RE: EFES:

[jdoggett <jdoggett@kent.edu>]

Dear Dan and Erik,

The papers you present, Dan, are correct.  The employee 
ownership/participation paper is the one to which I made the inference, but 
did not cite exactly.

Erik, the work that I did had some beginnings with your work.  In a paper that 
I read that you wrote, you, which I do not have the paper in front of me but 
is referenced in the thesis, stated that there are several factors that can 
influence participation.  I think that this statement was made in footnote 2 
of your paper.  I tried to look at forces that influence participation.

What I found was that there were basically four kinds of firms.  (There was a 
fifth category, which I was unknown given that I could not identify the firm 
culture.)  There were draconian firms, which were firms that castigated their 
employees, underminer firms, which were firms that offered the olive branch of 
participation but recoiled quickly when the employee attempted to participate, 
non-participatory firms, which were firms that neither offerred particiaption 
opportunities nor promoted it, and participatory firms, which were firms that 
promoted and expected participation.

The firms that had the lowest rates of absenteeism and turnover were 
participatory firms.  On the other hand, the firms that had the highest were 
draconian and underminer.

The lesson learned for me from the research is that there are firm designs 
beyond the simple participatory and non-participatory.  The existence of 
draconian and underminer cultures was new, for me, and had an obvious impact 
on absenteeism and turnover rates.

I could go on and on about this topic, because it interests me and I wrote the 
paper, but I think that the above is a pretty quick synopsis.  If you have the 
opportunity to read some of the work, then I would greatly appreciate any 
feedback given--positive or negative.

Thank you,
Joseph



>===== Original Message From Dan Bell <dbell@kent.edu> =====
>Hi Joe,
>
>Hope all is well with you. What are you doing these days?
>
>By the way, I assume the cases you mention in your note to EFES are
>posted in the COG Library. Below are the titles we have under your
>name. If anything is missing, please let me know.
>
>Take care,
>
>Dan
>
>Inapplicable Policy Advice: The Need for Institution Building
>Privatization and Central and Eastern Europe
>Relationship Between An Employee-Participatory Culture and Absenteeism and
>Turnover Rates in Ohio Employee Owned Firms
>     Abstract
>     Introduction
>     Chapter 2
>     Chapter 3
>     Chapter 4
>     Chapter 5
>     Chapter 6
>     Appendix 1
>     Appendix 2
>     Bibliography
>
>At 12:52 PM 11/15/01 +0100, you wrote:
>>Dear Joseph
>>Congratulations. Best cases. worst cases or just cases. I ll be interested /
>>erik
>> <<Adv for EO.doc>>
>>Erik Maaloe, dr merc
>>Institute for Organization
>>Aarhus Business School
>>Fulglesangs Alle 4
>>8210 Aarhus / Denmark
>>
>>
>>> ----------
>>> From:       jdoggett
>>> Reply To:   efes@cog.kent.edu
>>> Sent:       fredag 9. november 2001 22:59
>>> To:         efes@cog.kent.edu
>>> Subject:    RE: EFES:
>>>
>>> I read about best-case scenarios in employee ownership.  I wrote a thesis,
>>>
>>> which is posted in the cog library under my name, Joseph Doggett, and I
>>> worked
>>> to identify companies that promote employee participation.  What I find,
>>> in a
>>> nutshell, is that companies that promote and actually implement employee
>>> participation in the workplace have lower absenteeism and turnover rates
>>> than
>>> companies that exist under another arrangement.  Perhaps my work would be
>>> of
>>> interest to your pursuit.
>>>
>>> Best of luck,
>>> Joseph Doggett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\Adv for EO1.doc"
>>
>--
>Dan Bell
>International Program Coordinator
>Ohio Employee Ownership Center
>Kent State University
>Kent, OH 44242
>(330) 672-0333 << New direct number!
>(330) 672-4063 fax
>dbell@kent.edu
>http://www.kent.edu/oeoc/
>http://cog.kent.edu