Résumés
Abstract
In this study, we examine the role of mutual trustworthiness between labour representatives and management and its relationship with the adoption of High Performance Work Systems (HPWS) in the Korean employment relations context. We argue that trustworthiness is a feature of the parties to the exchange, as opposed to trust, which explains the nature of exchange relationships. We follow existing literature on trustworthiness and agree that it is composed of three variables, i.e., ability, integrity, and benevolence. We test the effects of these three variables as important antecedents for the adoption of HPWS at the workplace level. Using the National Establishment Survey 2009 conducted by Statistics Korea as a sample frame, we survey a representative sample of Korean establishments. These data consist of 1,353 paired responses from labour representatives and managers.
Our results show that labour-management mutual ability trustworthiness (MAT) has a positive and significant relationship with the adoption of high performance work systems ( Hypothesis 1 ); mutual benevolence trustworthiness (MBT) has a positive and significant relationship with the adoption of high performance work systems ( Hypothesis 2 ); and mutual integrity trustworthiness (MIT) has a positive and significant relationship with the adoption of high performance work systems ( Hypothesis 3 ). These results show that mutual trustworthiness in Korean employment relations is an important antecedent for the adoption of HPWS and can enable Korean industry to improve its position in the global economy. In the final analysis, it is implied that employment relations actors pursuing cooperative employment practices should ensure the development of a virtuous cycle of mutual trustworthiness.
Keywords:
- mutual trustworthiness,
- cooperative employment relations,
- high performance work systems,
- Korea
Résumé
Dans cette étude, nous examinons le rôle de la loyauté mutuelle entre les représentants syndicaux et la direction ainsi que sa relation avec l’adoption de systèmes de travail à haute performance dans le contexte des relations de travail en Corée. Nous soutenons que la loyauté est une caractéristique des parties à l’échange, par opposition à la confiance qui explique la nature des relations d’échange. Nous suivons la littérature existante sur la loyauté et convenons qu’elle est composée de trois variables, à savoir, la capacité, l’intégrité et la bienveillance. Nous testons les effets de ces trois variables comme les antécédents importants pour l’adoption de pratiques mobilisatrices au niveau du lieu de travail. Utilisation de l’Enquête nationale 2009 menée par Statistique Corée comme base de sondage, nous passons en revue un échantillon représentatif d’établissements coréens. Ces données se composent de 1353 réponses appariées de représentants syndicaux et la direction.
Nos résultats montrent que la capacité de loyauté mutuelle entre les représentants syndicaux et la direction a une relation positive et significative avec l’adoption des systèmes de travail à haute performance (Hypothèse 1); la bienveillance de la loyauté mutuelle a une relation positive et significative avec l’adoption des systèmes de travail à haute performance (hypothèse 2); t l’intégrité de la loyauté mutuelle a une relation positive et significative avec l’adoption des systèmes de travail à haute performance (Hypothèse 3). Ces résultats montrent que la loyauté mutuelle dans les relations d’emploi coréennes est un antécédent important pour l’adoption de pratiques mobilisatrices et peut permettre à l’industrie coréenne d’améliorer sa position dans l’économie mondiale. En dernière analyse, cela implique que les acteurs des relations d’emploi qui adoptent des pratiques coopératives de travail devraient assurer le développement d’un cercle vertueux de la loyauté mutuelle.
Mots-clés :
- loyauté mutuelle,
- contexte professionnel coopératif,
- systèmes de travail à haute performance,
- Corée
Resumen
Este estudio examina el rol de la fiabilidad mutua entre los representantes de los trabajadores y de la dirección y su relación con la adopción de sistemas de trabajo a alto rendimiento (STAR) en el contexto Coreano de relaciones de empleo. Se argumenta que la fiabilidad es una característica de las partes en el intercambio, opuesta a la confianza, que explica la naturaleza de las relaciones de intercambio. Según la literatura existente, la fiabilidad se compone de tres variables, la capacidad, la integridad y la benevolencia. Se evalúan los efectos de estas tres variables como antecedentes importantes para la adopción de STAR a nivel del lugar de trabajo. La Encuesta nacional de establecimientos 2009 realizada por Estadísticas Corea sirvió de base para el diseño de una encuesta con una muestra representativa de establecimientos Coréanos. Se obtuvo así 1 353 respuestas apareadas de representantes laborales y directivos.
Nuestros resultados muestran que la capacidad de fiabilidad mutua (CFM) entre trabajadores y directivos tiene una relación positiva y significativa con la adopción de sistemas de trabajo a alto rendimiento (STAR) (hipótesis 1); la benevolencia de la fiabilidad mutua (BFM) tiene una relación positiva y significativa con la adopción de STAR (hipótesis 2), y la integridad de la fiabilidad mutua (IFM) tiene un relación positiva y significativa con la adopción de STAR (hipótesis 3). Estos resultados muestran que la fiabilidad mutua en las relaciones de empleo en Corea es un antecedente importante para la adopción de STAR y puede habilitar la industria Coreana a mejorar su posición en la economía global. Por último, se deduce del análisis que los actores de las relaciones de empleo que promueven prácticas cooperativas deberían asegurarse del desarrollo de un ciclo virtuoso de fiabilidad mutua.
Palabras clave:
- fiabilidad mutua,
- relaciones laborales cooperativas,
- sistemas de trabajo a alto rendimiento,
- Corea
Parties annexes
References
- Angle, Harold L. and James L. Perry. 1986. Dual Commitment and Labor-Management Relationship Climates. The Academy of Management Journal, 29, 31-50.
- Appelbaum, Eileen and Rosemary Batt. 1994. The New American Workplace: Transforming Work Systems in the United States. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
- Bae, Johngseok and John J. Lawler. 2000. Organizational and HRM Strategies in Korea: Impact on Firm Performance in an Emerging Economy. The Academy of Management Journal, 43 (3), 502-517.
- Barney, Jay and Mark Hansen. 1994. Trustworthiness as a Source of Competitive Advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15[Special Issue], 175-190.
- Bews, Neville and Gedeon Rossouw. 2002. A Role in Business Ethics in Facilitating Trustworthiness. Journal of Business Ethics, 377-389.
- Braverman, Harry. 1974. Labor and Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly Review Books.
- Blau, Peter. 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
- Caldwell, Cam and Hansen, Mark. 2010. Trustworthiness, Governess, and Wealth Creation. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 173-188.
- Caldwell, Cam, Linda Hayes, Ranjan Karri and Patricia Bernal. 2008. Ethical Stewardship-Implications for Leadership and Trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 153-164.
- Cho, Yonjoo, Hye-Young Park and Stacey Wagner. 1999. Training in a Changing Korea. Training and Development, May, 98-99.
- Colquitt, Jason, Brent Scott and Jeffery LePine, A. 2007. Trust, Trustworthiness, and Trust Propensity: A Meta-Analytic Test of Their Unique Relationships with Risk Taking and Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (4), 909-927.
- Dietz, Graham. 2004. Partnership and the Development of Trust in British Workplaces. Human Resource Management Journal, 14 (1), 5-24.
- Dore, Ronald. 1983. Goodwill and the Spirit of Market Capitalism. British Journal of Sociology. XXXIV (4), 459-482.
- Dyer, Jeffery and Wujin, Chu. 2003. The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing Transaction Costs and Improving Performance: Empirical Evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea. Journal of Organization Science, 14 (1), 57-68.
- Eisenberger, Robert, Jim Cummings, Stephen Armeli and Patrick Lynch. 1997. Perceived Organizational Support, Discretionary Treatment, and Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (5), 812.
- Fox, Alan. 1974. Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations. London: Faber and Faber.
- Freeman, Richard and James Medoff. 1984. What Do Unions Do? New York: Basic Books.
- Frenkel, Stephen and Byoung-Hoon Lee. 2010. Do High Performance Work Practices Work in South Korea? Industrial Relations Journal, 41 (5), 479-504.
- Fukuyama, Francis. 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press
- Galang, Maria. 1999. Stakeholders in High-Performance Work Systems. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10, 287-305.
- Godard, John. 1991. The Progressive HRM Paradigm: A Theoretical and Empirical Re-examination. Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 46 (2), 378-400.
- Godard, John. 2004. A Critical Assessment of the High-Performance Paradigm. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42 (2), 349-378.
- Godard, John and john Delaney. 2000. Reflections on the High Performance Paradigm’s Implications for IR as a Field. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 53 (2), 482-502.
- Gouldner, Alvin. 1960. The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-179.
- Guest, David, William Brown, Riccardo Peccei and Katy Huxley. 2008. Does Partnership at Work Increase Trust? An Analysis Based on the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. Industrial Relations Journal, 39 (2), 124-152.
- Hansen, Nina, K and Dorothea Alewell. 2013. Employment Systems as Governance Mechanisms of Human Capital and Capability Development. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24 (11), 2131-2153.
- Ichniowski, Casey, Thomas Kochan, David Levine, Craig Olson and George Strauss. 1996. What Works at Work: Overview and Assessment. Industrial Relations, 35 (3), 299-333.
- Kaufman, Bruce and David Levine. 2000. An Economic Analysis of Employee Representation, in Bruce E. Kaufman and David I. Levine, eds., Nonunion Employee Representation: History, Contemporary Practice, and Policy. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 149-175.
- Kim, Dong-One. 2004. Human Resource Management, in W. Lee (ed.), Labour in Korea: 1987-2002 (Seoul, Korea Labour Institute), 243-283.
- Kim, Dong-One and Jae-Hyeon Ahn. 2011. Industrial Relations in Korea: Focusing on Developments Since the 1997-1998 Financial Crisis., Korean Academy of Management, International Symposium.
- Kim, Dong-One and Seongsu Kim. 2003. Globalization, Financial Crisis, and Industrial Relations: The Case of South Korea. Industrial Relations, 42 (3), 341-367.
- Kim, Dong-One and Sung Soo Park. 1997. Changing Patterns of Pay Systems in Japan and Korea: From Seniority to Performance. International Journal of Employment Studies, 5 (2), 117-134.
- Kim, Dong-One and Hyun-Ki Kim. 2004. A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Unions and Non-union Works Councils in Korea: Can Non-union Employee Representation Substitute for Trade Unionism? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15 (6), 1069-1094.
- Kim, Sunghoon and Patrick Wright. 2010. Putting Strategic Human Resource Management in Context: A Contextualized Model of High Commitment Work Systems and its Implications in China., Management and Organization Review, 7, 153-174.
- Kochan, Thomas, Harry Katz and Robert McKersie. 1994. The Transformation of American Industrial Relations. Ithaca, NY: ILR-Cornell University Press, 1994.
- Kochan, Thomas and Paul Osterman. 1994. The Mutual Gains Enterprise: Forging a Winning Partnership among Labor, Management and Government, Boston Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
- Kong, Tat Yan. 2012. Cooperation in Unlikely Settings: The Rise of Cooperative Labor Relations among Leading South Korean Firms. Politics and Society. 40 (3), 425-452.
- Korea Labor Institute. 2010. KLI Labor Statistics. Seoul: Korea Labor Institute.
- Lee, Jiman and Deog-Ro Lee. 2009. Labor-Management Partnership at Korean Firms: Its Effect on Organizational Performance and Industrial Relations Quality. Personnel Review. 38 (4), 432-452.
- Lewis, David and Andrew Weigert. 1985. Trust as a Social Reality. Social Forces, 63, 967-985.
- Liu, Wenchuan, James Guthrie, Patrick Flood and Sarah MacCurtain. 2009. Unions and the Adoption of High Performance Work Systems: Does Employment Security Play a Role?, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 63, 109-127.
- Locke, Edwin. 1982. The Ideas of Frederick W. Taylor: An Evaluation, Academy of Management Review, 4 (1), 14-24.
- Lui, Steven, Chung-Ming Lau and Hang-Yue Ngo. 2004. Global Convergence, Human Resources Best Practices, and Firm Performance: A Paradox., Management and International Review, 44, 67-86.
- Mayer, Roger and James Davis. 1999. The Effect of the Performance Appraisal System on Trust for Management: A Field Quasi-Experiment., Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 123-136.
- Mayer, Roger, James Davis and David Schoorman. 1995. An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust. Academy of Management Review, 20 (3), 709-734.
- McAllister, Daniel. 1995. Affect and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations., Academy of Management Journal, 38 (1), 24-59.
- Ordiz-Fuertes, Monica and Esteban Fernández-Sánchez. 2003. High-Involvement Practices in Human Resource Management: Concept and Factors that Motivate their Adoption., International Journal of Human Resource Management,14, 511-529.
- Osterman, Paul. 1994. How Common is Workplace Transformation and How can we Explain Who Adopts it?, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47, 173-187.
- Park, Young-Bum., Byoung-Hoon Lee and Seong-Hun Woo. 1997. Employment Relations in the Korean Automotive Industry: Issues and Policy Implications. Economic and Labour Relations Review, 8 (2), 248-268.
- Paul, Robert, Brian Niehoff and William Turnley. 2000. Empowerment, Expectations, and the Psychological Contract-Managing the Dilemmas and Gaining the Advantages. Journal of Socio Economics, 29 (5), 471-485.
- Rousseau, Denise. 2001. Schema, Promise, and Mutuality: The building Blocks of the Psychological Contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74 (4), 511-541.
- Rubinstein, Saul and Thomas Kochan. 2001. Learning from Saturn. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press (an imprint of Cornell University Press).
- Shin, Dongyoub and Jiman Lee. 1999. Trust in Lean Production Systems: Lean Job Design and Workers’ Trust in Management at Koran Automobile Plants. Euro-Asia Centre Research Series, 61, 1-31.
- Shin, Eunjong. 2013. Unions and the Adoption of High- Performance Work Systems in Korea: Moderating Roles of Firms’ Competitive Strategies. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25 (13), 1858-1880.
- Shrout, Patrick and Joseph Fleiss. 1979. Intra Class Correlations: Uses in Assessing Rater Reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
- Steers, R. M., Y. K. Shin and G. R. Ungson. 1989. The Chaebol: Korea’s New Industrial Might. New York: Harper & Row.
- Sun, Li-Yun, Samuel Aryee and Kenneth Law. 2007. High Performance Human Resources Practices, Citizenship Behavior and Organizational Performance: A Relational Perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 558-577.
- Takeuchi, Riki, David Lepak, Heli Wang, H. and Kazou Takeuchi. 2007. An Empirical Examination of the Mechanisms Mediating between High Performance Work Systems and the Performance of Japanese Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1069-1083.
- Timming, Andrew. 2006. The Problem of Identity and Trust in European Works Councils. Employee Relations, 28, 9-25.
- Tomer, John. 2001. Understanding High Performance Work Systems: The Joint Contribution of Economics and Human Resource Management. Journal of Socio-Economics, 30 (1), 63-73.
- Tzafrir, Shay S. 2005. The Relationship between Trust, HRM Practices and Firm Performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 1600-1622.
- Vroom, Victor H. 1964. Work and Motivation. R E. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida.
- Walton, Richard. 1985. From Control to Commitment in the Workplace. Harvard Business Review, March/April, 76-84.
- Walton, Richard and Richard McKersie. 1965. Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations, 2nd ed., ILR Press, Ithaca, NY.
- Wilkinson, Barry. 1994. The Korea Labour Problem. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 32, 339-358.
- Williamson, Oliver. 1999. Strategy Research: Governance and Competence Perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 1087-1108.
- Wright, Patrick, Timothy Gardner, Lisa Moynihan, Hyeon Jeong Park, Barry Gerhart and John Delery. 2001. Measurement Error in Research on Human Resources and Firm Performance: Additional Data and Suggestions for Future Research. Personnel Psychology, 54: 875-901.
- Zaheer, Akbar., Bill McEvily and Vincenzo Perrone. 1998. Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance. Organization Science, 9 (2), 141-159.
- Zand, Dale. 1972. Trust and Managerial Problem Solving. Administrative Science Quarterly. 17, 229-239.