot be proven or disproven by empirical research. (O'Brien, 1978, p. l87.) As Vaughan ironically comments, the advantage of moral theories is that they are "... much less vulnerable to refutation." (Vaughan, 1984,p. 181.) Nevertheless, because the 'good citizenship' argument cannot be proved empirically, it should not necessarily be dismissed. Democratic ideas and ideals are a major feature of the structure of Australian society. Particularly with an increasingly educated workforce, industrial structures reflecting authoritarian values are likely to generate conflict between workers and management if they are seen to be completely at variance with political structures reflecting democratic ideas. In Vaughan's (1984) view, the arguments in favour of employee participation can be reduced to three
(1). the need and desire of workers to play an active role in the design and control of work processes;
(2). improved organisational performance; and
(3). workers' rights to participate in decisions that will affect them. (Vaughan, 1984, pp. 166-7).
At a more pragmatic level, some of the psychological and economic arguments referred to above can be, and have been, subjected to empirical analysis. O'Brien points out that the international literature on job characteristics and worker satisfaction which is extensive, and is based on employee surveys in many countries, has generally concluded that workers whose jobs are low in autonomy, variety and skill level tend to be dissatisfied with their work. From this the conclusion has been drawn that improving workers' autonomy by giving them more right to participate in the organisation of their work will improve job satisfaction and lead to higher productivity. However, he warns that there are methodological flaws in the research on which this conclusion is based. He also points out that some workers have an instrumental attitude to work, and do not care about influence over management decisions. (O'Brien, 1977). A large-scale Australian survey of 1400 respondents in the Adelaide area, which sought to avoid these pitfalls, was carried out by O'Brien, Dowling and Kabanoff (1978). The study sought to measure the relationship between job satisfaction, on the one hand, and skill utilisation, influence, variety, pressure and interaction on the other. Positive relationships were found between job satisfaction, on the one hand, and skill utilisation, variety and influence, on the other. However, the strongest correlation was between job satisfaction and skill utilisation. O'Brien concludes that this suggests that increasing worker influence will not increase worker satisfaction unless skill utilisation is also improved. (O'Brien, 1978, p. l91.) Furthermore, as he also points out, other research findings have shown that it is difficult to prove that increased job satisfaction leads to higher productivity. The reason is that there is a number of intervening variables which may enter into the relationship. They include work group norms, matches between skill levels and job requirements, limitations imposed on performance by technology, and quality of supervision. (O'Brien, 1978, . pp. l89-91.) Meta-analytic reviews by Locke and Schweiger (1979) and Miller and Monge (1986) found a positive relationship overall between participation and job satisfaction in the studies surveyed, although links between participation and productivity were much weaker. Thus, while the general psychological and economic arguments about the positive relationship between worker participation and workers satisfaction and productivity are plausible, and there is some evidence to support them, they cannot be regarded as having been proven. Research findings overall suggest that participation will not invariably have positive effects on employee satisfaction and performance, unless certain conditions are fulfilled. According to Stanton (1993) these include conditions that employees:
(1). seek to fulfil ego needs through work;
(2). have the necessary intelligence, education and experience to assume aadditional responsibilities;
(3). are educated and skilled to a level capable of contributing to the organisation's performance;
(4). are interested in having a say in matters affecting them in the workplace;
(5). do not feel anxious, uncomfortable or insecure in unstructured or ill-defined work situations;
(6). are high in self-reliance and self-confidence;
(7). are interested in involvement in decision-making; and
(8). identify with the goals and objectives of the organisation.
As will be apparent, this is a formidable list of contingencies indeed!
Thus, the outcome of introducing more real participative decision-making in industrial organisations still remains uncertain. This is particularly true in an era of greater competition and a difficult economic environment, as even many supporters of greater participation concede. (Vaughan, 1984,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sammanslagning 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Tror att detta togs upp i Michael Moores "Capitalism - a love story".
Det stämmer men han är knappast först.
Nackdelarna är att företaget kan komma att generera mindre pengar.
Finns det något som tyder på det?
Det är direkt arbetardemokrati.
Vad är egenvärdet i direkt demokrati? Dessutom vad jag minns så stämmer detta inte då tex bostadsrättsföreningar är självförvaltningar. Dom är generellt sätt inte direktdemokratier.
Dessutom skulle inte de kortsiktiga vinster som kännetecknar dagens kapitalism vara lika relevanta, så risken för den typ av kriser vi ser just nu skulle sjunka.
Jag håller med dig, kortsiktiga vinster vid kognitivt krävande jobb tror jag inte på. Men din premiss om "dagens kapitalism" osv låter jag vara osagt.
Det är inte ens omöjligt att ha arbetsledare samtidigt som man har självförvaltning.
Enligt vilken definition då?