|
Dear Robert, Dear Race,
I am very happy to see that you are progressing.
You can count on our full support.
I know Fred Freundlich as a very good guy and I think he could
do a good job.
On the other hand, Rainer Schluter, the secretary general of
CECOP (the European Confederation of Workers' Co-operatives) will be present in
Bilbao; EFES and CECOP have strong links and cooperation.
I'd like to organize some roundtables in Mondragon on Friday
November 22 afternoon; you will see in the draft programme which will be largely
disseminated in the following days, that one of these roundtables will be
dedicated to:
"15.00
- 16.30 "
Round table : workers’ co-operatives and employee share ownership in
the light of the Mondragon model
With the participation of:
Robert Oakeshott, JOL – Job Ownership Ltd, United
Kingdom
Shann Turnbull, AEOA – Australian Employee Ownership Association,
Australy
David Erdal, Tullis Russell, United Kingdom
Dan Bell, COG - Capital Ownership Group, USA
Rainer Schluter, CECOP – European Confederation of Workers’
Co-operatives, Social Co-operatives and Participative Enterprises
and others
The Mondragon model represents today an important European reference,
especially in the Anglo-Saxon countries. The project of an international
research association to study the Mondragon model was launched. This allows to
compare the resemblance between the Workers Co-operatives and the Employee
Ownership, their similarities and their differences. "
Maybe some other roundtables could be organized too. On the other hand,
we'll have workshops on Saturday morning, and people are invited to suggest
themes to discuss.
Best wishes
Marc Mathieu
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 1:49
PM
Subject: Re: Mondragon: Fwd: New ILO
Recommendation on the Promotion of Cooperatives
on 13/9/02 12:59 am, RaceM at race@netspace.net.au wrote:
on 10/9/02 1:39 am, RaceM at race@netspace.net.au
wrote:
>> on 8/9/02 5:49 am, RaceM at race@netspace.net.au
wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Dear
Robert
>>>
>>> Thanks for your message, and for
your appreciative comments about
>>> 'Jobs of Our Own'. As to
'Rerum Novarum', I had always until I wrote
>>> the book
called the encyclical just that, but in the course of the
>>>
research I came across 'De Rerum Novarum' in what I took to be
an
>>> authoritative source, and adopted it as translating to
'Of New
>>> Things'. Which shows among other things that a
distant recollection
>>> of schooldays Latin is a dangerous
thing. I haven't commented on your
>>> 'Jobs and Fairness'
because I haven't yet had the opportunity to read
>>> it
properly - the Parliamentary Library here came up with a copy
on
>>> inter-library loan, but it had to be returned before I
had had time
>>> to do any more than a first skim through, so
I've now ordered it from
>>> my local bookseller who tells me
that I have a few more weeks still
>>> to wait. One section
that interested me greatly was the end game in
>>> regard to
the National Freight Corporation - I'd read Peter
>>>
Thompson's account in his memoirs some years ago and
frequently
>>> referred to it in speeches, but never got round
to finding out what
>>> had been the final washup. Meanwhile,
I still don't know whether I
>>> will be able to make Bilbao,
less for financial reasons than that I
>>> have recently taken
on a fairly substantial short term consultancy on
>>> early
childhood education and care for a government deparyment,
that
>>> has to be completed by Christmas, so getting to the
conference will
>>> depend on how the work is progressing.
Best wishes, Race Mathews
>> dear race, thanks for
both your e-mails. I shall certainly make a point of
>> visiting
the GKC institute at Orange in New Jersey when I am next in
>>
America. About the employee ownership end-game at NFC, I suppose the
key
>> fact is that "a significant majority of NFC's employee
shareholders, some
>> 60%, voted in 1988 to authorise the
directors to seek a flotation". Of
>> course, that isn't the VERY
end of the story; and Sir Peter was rightly
>> incensed by what
he saw as the subsequent betrayal - after his retirement -
>> by
the successor top management of the "rank and file " employee
>>
shareholders. That is all dealt with fairly fully in my book. Incidently
I
>> had originally intended in my comments about Jobs of Our Own
to bring up the
>> comparison (p226) between behaviour in
Japanese and Mondragon businesses. Do
>> you know Ronald Dore's
TAKING JAPAN SERIOUSLY with its striking sub-title- A
>>
CONFUCIAN PERSPECTIVE ON LEADING ECONOMIC ISSUES. If not I can
only
>> recommend it most strongly. He introduces most
persuasively a distinction
>> between the COMPANY LAW MODEL of
capitalist businesses and the Community
>> Model and argues that
DE FACTO even if not DE JURE the latter is what you
>> find in
Japan. For what it's worth I reviewed the book at some length in
the
>> April-June 1988 issue of Political Quarterly, to which you
may have
>> relatively easy access....I shall keep my fingers
crossed and hope that your
>> other commitments will allow you to
make the journey to Mondragon and Bilbao
>> in late Novemenber -
and to stop off here either on the way or the way back.
>> I have
two spare rooms so there would be no difficulty about the offer of
a
>> bed. With renewed thanks and all the best from
robert.
>
> Dear Robert
>
> Thanks for your
message, and I'll get the library to look out a copy
> of the
'Political Quarterly' article for me. Meanwhile, I'd like to
> think
that, irrespective of whether I make it to Bilbao, the
> conference
might consider putting formally to the MCC a proposal for
> jointly
resuming the action research that was initiated by the
>
Greenwood/Gonzalez team at Fagor in the late 1980s. It seems to me
>
that no single issue is more important for the future of the MCC as
a
> co-operative entity, and for the 'evolved distributism' to which
it
> so eloquently gives expression, than to get to the bottom of
the
> shopfloor disaffection that the Greenwood and Gonzalez
research
> identified - and that apparently also shows up in more
recent survey
> data - and develop an agreed program of remedial
measures. In my
> view, the task is in no sense insuperable,
providing that it draws on
> the best sources of industrial
relations and industrial democracy
> insight, information and
guidance, irrespective of where they are to
> be found,and does not
try to operate on a wholly in-houses basis, as
> would be
understandable in the light of the success of the
> co-operatives in
fending for themselves in so many other spheres.I
> also wonder
whether - in the light of your long association with
> Mondragon and
the wide range of cases you have covered in 'Jobs and
> Fairness'-
you might not be admirably qualified - either alone or
>
perhaps in association with others such as, say, Jeff Gates - to
>
steer such a project to external sources of advice that would be
both
> effective and congenial for the co-operatives? And might not
a
> measure at least of funding be accessible from Brussels or the
ILO?
> Not least, it seems to me that getting off the ground such a
program
> with an appropriate sense of urgency would in itself make
the
> conference worthwhile, irrespective of the whatever other
positive
> outcomes may be achieved. It would not be the MCC
co-operatives alone
> that benefited, but all those of us who wish
them well and would
> like to see their lessons put to work in our
own countries. I'd hoped
> originally that something similar might
be triggered from discussion
> on the Mondragon page of the COG web
site, but on indications to date
> it isn't going to happen, and an
entity with clout and credibility is
> required. Best wishes, Race
Mathews.
dear race, this is an overdue
response to your latest email. Rather
unusually I have been out of
London for the past two days. In principle I
greatly favour your
"action research" proposal: for a thoroughly
professional investigation
into the causes of management/shopfloor
discontents within MCC and the
resulting indentification of a set of changed
policies to confront
them. I might also be able to point to a candidate who
could do a good
job. For what it's worth Ron Dore would probably be my
preferred
researcher. I failed to pass on when I flagged him up in my last
e-mail
what has always seemed to me his most persuasive contrast between
how
western and japanes managements are perceived by the "lads". The
latter are
seen as the "trusted elders of a working community" the
former as "the paid
agents of the shareholders". And if the project was
really going to come
off- and the sponsors wanted a competition to get
the job - I could almost
certainly suggest some other names. But I also
have two initial caveats: a)
if the proposal is to be considered by the
conference I would favour seeking
to establish in advance what MCC
reaction was likely to be and b) getting an
advance reaction from Mark
Mathieu. Friendly Fred might be prepared to act
as an intemediary in
the first case. You are, I'm sure, the best agent in
the second. Well,
that's about it for now. But one final query. Have you an
address and
other contact details for John Thomson, preferably here in the
UK but
also useful to me if he is elsewhere. With best wishes from
Robert.
Dear Robert
Thanks for your message. I'm intensely
interested in your insight about contrasts between western and japanese
perceptions of management at the shopfloor level - between the 'paid agents
of the shareholders' and 'trusted elders of a working community' paradigms -
being relevant to the disaffection among some members of some Mondragon
co-operatives that Greenwood and Gonzalez and subsequent researchers
have identified, and immensely encouraged that you share my sense of urgency
about the need for an international study to nail down the precise nature of
the problem and come up with concrete, hands-on remedies that are compatible
with the culture of the co-operatives and congenial to them. Clearly you are
right about the essential pre-requisites including a strong sense of
ownership of the project by the co-operatives, and also the availability of
a strong auspicing body such as Marc Mathieu and the European Federation of
Employee Share Ownership - in conjunction perhaps with the European
Confederation of Workers' Co-operatives and Participative Enterprises? -
might well be able to provide. On the face of the matter, the Bilbao
conference would be an ideal starting point, bringing face to face as I
imagine it will members of the co-operatives with numbers of their external
well-wishers who are in a position either to contribute to a planning
process or participate personally in an agreed research project.
And I wonder if, in you chairing of the conference, and having
had the enviable privilege of actually talking with Arizmediarrieta, you
might not feel his approving presence - not to mention also the
presence of Jimmy Tomkins and Moses Coady and the founder
distributists before them - behind you on the dais, in the event that
discussion of the project turns out to eventuate? Be that as it may,
while it may well be that both Marc and Fred Freundlich are followng
our exchanges of messages, I will copy this one to them individually, in the
hope that that they may have some guidance for us as to how best to proceed.
Finally, on a more down-to-earth note, perhaps you could say some more
about Robert Dore and his work, in part as an indication of the
attributes and skills you feel the project would require. Best wishes, Race
Mathews
dear
race, ron dore has one of the best minds of all the sociologists I know. You
can find an impressive list of all or most of what he has published in the
latest edition of Who's Who. I first came across him in the 1970s when he was
working at the Institute of Development Studies in Sussex. Later, probably in
the late 1970s, I read his Japanese Factory/English Factory. Later still in
the 1990s I persuaded him to become a trustee of Partnership Research Ltd, the
charitable counterpart of Job Ownership Ltd, at which commisioning the
research and publication of individual case studies was the main activity.
Versions of many of these later provided well over half of the material
brought together in Jobs and Fairness. The feeling round the table was that if
work was subject to Ron Dore's scrutiny and managed to survive then it must
meet acceptable research standards. Later again, I wrote that review of two of
his more recent books about Japanese business of which you already have the
reference. I can't think of anyone better qualified by a combination of his
knowledge of this specialist field and his outstanding intellectual gifts to
head up the research you have in mind. Inidentally once you have achieved
access to a copy of Jobs and Fairness, you might usefully in this context look
at the successive case studies of the two Italian industrial Co-ops located at
Imola, not far to the south east of Bologna: La Ceramica and Sacmi. They
exhibit a number of contrasts. Perhaps the most important one is that in the
former the top managers are as it were guns hired in from the private sector
who are not allowed to become co-op members. In Sacmi by contrast the top
managers are permitted to become co-op members and nomally do so. Both
businesses have been stunningly successful for the last dozen years or so. But
there is a big difference between the character of their respective work
forces: at La Ceramica the majority have low levels of skill. At Sacmi the
reverse is true. For what it's worth I don't myself believe that there is a
single "best model" if you are talking about the relationships in a
co-operative type business between the top decision making body, the
management, the "rank and file" employees, and the trade unions, if any.
To modify existing arrangements in Europe's co-ops in the direction of
more nearly confucian values might well be a rather taxing task and the likely
outcome problematic. On the other hand I rather doubt whether specifically
institutional adjustment, even if substantial - as in the case of your own
tentative suggestion of "designer unions" for Mondragon - would do the trick .
By changing the existing equilibrium it might even produce change for the
worse. I often find that I need to remind myself of Bernard Miller's
observation, made from the vantage point of an ex-chairman of John Lewis, that
the partnership's leadership were probably entitled to think of themselves as
doing rather well. if as many as one third of the rank and file partners felt
and behaved as if they were really committed to the set-up. I hope these
reflections may help though I quite see that they may not be! All the
best from Robert O.
|