Here is an essay on ‘Workers’ Participation in Management’ for class 11 and 12. Find paragraphs, long and short essays on ‘Workers’ Participation in Management’ especially written for school and college students.
Essay Contents:
- Essay on the Introduction to Workers’ Participation in Management
- Essay on the Concept of Participative Management
- Essay on the Development of Participative Management
- Essay on the Objectives of Participation
- Essay on the Levels of Workers’ Participation
- Essay on the Pre-Requisites for Effective Participation
Essay # 1. Introduction to Workers’ Participation in Management:
Workers’ participation in management decision making is a highly complex concept. The notion is not a new one. It has apparently existed since the beginning of the industrial revolution. However, its importance increased over a period of years due to the growth of large-scale enterprises, increase in work-force, paternalistic philosophy and practice of informal consultation. Moreover, the growth of professionalism in industry, development of the principle of social justice, transformation of traditional labor management relations, advent of democracy in industry have added new dimensions to the concept of participative management.
The philosophy of workers’ participation emphasizes democratic participation in decision-making, maximum employer-employee collaboration, minimum state intervention, realization of a greater measure of social justice, greater industrial efficiency and higher level of organizational health and effectiveness.
Participation, in empowering employees to take responsibility for their own jobs, can lead to better, more effective management and employee relations. Participative programs are largely responsible for raising morale, creativity and employee job satisfaction as well.
In essence, participative management is recognized as a source of organizational effectiveness. It is believed to have a great potential to bring about social changes that are directed at better social and economic order. However, the real benefits accruing would depend upon the extent of participation of employees in management in practice.
Essay # 2. Concept of Participative Management:
The concept of Participative Management has attracted considerable attention from academicians and practicing managers during the past decades. It has apparently existed since the beginning of the industrial revolution. However, its importance increased gradually over a period of years due to the growth of large- scale enterprises, increase in work-force, paternalistic philosophy and practice of informal consultation.
Moreover, the growth of professionalism in industry, advent of democracy, and development of the principle of social justice, transformation of traditional labor management relations have added new dimensions to the concept of participative management.
In simple words, the theory lying behind the concept of participative management may be stated as:
“The workers generally know the problems related to the work more accurately than others in the organization. They generally possess some views and suggestions relating to their work and have a desire to put them before the management. They expect that their suggestions find a due place in the formulation of policies affecting them. The management generally takes decisions on its- own and imposes them on the workers. The views and suggestions of workers may or may not be relevant but ignoring them creates doubts in minds of workers about the intentions of management. This gives rise to labor-management conflict and makes workers alienated from the management.”
The application of behavioral science theories to problems of industrial relations and productivity at the shop floor level has indicated the significance of participative management in the reduction of alienation among workers in the modern technological system, increased job satisfaction and morale among employees and achievement of greater efficiency.
The philosophy underlying participative management stresses democratic participation in decision-making, maximum employer-employee collaboration, minimum state intervention, realization of a greater measure of social justice, greater industrial efficiency, and higher level of organizational health and effectiveness.
Participative Management echoes the millennial vision of nineteenth century-thinkers while heralding the evolution of new forms of individual organizations under twentieth century pressures. It has not only remained a means through which workers and their organizations can put forward their views and influence decisions, but also has developed into a new management strategy.
The International Institute for Labor Studies defined participative management as “the participation resulting from practices which increase the scope for employee’s share of influence in decision-making at different tiers of organizational hierarchy with concomitant assumption of responsibility”.
In its broad sense, employee participation means associating representatives of workers at every stage of decision-making, as is done in former West Germany and Yugoslavia, a process by which the workers’ share in decision-making extends beyond the decisions that are implicit in the specific contents of the job they do. This, in actual practice, amounts to the workers having a share in the reaching of final managerial decisions in an enterprise.
Davis views participation as ‘mental and emotional involvement of persons in- group situations that encourage them to contribute to group goals and share responsibility for them. The involvement is emotional and psychological rather than mere muscular or physical. The persons who participate are ego-involved instead of merely task-involved. Participation motivates people to contribute. They are given an opportunity to release their own objectives of the organization.
The participants are not only to approve and agree, but also to suggest and opine. Participation encourages them to accept responsibility in their groups’ activities. It is a social process by which people become self-involved in an organization and want to see it work successfully. Managers who encourage participation merely share by getting others involved so that all may contribute but they still retain final authority and responsibility.
To McGregor participation is a formal method providing an opportunity for every member of the organization to contribute his brains and ingenuity as well as his physical efforts for the improvement of organizational effectiveness.
Mhetras considered the elements of participation as:
(a) Sharing of decision-making power with the lower ranks of the organization,
(b) Firm belief and confidence in the individual and his ability to contribute,
(c) Discarding of narrow conventional outlook of antagonism of interest and substituting it with community of purpose; and
(d) Establishing co-operation for the well-being of labor, management and industry.
Thus, Participative Management may be taken to cover all terms of association of workers and their representatives with the decision- making process, ranging from exchange of information, consultations, decisions and negotiations to more institutionalized forms, such as the presence of workers’ members on management or supervisory boards or even management by workers themselves as practiced in Yugoslavia.
Essay # 3. Development of Participative Management:
The participative management has its roots in the ‘Industrial revolution’ that began in the 17th century England. The industrial revolution resulted in mass production. The peasantry, craftsmen and artisans, unable to face the competition, were forced to quit their subsistence level of economic activity and enter large industrial enterprises as part of the huge work- force.
The owners of industries took advantage of their helplessness and exploited them to the maximum. Feudal system was giving way to the capitalism. There arose simultaneously some associations, mainly of skilled craftsmen aiming at a change in social and economic system of Great Britain. The main impetus behind such grouping was political rather than economic.
The Industrial Revolution resulted in class conflict and alienation of interest with serious repercussions on the industrial relations. The emergence of capitalism and socio-economic changes gave rise to a strong labor movement clamoring and fighting for the workers’ status, protecting them from exploitation of new factory employers and, at the same time, also, waging a political struggle for securing political rights with a view to emancipate the working class from the new serfdom by political and statutory action.
The movement was guided by philosophies of a number of socialist thinkers who were concerned with the problem of the status of workers in the factory organization and society and of the protection of workers against capitalist exploitation. Among other things, they pleaded for reforms in property rights and a fair deal to workers.
Among the early experiments in the area of workers’ control Robert Owen’s experiment is the most important. He wanted a reformation of the new order under which all production was to be socially organized and capital made servant of the social labor. He wanted the workers not to destroy the machinery of capitalism but to control it. He advocated participative management for achieving distributive social justice.
While Owen advocated producers’ co- operatives in Britain, in France St. Simon advocated an industrial order free of nobles and clergymen called idlers and desired the new manufacturing regime to combine the interest of the entrepreneur with those of the workers on the one hand and the consumers on the other.
Pierre- Joseph Proudhan, a French socialist, gave support to the movement for the democratization of the formation and functioning of trade- unions. John Stuart Mill, whose socialism was a product of individualism and utilitarianism, advocated for the co- operative association of all producers eliminating wage system and class conflict, while maintaining individual liberty.
Karl Marx gave a scientific basis to the ideals of socialism and envisaged more or less complete control of industry by the state as the representative of the working class. Marxism followed other socialism thoughts in different countries of Europe and Britain known as Reformism, Syndicalism, Fabianism, Guild Socialism and Christian Socialism. The reformists advocated reforms through parliamentary and State actions. They would accomplish all they desired through the intelligent use of their votes.
The Syndicalists laid stress on class war, direct struggle and action, and considered the State as an agency through which the capitalists exercised their authority and exploitation. The Fabianists, represented by G.B. Shaw, Webb, H.G. Wells, R. Macdonald, Lawrence and G.D.H. Cole, wanted the State Socialism, nationalization of public utility undertakings, extension of State authority and control over individual enterprises and desired co-operation and collaboration between employers and employees instead of conflicts and struggles.
The Guild Socialists advocated replacement of industrial capitalism by the producers’ association of workers. They wanted the entire fabric of economic system to change to eliminate capitalism and give power to workers of ownership, control and management. They advocated that industry should be owned by the democratic state that should look after the interests of the whole community. It should be controlled and managed by workers’ guilds by a charter from the state.
Even at the time when the socialist philosophy of Karl Marx was attracting followers in the continent, the trade unions were ‘working simply for the protection of interests of their members under capitalist by collective bargaining and the provisions of fringe benefits. This may be treated as the point of departure which led to the eventual acceptance fully or partly, of the concept of workers’ participation; ‘workers’ control’ remaining just a Utopian dream to be fulfilled sometime in future.
The emergence of political democracy gave rise to demand for industrial democracy and in a democratic society it is logical correlate of the urge to democratize all the major aspects of social life. It was thought that the process of democratization would remain incomplete if the industrial sector did not get included in its purview and the political democracy could not be sustained for long if it was not supplemented by the corresponding change in the industrial sphere.
The advent of democracy brought in the concept of social justice according to which an industry exists for production of goods and services required for the community and the maximization of profit was relegated to the background.
It was realized that complete control of industries by workers is neither feasible nor desirable, at least in political democracies, where the representatives of the people freely elected, has the power to curb the evils of capitalism, statehood and bureaucracy However, it was also thought that participative management would be sufficient to meet the needs of social justice.
The capitalist society began incorporating the democratic principles of liberty, equality and justice by adopting the ideals of Welfare State. Social security for the working class was more and more accepted as State responsibility. Workers were granted the right to organize themselves in trade unions and to pressurize employers to achieve their economic ends.
At the time of the First World War, it was realized that the sectional interests of employers and workers could be integrated and industrial conflict could be avoided by encouraging them to co- operate with each other and to resolve their differences through committees of joint consultation.
The establishment of International Labor Organization is an important landmark in the direction of employer-employee relations. During a special session of ILO held in Philadelphia in 1944, it was recognized that labor is not a commodity and freedom of expression and association are essential to sustain progress.
The ILO has adopted a number of international instruments expressing the desirability of consultation and co- operation between employers and workers with the undertaking. The need for effective internal communication and examination of workers’ grievances was felt. In the face of these changes, management evolved as a specialized science-cum-art. The application of social sciences to management took away a large part of the alienation- exploitation complex of Marxist and neo-Marxist doctrines and industrial relations were progressively humanized.
As technology grew in complexity and large corporations came into existence, industry remained no longer in the hands of capitalism; industrial organization was taken over by professional managers. The managers were prompted to introduce such strategies that could insure uninterrupted industrial activity. Professionalization of industrial management and the growing complexity of modern industrial organization compelled to search for a new system of management.
Since the beginning of 20th century, it has become everybody’s realization that a worker is not a marketable commodity but is a self-respecting human being. The Clayton Act of 1914 boldly declared that labor was not a commodity or an article of commerce and thus gave it due recognition.
It has been increasingly realized that the workers have feelings, emotions and aspirations like all other human beings and strive to fulfill them through the instrumentality of work from which they not only make their living but also derive self-satisfaction.
A man brings more to a factory than the work of his hands. He brings a part of his life- he lives it there with all its biological, social and psychological concomitants. He seeks satisfaction and meaning in that working life just as he does in his life as a citizen. He feels that just as a citizen has certain inherent rights and voice in determining and exercising those rights, he as a citizen of the enterprise in which he is employed and for whose benefits and prosperity he works, is entitled to right to have voice in determining the rules and regulations of the organization.
As a result of these developments, the old theories of industrial democracy became outmoded. Management and labor were increasingly recognized as interdependent groups rather than opponents of each other. At the beginning of this century, especially during the crisis of the First World War, it was realized in the West that the sectional interests of employers and workers could be integrated and industrial conflict avoided by encouraging them to cooperate with each other and to resolve their differences through committees of joint consultation.
Drucker conceived enterprises as important social institutions. Because of their strategic position in the society, the policies and practices of these institutions have to be in conformity with the major societal goals and values. The industrial organization should have goals broader than profit- making and that business corporations should substantially contribute to the realization of social goals and values.
Thus, workers’ participation may be viewed as:
(i) An instrument for increasing the efficiency of enterprises and establishing harmonious industrial relations;
(ii) A device for developing social education for promoting solidarity among workers and for tapping human talent;
(iii) A means for achieving industrial peace and harmony which leads to higher productivity and increased production;
(iv) A humanitarian act, elevating the status of a worker in the society;
(v) An ideological way of developing self-management and promoting industrial democracy.
Essay # 4. Objectives of Participation:
The scope and the extent of workers’ participation depend on the objectives to be achieved from the participative machinery in an organization. The objectives pursued by the various forms of participative management vary from country to country, from region to region and even from organization to organization, because the emergence of a specific form of participative management depends on several factors, like the social environment, the level of economic development, the political system prevalent in the country and, above all, the values held by owner-managers and workers. For the workers, it may be regarded as a means to increase their security while for the owners it may serve as a means to increase production and profit.
The objectives of participation may vary from country to country. But in countries like Germany, U.S.A. and even in Yugoslavia, workers’ participation has nothing to do with productivity. Virmani points out, Moreover, a few studies undertaken in Germany, Yugoslavia and even in U.S.A., suggest that there is necessarily no correlation between productivity and participation.
In West Germany the objectives of co- determination may be prevention of exploitation of workers either by owners or top managers (superiors), growth of economy through democratic process, resolution of conflict amicably between labor and management without disrupting industrial peace, obligation on the part of management to use authority as a trustee, sharing of financial and other information, introduce socialism through democratic means.
In Yugoslavia, the major objective of self-management is to overcome human alienation, alienation in the production process, technological alienation, over specialization, revolt against bureaucratic authority, technical obsolescence and fragmentary work leading to be crippled worker.
Workers’ council is the supreme body where the objective of participative management is to assign final authority to workers on overall matters relating to an undertaking. It aims at a democratic egalitarian distribution of influence, not sharing authority or power.
In France, participative management has mainly a consultative function, in addition to the welfare activities. Though the works committee has the right to send two of its representative to attend the meeting of the Board of Directors, these members do not have any voting rights. Their function chiefly concerns welfare activities.
In Algeria, the concept of participative management is linked with the socioeconomic and political program of redistribution of the political and economic power and democratization of the decision-making process.
In Israel, participation is to achieve the objectives of development of working class, nation- building through entrepreneurship and land-development, creation of a just egalitarian society and ensuring a high standard of living for the growing Jewish community.
In Tanzania, the socio-economic and political objectives were increase of harmony and co-operation in order to raise productivity, increase of responsibility on the side of workers, increase of discipline based on political consciousness and collective responsibility, security of the economy by handing over to workers the ownership and control of the means of production, development of man as an active member of the socialist society.
In Zambia, the implementation of the concept of industrial democracy has been an important ingredient in the political and socio-economic program to build up a socialist society on the philosophy of humanism.
The major objectives for introducing industrial participatory democracy have been to enable workers to take over together with the management structure the economic power from private hands, prepare workers to assure the responsibilities of running industries; and secure the mutual cooperation of workers, management and trade unions in the interest of industrial peace, improved working conditions and greater efficiency and productivity.
In Britain, its main objective is to look after productivity. The management takes participation as a means of effective use of human resources; trade unions consider it as a means of extending their power and influence on the management; the government views it as a panacea for solving industrial relation problems; the academicians consider it as a means for close involvement of the workers with the enterprise and the decisions which directly affect them; while others regard it as a countervailing weight to the managerial power.
The Joint Committees which are advisory in character aim consideration and discussion of changes in methods of production, safety and welfare of employees, training and education, work rules and personnel problems, and such other matters of mutual interest, except wages and other issues falling within the sphere of collective bargaining.
The scope of the committee is sometimes wide enough to include even matters normally reserved for collective bargaining, if the employees’ representatives on the committees happen to be shop stewards as well.
In India, the objectives set by managements, workers and government are entirely different. The workers’ expectation with the help of participative management is to achieve security, better wages, bonus etc. whereas the employers consider it as a means to fulfill their main interest, i.e., the maximization of profits; the government considers it as a means of increasing productivity and a part of dispute-resolving machinery.
Mainly participation has been viewed as a means of information-sharing concerning balance sheet, production, economic condition of the plant and a process of consultation on certain matters such as welfare programs, methods of work, safety etc.
Ranade is of the opinion that the objectives of workers’ participation in India include improving productivity, performance, quality and result as well as redressing the grievances of workers. In fact it is difficult to identify a few general objectives on the basis of the practices in India.
The various objectives of participative management may be categorized under the following major heads:
(1) Ethical or Moral Objectives:
Ethical and Moral Objectives are related to promote individual development and the extension of individual’s human rights at the work place and to bring the workers recognition, treatment and attention as a human being rather than as a mere statistical unit of production.
(2) Socio-Political Objectives:
Socio- political objectives put forward the principles of democratic self-government within the economy on the ground that since in a democratic system workers have the same political rights as other citizen, it seems odd that they should not be entitled to a say, within the undertakings where they are employed, in decisions which directly concern them.
The social objectives are mostly confined to improving the atmosphere in the undertaking and promoting better relations between management and personnel and also the fuller integration of workers into the operation of the undertaking.
(3) Economic Objectives:
Economic objectives are related directly or indirectly to increasing the efficiency of the undertaking. They are based on the assumption that by associating the workers with the decisions taken or by using sufficiently the knowledge, experience and intelligence of those who actually do the work, the quantity and quality of output and the utilization of labor, raw materials, and equipment as well as the introduction of new techniques; the industrial organization and methods and the labor relations are improved and the areas of conflict between management and labor are reduced.
Essay # 5. Levels of Workers’ Participation:
Workers’ participation is possible at all levels of management. Generally this depends on the nature of the functions that are performed, the strength of the workers, the number and variety of departments in an organization and the attitude of the trade union and of the management.
Broadly, there are four levels of participation:
1. Informative and Associative Participation:
Informative participation is at the initial level, where members are entitled to receive information and give opinion on matters of general economic importance, like:
(i) The state of market,
(ii) Production and sales program,
(iii) Reorganization of production methods and processes, and general running of the undertaking,
(iv) Circumstances affecting the economic position of the undertaking,
(v) Methods of manufacture and work,
(vi) The annual balance sheet, profit and loss statement and connected documents,
(vii) Policy changes concerned with production schedules, production,
(viii) Long- term plans for expansion, modernization, diversification and redevelopment,
(ix) Disciplinary action, and
(x) Such other matters as may be agreed upon.
2. Consultative Participation:
In consultative participation the representatives of the workers are consulted by the management on matters relating to administration of the Standing Orders and their amendment, introduction of new methods and techniques of production, fixation of production norms of men and machine at the unit as a whole. Compared to informative participation this is superior and involves a higher degree of sharing the views of the members and giving them an opportunity to express their feelings.
3. Administrative Participation:
Through administrative participation a greater degree of share in the authority and responsibility in management functions is provided in matters like administration of welfare measures, supervision of safety measures, fines and welfare funds, operation of vocational training and apprenticeship schemes, preparation of schedules of working hours, breaks and holidays, payment of rewards for valuable suggestions received from the workers, and any other matter as may be agreed upon by two parties.
4. Decisive Participation:
It is the highest level of participation, where workers are given an opportunity to take part in decision-making activities.
Thus participative management means participation by all classes of employees in all functions of an industry right from the stage of policy making till the final stage of its implementation. The participation at different levels will be of different types. At the execution level, all the workers connected with the job will participate in formulating a plan for its efficient execution. In the middle level different groups of workers will be represented by their duly elected representatives while at the highest level (policy and planning level) the workers will be represented by the man or group of men selected by different groups at all the levels.
Essay # 6. Pre-Requisites for Effective Participation:
The pre-requisites for the success of any scheme of participative management are the following:
1. Strong, Democratic and Representative Union:
There should be a strong, democratic and representative unionism for the success of participative management. Trade union politicization and multiplicity militate against the spirit of participation. It is desirable to have participation of workers directly through their representative at the plant level rather than through the external trade union leaders, who may not be aware of the plant problems.
2. Clearly Formulated Objective:
Mutually-agreed and clearly formulated objective is another important pre-requisite for the success of participative management; for instance, if the objective of participation is to increase productivity alone, then participation may fail. Increased productivity can be achieved through the autocratic style of leadership which is against the spirit of participation. Employees would be in favor of participation when they find autonomy and satisfaction of their higher order needs of their work.
3. Feeling of Participation:
There should also be a feeling of participation at all levels. Too much emphasis on hierarchical structure and close supervision is not conducive to participation. The working environment must be congenial enough to establish and maintain a participatory culture. The style of supervision and organizational culture are the two most important elements for the success of the participative management.
4. Effective Consultation:
If the management effectively consults the workers, it inculcates enthusiasm in them in the formulation of policies that affect them directly. They should have a say in all issues affecting them, including personnel and economic matters. There should be free and frank sharing of information with the worker representatives.
5. Favorable Attitudes and Outlook:
Both the management and the workers must develop favorable attitudes and outlook. They must have full faith in the soundness of the philosophy underlying the concept of labor participation. A relationship based on mutual trust and respect is essential for effective participation.
6. Legislative Support:
Legislative support is necessary to ensure that rights of management and the workers are recognized and protected. The parties may not use the legal framework but the fact that it exists may make them much more responsible and keenly conscious of each other’s rights and obligations.