Juan Menéndez-Valdés. Flexibilidad y compromiso en las nuevas estructuras organizativas. 50º Congreso Internacional AEDIPE
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•279 views
Flexibility and Commitment in New Organisational Structures – Evidence from Eurofound In 3 sentences: The document discusses trends in new forms of employment like temporary work, part-time work, and self-employment across Europe. It also analyzes data from surveys on working conditions that show most employees still have regular working hours but skills use is increasing. Company surveys identified five groups of workplaces with different management styles and "systematic and involving" workplaces reported the highest worker well-being and job performance.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (7)
Similar to Juan Menéndez-Valdés. Flexibilidad y compromiso en las nuevas estructuras organizativas. 50º Congreso Internacional AEDIPE
Similar to Juan Menéndez-Valdés. Flexibilidad y compromiso en las nuevas estructuras organizativas. 50º Congreso Internacional AEDIPE (20)
More from AEDIPE
More from AEDIPE (16)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (14)
Juan Menéndez-Valdés. Flexibilidad y compromiso en las nuevas estructuras organizativas. 50º Congreso Internacional AEDIPE
- 1. Flexibility and Commitment in New Organisational Structures – Evidence from Eurofound Juan Menéndez-Valdés, Director, Eurofound 6 October 2016
- 2. Structural change in the labour market
- 3. 3 Employment growth by wage quintile in EU 1998 - 2013 Long term trend in high growth of well paid jobs – with some polarisation Source: European Jobs Monitor Low paid High paid
- 4. Net employment change in selected Member States: mixed picture Employment change (in thousands) by wage quintile in Spain, Austria, Italy 2011 Q2 – 2015 Q2 Upgrading Downgrading
- 5. Labour market change – two paradoxes Demographic change - labour shortages Technological change – surplus of labour Fewer routine jobs More routine in all jobs
- 6. (New) forms of employment
- 7. 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Temporary Part time & temporary employment as % of all employment Source: EU:LFS More part-time jobs but similar rates of temporary jobs in the EU Part time
- 8. 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Temporary Temporary Part time & temporary employment as % of all employment Source: EU:LFS More part-time jobs but similar rates of temporary jobs in the EU Part time Part time Spain increase in part time… & decrease in temporary
- 9. Regularity of working hours (%) – High regularity still the norm 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bulgaria Malta Spain Germany EU28 Sweden Finland Denmark High Medium Low Source: 6th European Working Conditions Survey (2015)
- 10. Employees Self-employed Employment relationship Work pattern Employee sharing Job sharing Voucher-based work Interim management Casual work ICT-based mobile work Portfolio work Crowd employment Collaborative employment
- 11. 11 Employee- sharing Job sharing Interim- management Casual work ICT-based mobile work Voucher- based work Portfolio work Crowd employment Colla- borative employment Social protection Health and safety Income Bonus, fringe benefits Length of working time Flexibility Work-life balance Stress, work intensity Career development Training, skill development Content of tasks, responsibilities Autonomy, control Integration in work organisation Representation Implications for working conditions
- 12. 12 Employee- sharing Job sharing Interim- management Casual work ICT-based mobile work Voucher- based work Portfolio work Crowd employ- ment Colla- borative work Job creation, job retention, crowding out of standard employment Labour market integration Segmentation of the labour market, social polarisation Legalisation of employment Increased attractiveness of the labour market Upskilling of the labour force Implications for the labour market
- 13. The company level Results from the Third European Company Survey
- 14. Five groups of establishments Systematic and involving (30%) Externally oriented (25%) Top-down and autonomous (21%) Interactive and involving (12%) Passive management (12%) Combining work-place practices identified in the European Company Survey (ECS) Source: 3rd European Company Survey
- 15. Well-being and performance of the five groups of establishments -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Workplacewell-being Performance of establishment Systematic and involving Interactive and involving Externally oriented Top-down and internally oriented Passive management Source: 3rd European Company Survey
- 16. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% FI SE AT UK DE EU28 ES EL HU HR Passive management Top-down and internally oriented Externally oriented Interactive and involving Systematic and involving Type of establishment, selected countries (%) Source: 3rd European Company Survey
- 17. Skills, discretion, engagement at the workplace Data from the 6th European Working Conditions Survey
- 18. Skills and discretion index (0-100), selected countries 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Greece Portugal Bulgaria Italy Spain EU28 Denmark Norway Finland Source: 6th European Working Conditions Survey (2015) 5655 6647
- 19. Working time quality index (0-100) 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 706766 73
- 20. Thank you for your attention For more information www.eurofound.europa.eu
- 21. 21 Job growth by type of contract in Europe, 2011-2015 Part-time jobs growth in all wage quintiles Growth in self employment and permanent only in top wage quintile Source: European Jobs Monitor
- 22. at be bg cy cz dk ee el es fi fr huie it lt lu lv nl pl pt ro se si sk uk R² = 0.4902 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Temporaryemploymentrate Transition rate: from temporary to permanent When temporary employment rates are high transitions out of temporary employment are low - segmentation Eurofound (2016) “Recent developments in temporary employment: Employment growth, wages and transitions”
- 23. Selected indicators for use of creativity and task variety, EU 28 (%) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Non-monotonous tasks Non-repetitive tasks Complex tasks Learning new things Applying own ideas Solving unforeseen problems 2005 2010 2015 Source: 6th European Working Conditions Survey (2015)
- 24. Break of less than 11 hours between two working days, by country (%) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Self-employed Employees
Editor's Notes
- This shows mainly an upgrading polarisation of EU labour markets in terms of pay. The same exercise for educational attainment and other dimensions of job quality, the picture is a clear upgrading. All but one of the fastest growing jobs are in the services sector. Four out of the top jobs ten are top quintile jobs – in terms of pay and in terms of education. The fastest growing job (2011 – 2015) was that of ICT professionals in computer programming and consultancy activities which increased by 39% since 2011 (however less than 1% of European workers are employed in this type of job). A key explanation behind this polarisation of the labour market is the effect of technical change on labour demand. Routine tasks which are easier to codify and automate are more likely to be replaced by machines or computers. Since those tasks are assumed to be more frequent in the middle of the occupational structure, the result would be job polarisation. The term ‘routine-biased technical change’ has been coined to describe this phenomenon.
- It is widely accepted that labour in routine-intensive tasks and occupations is declining over time in most developed economies. The OECD has estimated in 9% the number of jobs that could be automated easily in the immediate future. But does that necessarily mean that the task content in occupations not effected by this decline has remained unchanged? Or is it possible that the level of routine has increased across the board? In the most recent European Jobs Monitor report, Eurofound has constructed a new set of indicators for measuring task content and methods across occupations in Europe. Task content is measured with more than 30 indicators that look not only at the use of technology but also at work organisation. This analysis shows that jobs are coherent bundles of tasks. They are not determined by one type of task alone. Secondly, we see that work is generally becoming more routine. The repetitiveness of tasks reported by workers across Europe has increased and so has the degree of standardisation of tasks – even if we take into account the fact that employment in highly routine jobs has reduced between 1995 and 2015. Interestingly, the increase in the reported levels of routine at work seem to be concentrated in occupations that have not traditionally been associated with such a kind of work. Managers, professionals and clerical occupations are among the occupational groups that report the largest increases in the levels of routine. Computerisation is a likely factor behind this trend: the very nature of computing relies on the processing of standardized information, and an increasing use of computers can both facilitate and require a further standardization of labour input. Increasing use of subcontracting and the globalization of value chains could also contribute. It requires higher levels of standardisation to facilitate the management of increasingly complex production processes. Two important conclusions from this analysis of the task content of jobs: Since jobs are coherent bundles of many types of tasks, the overall effect of computerisation on the demand for different occupations is difficult to determine. Secondly, if the task composition of jobs can change over time, it may not be a very solid basis for predicting what jobs may be more at risk of automation.
- High regularity: All four aspects of regularity: the same number of hours every day, the same number of days every week, the same number of hours every week and fixed starting and finishing times; 44% of workers in 2015 report high regularity, only one percentage point less than in 2005. Medium regularity: Between two and three of the four aspects; the proportion of workers doing this has increased – from 19% in 2005 to 27% in 2015. Low regularity: One aspect only; the proportion of workers with low regularity has been decreasing: from 36% in 2005 to 29% in 2015. Spain: 54% high regularity; 24 % low regularity Denmark: 18% high regularity; 44% low regularity
- While standard employment relations remain the norm, What is ‘out there’ in terms of new employment relationships? New models of the employment relationship between employer and employee, or client and worker (one to one relation?) New work patterns – in other words, new ways in which work is conducted (place, time, complete work or partial task…) Differentiate whether new forms are applicable to employees or to self-employed/freelancers (or both) Eurofound researches for each form: What are general characteristics? What is the regulatory framework? What is the impact on working conditions? What are the implications for the labour market?
- We have investigated 14 dimensions of working conditions. Clearly, none of the new forms examined are negative for all 14 dimensions. For most forms, we see a mix between positive impact, neutral implications and negative features. However, whereas employee sharing and job sharing show mainly positive implications for working conditions, working conditions for those engaged in casual work are mostly negative or neutral at best. The colourful table provides one clear message, however: a detailed examination of each form is required to decide where advantages lie and what the pitfalls are. This should inform decisions about which forms to foster and where to intervene in order to mitigate negative implications.
- The same message also transpires from the investigation of labour market implications: All of these employment forms contribute to labour market innovation and make it more attractive to both employers and a wider range of potential workers. However, there is a danger of labour market segmentation, particularly from casual work and voucher-based work, if the result is a widespread acceptance of fragmented jobs that are inherently linked to low income and limited social protection.
- For the three core topics of the Third European Company Survey 2013 (work organisation, human resources management, and employee participation and social dialogue) nine dimensions of practices were examined. Collaboration and outsourcing: collaboration and outsourcing in the development, production (or delivery) and marketing of goods and services. Internal organisation and information management: organisation of departments, teamwork, task rotation, information management (knowledge sharing, monitoring quality and monitoring external ideas) Decision-making on daily tasks: autonomous teamwork and employee autonomy in decision-making Recruitment, employment and career development: employment contracts, performance appraisal, tenure and promotion opportunities Training: paid time off for training and on-the-job training Working time flexibility: flexibility in starting and finishing times, accumulation of overtime, part-time work Variable pay: performance related pay and financial participation Direct employee participation: Instruments to enable direct employee participation, level of involvement, attitudes towards direct participation Workplace social dialogue: types of structures, communication with the workforce, resources for the employee representation, information provision, level of involvement, level of influence, trust, industrial action A latent class analysis was then carried out to see what combinations of approaches are found in European establishments. This analysis found five groups of establishments.
- Systematic and involving (30%) top-down, highly structured internal organisation, high investment in HRM, extensive practices for direct and indirect participation Externally oriented (25%) top-down, moderately structured internal organisation, outward looking, moderate investment in HRM, little direct and indirect participation Top-down and autonomous (21%) top-down, highly structured internal organisation, self-sufficient, moderate investment in HRM, moderately supported direct and indirect participation Interactive and involving (12%) joint approach to decision-making, moderately structured internal organisation, limited investment in HRM but extensive practices for direct and indirect participation Passive management (12%) top-down, moderately structured internal organisation, but hardly any HRM, and little direct and indirect participation Establishments in the ‘Systematic and involving’ group show characteristics of ‘high performance work systems’: a high prevalence of (autonomous) teamwork, flexible working time arrangements, training, variable pay schemes and employee participation. Establishments in the ‘Interactive and involving’ group show similarity with ‘discretionary learning’ forms of organisations. These differ from ‘high performance work systems’ in that even more emphasis is placed on individual and team autonomy; also, the organisational structure is much less formalised. Establishments in the ‘Passive management’ group resemble ‘traditional or simple organisations’, characterised by a (simple) informal management structure and limited attention to work organisation and HRM practices.
- Establishments in the Systematic and involving and Interactive and involving types have the best scores for establishment performance. However, the Interactive and involving establishments have substantially higher scores on the workplace-wellbeing index. On the other hand, establishments of the three other types have lower-than-average scores both in terms of establishment performance and workplace well-being. The worst scores are seen for establishment on the Passive management group. It is interesting to see that these positive outcomes in terms of establishment performance and workplace well-being are found for two types of establishments that are fundamentally different. For example, establishments in the Systematic and involving group predominantly have a top-down approach to decision-making regarding daily tasks and extensive human resource management practices. Establishments of the Interactive and involving type, in contrast, predominantly take a joint approach to decision-making and have much more modest human resource management practices. These differences aside, what both types have in common is the favourable environment for direct employee participation they offer and the considerable extent to which they engage in it. This may indicate that at least part of the explanation for the positive associations with establishment performance and workplace well-being may lie in these direct employee involvement practices.
- Countries differ considerably in terms of the prevalence of establishments of the different groups. Both the ‘Systematic and involving’ and the ‘Interactive and involving’ groups are most prevalent in Finland, Sweden and Austria : together, the two groups account for more than 70% of establishments in Finland and Sweden and more than 60% in Austria. These are all countries with a long history of, and institutional structures supporting, employee participation. The EU average for these two groups is 42 %. Spain is a little below the EU average with 40% of establishments in these two groups. This due to a relatively low percentage of companies in the ‘Interactive and involving’ group.
- The skills and discretion index combines indicators on four dimensions: Cognitive dimension; Decision latitude; Organisational participation; and Training The proportion of workers experiencing decision latitude (Choose/change order of tasks; choose/change speed or rate of work; Choose/change methods of work; Having a say in the choice of work colleagues) has increased About half of all workers in the EU are involved in decisions directly affecting their work: consulted before objectives are set; involved in improving work organisation or work processes of their department or organisation; influence decisions that are important for their work. Training: increase from 26% in 2005 to 40% in 2015. Positive view of training: over 80% feel that training has improved the way they work. 60% believe that their prospects for future employment are better because of training received. BUT: workers who need training most have least access (workers with low levels of skills and level of education, and those on non-permanent or part-time contracts). More detailed view on cognitive dimension: next slide
- Working time quality index comprises four dimensions: - Duration (long working week; long working days; lack of recovery period) Atypical working time (weekend work; night work; shift work) Working time arrangements (discretion over working time arrangement; advance information on changes in schedule; coming in at short notice) Working time flexibility (possibility to take an hour or two off for personal or family matter; working in free time to meet work demands) In sum, I have presented some data on the structural change going on ( polarisation, jobs disappearing, routinization of remaining jobs…), tried to illustrate emerging and more diverse kind of employment relations (all them with lights and shadows) and descend to the workplace level, where direct participation is a key win-win factor, and the use of skills and discretion of workers can be further enhanced.
- Cognitive dimension of work: little change over time. A large proportion of workers report that job involves solving unforeseen problems on their own and applying own ideas. Considerable proportion says they are learning new things on the job and carry out complex tasks. BUT for almost half of workers their job involves monotonous and/or repetitive tasks. Engagement: Generally positive picture. Over 70% of workers are enthusiastic about their job, feel full of energy, feel that time flies at work and ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ doubt the importance of their job. BUT: mixed message for one aspect of engagement. ‘Feeling exhausted at the end of the day’: similar proportions of workers feel this way ‘most of the time’ and ‘always’ (34%) as experience it ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ (24%) Motivation: 63% of workers agree that their company motivates them to give their best job performance. However: substantial differences between countries (78% in Norway, 46% in Albania)