AC 1.1 Provide an overview of the three main perspectives on employment relations, unitarist, pluralist and radical, explaining which approach is adopted at your organisation, critically evaluating how this influences the work of its people professionals.
The field of employment relations is founded on three major perspectives: unitarism, pluralism, and radicalism (Cradden, 2011). Each perspective provides a unique prism through which to examine the interaction between companies and employees.
Unitarism: A Harmonious Workplace
Unitarism, a management perspective, champions a harmonious and unified workplace where management and employees share a common purpose. It envisions a workplace devoid of conflict, attributing any discord to poor communication or misunderstandings (Cradden, 2011). This approach promotes collaboration, teamwork, and a shared sense of belonging. It emphasizes the importance of effective communication channels and open dialogue to address any issues that may arise. Unitarism often downplays the role of trade unions, viewing them as unnecessary or even disruptive to the harmonious functioning of the organization. It advocates for a direct and informal approach to resolving workplace disputes, relying on internal mechanisms rather than external intermediaries.
While unitarism offers the potential for a positive and productive work environment, it also presents certain limitations. One major drawback is its tendency to overlook or downplay the inherent power imbalances that may exist between management and employees (Heery, 2016). By ignoring potential conflicts of interest and differing perspectives, unitarism can inadvertently suppress legitimate concerns and grievances. This can lead to a culture of silence, where employees may feel hesitant to voice their opinions or concerns for fear of repercussions. Additionally, the dismissal of trade unions as unnecessary can deprive employees of a crucial collective voice and bargaining power. Trade unions play a vital role in advocating for fair wages, safe working conditions, and employee rights. By neglecting this aspect, unitarism may inadvertently contribute to a less equitable and secure workplace.
Unitarism therefore offers a vision of a peaceful and integrated workplace, emphasizing collaboration and shared goals. However, its limitations in addressing power imbalances and the role of trade unions warrant careful consideration. A more balanced approach that acknowledges the potential for conflict and the importance of collective representation may be necessary to create truly harmonious and sustainable workplaces.
Pluralism: A Balanced Approach
Pluralism, as a management perspective, acknowledges the diverse interests within an organization, recognizing the potential for conflict between management and employees (Cradden, 2011). It views trade unions as legitimate representatives of employee interests and encourages collective bargaining as a means of resolving disputes. This approach promotes a more balanced power dynamic, where both parties have a voice and can negotiate terms and conditions. By fostering open dialogue and compromise, pluralism aims to create a more stable and equitable workplace.
One of the key advantages of pluralism is its ability to address potential conflicts proactively (Heery, 2016). By recognizing the existence of differing interests and providing a structured framework for negotiation, pluralism can help prevent disputes from escalating and disrupting the workplace. Additionally, by involving trade unions in the decision-making process, pluralism can ensure that employees’ concerns are heard and addressed. This can lead to increased employee satisfaction, motivation, and productivity.
However, pluralism also presents certain challenges. One potential drawback is the increased complexity of industrial relations. Collective bargaining can be a time-consuming and potentially contentious process. It requires skilled negotiators on both sides to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Additionally, if not managed effectively, pluralism can lead to increased industrial action, such as strikes or work stoppages, which can disrupt business operations and harm productivity. It is crucial to maintain a constructive and collaborative approach to negotiations to minimize the risk of such disruptions.
Hence, pluralism offers a more realistic and balanced approach to industrial relations by acknowledging the diverse interests within an organization. By promoting collective bargaining and compromise, pluralism can contribute to a more stable, equitable, and productive workplace. However, it is essential to manage the complexities of this approach carefully to avoid potential conflicts and disruptions.
Radicalism: A Critical Perspective
Radicalism, often associated with a Marxist perspective, views the workplace as inherently conflictual due to the inherent power imbalance between employers and employees (Cradden, 2011). This perspective sees organizations as sites of class struggle, where capitalists exploit workers to maximize profits. Radicalists argue that fundamental changes to the capitalist system are necessary to address issues of inequality and injustice.
One of the strengths of radicalism is its ability to critically analyze the underlying power dynamics in organizations (Meyerson, 2008). By exposing the exploitative nature of capitalism, radicalism can mobilize workers to challenge oppressive conditions and demand greater autonomy and control over their work. However, this approach can also lead to confrontational and adversarial relationships between management and labor.
A major drawback of radicalism is its potential to overlook the complexities of modern workplaces. While class conflict remains a significant issue in many industries, contemporary organizations are also characterized by diverse workforces, flexible employment arrangements, and evolving management practices. A rigid adherence to a Marxist framework may limit the ability to understand and address the nuanced challenges faced by workers in the 21st century. Additionally, radicalism’s emphasis on revolutionary change can sometimes lead to unrealistic expectations and impractical solutions.
GE’s Hybrid Approach
General Electric (GE) has a both a unitarist and pluralist approach to employee relations (Kaufman, 2008). This viewpoint stresses a shared feeling of purpose and harmony among management and employees. GE’s emphasis on a strong corporate culture, performance management systems, and employee engagement programs exemplifies this approach. However, GE integrates parts of a pluralist approach, acknowledging the possibility of multiple interests and the role of collective bargaining in some situations. This may be seen in some of GE’s interactions in some regions.
This hybrid strategy has a variety of effects on the job of GE’s human resources experts (Ackers, 2019). They must create a healthy work climate, encourage open communication, and respond to employee issues promptly. They should also be proficient in performance management, talent development, and change management. They may also be active in union negotiations, which require excellent negotiating and dispute resolution abilities. While the unitarist emphasis on harmony is common, human resource professionals must also be prepared to handle possible disputes and balance varied interests inside the firm. GE’s hybrid strategy offers both advantages and challenges for human resource professionals. On the one hand, it allows for a more nuanced and adaptable approach to employee relations, enabling HR to foster a strong corporate culture while also addressing potential conflicts and advocating for employee interests. This approach can lead to increased employee satisfaction, engagement, and productivity.
However, implementing a hybrid strategy requires a high degree of skill and sensitivity from HR professionals (Higgins, Roper & Gamwell, 2016). They must be adept at balancing the competing demands of a unitarist and pluralist approach, navigating complex industrial relations landscapes, and adapting to changing circumstances. Additionally, the success of a hybrid strategy depends on effective communication, trust-building, and conflict resolution skills. HR professionals must be able to build strong relationships with both management and employees, and to facilitate constructive dialogue and negotiation.
AC 2.2 Employment relations strategies are shaped by competitive pressures; review how the current labour market and organisational strategy impacts the management of employment relations within the organisation.
General Electric’s employment relations strategies are heavily influenced by current labor market trends and its growing organizational strategy.
The Impact of the Tight Labor Market
The tight labor market, marked by talent shortages and growing competition for talented workers, needs a more proactive and employee-focused strategy (Spechler, 2017). To recruit and retain top people, GE must provide competitive wage packages, flexible work arrangements, and professional development opportunities. GE’s recognition of the need for a more proactive and employee-focused strategy aligns with global trends in talent acquisition and retention. Many countries, particularly those with advanced economies, are facing similar challenges of talent shortages and increased competition for skilled workers.
For instance, in the United States, companies are increasingly adopting strategies such as offering remote work options, flexible schedules, and robust employee benefits packages to attract and retain top talent (King, 2024). Companies like Google and Microsoft are known for their generous perks, including on-site amenities, subsidized meals, and tuition reimbursement. In European countries like Germany and the Netherlands, work-life balance is a significant factor in employee satisfaction and retention (McColgan, 2015). Companies in these countries often offer generous parental leave policies, flexible working hours, and opportunities for career breaks. In Asia, countries like Singapore and Japan have implemented initiatives to attract and retain foreign talent. These include streamlined immigration processes, tax incentives, and opportunities for career advancement.
By adopting a more proactive and employee-focused strategy, GE can position itself as an attractive employer and compete effectively for top talent in a globalized market. However, it is crucial to tailor these strategies to specific regional and cultural contexts to ensure their effectiveness.
The Role of Digital Transformation
Furthermore, GE’s emphasis on digital transformation and innovation necessitates a workforce that is adaptive, talented, and eager to embrace change (Nambisan, Wright & Feldman, 2019). This needs expenditures in personnel training and development, as well as the promotion of an innovative and experimentative culture. GE’s digital transformation necessitates a workforce that is agile, skilled, and receptive to change. This requires significant investment in employee training and development to equip them with the necessary digital skills and knowledge. By providing continuous learning opportunities, GE can foster a culture of innovation and empower employees to embrace new technologies and approaches. Furthermore, cultivating an innovative culture is essential for driving digital transformation. This involves creating an environment where employees feel empowered to experiment, take risks, and share their ideas. By encouraging a culture of open communication and collaboration, GE can harness the collective creativity of its workforce and generate innovative solutions. To accomplish this, GE must establish effective communication channels, empower people, and foster an environment that promotes creativity and risk-taking (Neuenfeldt & Sulíková, n.d). Cultivating an innovative culture is essential for driving digital transformation. This involves creating an environment where employees feel empowered to experiment, take risks, and share their ideas. By encouraging a culture of open communication and collaboration, GE can harness the collective creativity of its workforce and generate innovative solutions.
Empowering employees is another key factor in driving digital transformation. By delegating authority, providing autonomy, and recognizing and rewarding contributions, GE can motivate employees to take ownership of their work and drive innovation (Alshemmari, 2023). This can lead to increased engagement, productivity, and job satisfaction. Hence, GE’s success in digital transformation depends on its ability to invest in employee development, foster an innovative culture, and empower its workforce. By implementing these strategies, GE can attract and retain top talent, drive innovation, and achieve sustainable growth in the digital age.
Navigating Global Labor Relations
GE’s global operations expose it to a complex tapestry of labor laws, cultural norms, and varying levels of unionization across different countries. This presents both opportunities and challenges for the company’s human resource management. This necessitates a sophisticated approach to work relations, weighing global consistency against local adaptation. To maintain a favorable employer brand, GE must manage complex labor legislation, engage with labor unions as needed, and promote fair work practices (Heckscher, 2018). On the one hand, a globalized approach to labor relations can streamline processes, promote consistency in policies and practices, and leverage best practices from around the world. By establishing global standards for employment practices, GE can ensure fairness, equity, and compliance with international labor standards. Additionally, a global perspective can help GE identify emerging trends in labor relations and adapt to changing workforce expectations.
However, a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable for all contexts. Different countries have distinct labor laws, cultural norms, and unionization rates, which require a nuanced and flexible approach (Caligiuri, Lepak & Bonache, 2010). To navigate this complexity, GE must balance global consistency with local adaptation. This involves understanding the specific needs and expectations of employees in different regions and tailoring HR practices accordingly.
In addition, GE must be mindful of its employer brand reputation and maintain positive relationships with labor unions and employee representatives (Jacoby, 2018). By engaging in constructive dialogue, negotiating in good faith, and respecting workers’ rights, GE can foster a positive and productive labor relations climate. This can help to mitigate risks, such as strikes, work stoppages, and reputational damage, and contribute to the company’s long-term success.
The Interplay Between Labor Market and Organizational Strategy
Finally, the connection between the labor market and organizational strategy impacts GE’s employment relations approach. By focusing employee engagement, talent development, and a flexible work environment, GE can effectively manage the current landscape’s problems and possibilities while also positioning itself for future success (Mihalcea, 2017). GE’s ability to effectively navigate the complex interplay between the labor market and organizational strategy is crucial to its long-term success. By prioritizing employee engagement, talent development, and flexible work arrangements, GE can address the challenges and capitalize on the opportunities presented by the current labor market.
A strong focus on employee engagement can lead to increased job satisfaction, motivation, and productivity. By fostering a positive work environment, recognizing and rewarding employee contributions, and providing opportunities for growth and development, GE can build a loyal and dedicated workforce (Savitz, 2013). Investing in talent development is essential to ensure that GE has the skills and expertise needed to compete in a rapidly changing business environment. By providing employees with access to training and development programs, GE can equip them with the tools and knowledge they need to succeed.
Flexible work arrangements can also help GE attract and retain top talent, particularly in a tight labor market. By offering options such as remote work, flexible hours, and compressed workweeks, GE can cater to the diverse needs and preferences of its employees (Stahl et al, 2007). This can lead to increased job satisfaction, reduced absenteeism, and improved work-life balance.
However, implementing these strategies requires careful planning and execution. GE must balance the need for flexibility with the demands of its business operations. Additionally, the company must ensure that its HR practices are aligned with its overall business strategy and that they are effectively implemented and monitored. By adopting a proactive and strategic approach to human resource management, GE can position itself for long-term success in a dynamic and competitive labor market.
AC 3.4 Propose two distinct strategies to improve levels of engagement within the organisation and evaluate how their impact on organisational performance can be measured. Justify your recommendations.
To increase employee engagement at GE, two strategic methods might be considered.
Fostering a Culture of Recognition and Gratitude
The first step would be to establish a culture of recognition and gratitude. A strong culture of recognition and appreciation can dramatically improve staff morale and motivation (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). Regularly praising and publicly honoring great performance, new ideas, and contributions to team goals can help to create a good and supportive work environment. Offering tailored prizes and incentives, such as bonuses, extra time off, or personalized presents, can demonstrate gratitude for individual accomplishments. Furthermore, peer-to-peer recognition programs can help employees recognize and appreciate their colleagues’ contributions, boosting team cohesion and morale.
A culture of recognition and gratitude is a powerful tool for increasing employee engagement at GE. By acknowledging and appreciating employees’ efforts, the company can foster a positive work environment where individuals feel valued and motivated (Imran, Ghazwan & Firmansyah, 2024). This can lead to increased job satisfaction, reduced turnover, and improved overall performance. Regularly recognizing and rewarding employees for their contributions can boost morale and motivation. When employees feel appreciated, they are more likely to be engaged and committed to their work. Public recognition, such as shout-outs in team meetings or company-wide newsletters, can be particularly effective in motivating employees. Peer-to-peer recognition programs can further enhance employee engagement. By encouraging employees to acknowledge and appreciate their colleagues, these programs can strengthen team bonds and foster a sense of camaraderie. This can lead to increased collaboration, innovation, and overall job satisfaction.
While a culture of recognition and gratitude is undoubtedly beneficial, it is important to implement it thoughtfully and avoid potential pitfalls. One potential challenge is ensuring that recognition is fair and equitable. If some employees feel overlooked or undervalued, it could have a negative impact on morale (Coelho, 2024). To mitigate this risk, it is essential to establish clear guidelines for recognition and to involve managers and team leaders in the process. Another potential challenge is the risk of over-reliance on extrinsic rewards. While recognition and incentives can be effective motivators, it is important to recognize that intrinsic motivation, such as a sense of purpose and accomplishment, is also crucial. Overemphasizing extrinsic rewards may diminish the impact of intrinsic motivation.
Finally, it is important to consider the cultural context of the organization. What is considered appropriate and effective recognition in one culture may not be as effective in another (Jahangir, 2024). It is important to tailor the strategy to the specific needs and values of the GE workforce. By carefully considering these factors and implementing the strategy with intention, GE can create a more engaged and productive workforce.
This strategy’s influence on organizational performance can be measured in terms of increased employee happiness, retention, and productivity. By conducting frequent employee satisfaction surveys, monitoring staff attrition rates, and tracking key performance metrics, GE may evaluate the recognition and appreciation program’s success in delivering positive results.
Empowering Employees Through Meaningful Work and Autonomy
The second step would be to empower people by providing meaningful work and autonomy. Empowering workers with meaningful work and autonomy can help them feel more invested and engaged (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). Redesigning employment to encompass a broader variety of activities and responsibilities might lead to possibilities for advancement and development. Delegating decision-making authority to workers can encourage individuals to take responsibility for their work and participate to strategic efforts. Offering flexible work options, such as remote work or flexible hours, can help with work-life balance and employee happiness.
Empowering employees with meaningful work and autonomy can be a powerful strategy for increasing engagement at GE. When employees feel that their work has purpose and that they have the freedom to make decisions, they are more likely to be motivated and engaged (Laaser & Bolton, 2022). This can lead to increased job satisfaction, reduced turnover, and improved productivity. Redesigning jobs to include a broader range of tasks and responsibilities can help to alleviate boredom and monotony. When employees are challenged and stimulated, they are more likely to be engaged and motivated. This can also help to develop employees’ skills and prepare them for future opportunities.
Delegating decision-making authority to employees can empower them to take ownership of their work and contribute to the strategic goals of the organization (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). This can lead to increased innovation, creativity, and problem-solving. Offering flexible work arrangements can help to improve work-life balance and employee satisfaction. When employees have the flexibility to work from home or to adjust their hours, they are more likely to be happy and productive. This can also help to attract and retain top talent.
While empowering employees is a valuable strategy, it is important to implement it carefully to avoid potential pitfalls. One potential challenge is that not all employees are equally suited to autonomy and decision-making. Some employees may prefer a more structured and directive approach (Martin, Liao & Campbell, 2013). It is important to assess individual preferences and capabilities when implementing empowerment strategies. Another potential challenge is the risk of overloading employees with too much responsibility. If employees are given too much autonomy and decision-making authority, they may become overwhelmed and stressed. It is important to provide employees with the necessary training, support, and resources to succeed.
Finally, it is important to consider the organizational culture. A culture of empowerment and autonomy is more likely to be successful in organizations that have a strong foundation of trust and transparency. If employees do not trust their managers or the organization, they may be hesitant to take on additional responsibilities or make decisions. By carefully considering these factors, GE can effectively empower its employees and create a more engaged and productive workforce.
This strategy’s influence on organizational performance may be assessed by greater staff engagement, improved innovation and creativity, and higher customer satisfaction. By conducting employee engagement surveys, tracking the amount of new ideas and solutions developed by employees, and assessing customer happiness, GE can evaluate the success of the empowerment strategy in delivering good results.
Both of these tactics are based on good organizational psychology concepts, and they have been shown to improve employee engagement and organizational performance. By employing these tactics and carefully assessing their effectiveness, GE can build a more engaged, productive, and successful staff.
AC 4.1 Identify two different forms of collective bargaining, one in a unionised and one in a non-unionised environment, critically analysing their role in determining pay and resolving differences. Explain to what extent either applies to your own organisation.
Collective bargaining, a process where representatives of employees and employers negotiate terms and conditions of employment, can take different forms depending on the level of unionization (Hayter, 2015).
Unionized Collective Bargaining
In a unionized environment, collective bargaining typically involves formal negotiations between a labor union and management (Schnabel, 2020). The union, representing the interests of its members, negotiates with the employer on issues such as wages, benefits, working hours, and job security. These negotiations often result in a collective bargaining agreement, which sets the terms and conditions of employment for all union members. This process can be adversarial, with both sides advocating for their interests, but it also provides a structured mechanism for resolving disputes and ensuring fair treatment for workers.
Collective bargaining can be a powerful tool for improving the working conditions and wages of employees (Hayter, 2011). By negotiating as a group, workers can achieve better outcomes than they would be able to individually. This can lead to higher wages, better benefits, more job security, and improved working conditions. Collective bargaining can also help to ensure fairness and equity in the workplace. By negotiating a collective agreement, unions can help to prevent discrimination and ensure that all workers are treated fairly. This can lead to a more harmonious and productive workplace.
Moreover, collective bargaining can help to improve communication between employers and employees. The negotiation process can provide an opportunity for both sides to discuss their concerns and work together to find solutions (Aleks, Maffie & Saksida, 2020). This can help to build trust and understanding between management and labor. One potential drawback of collective bargaining is that it can be a time-consuming and adversarial process. Negotiations can be contentious, and it may take time to reach an agreement. This can lead to work stoppages, such as strikes or lockouts, which can disrupt business operations and harm the economy. Another potential issue is that collective bargaining can lead to inflexibility and bureaucracy. Collective agreements can be complex and difficult to change, which can make it difficult for employers to adapt to changing economic conditions. This can hinder innovation and competitiveness. Additionally, some critics argue that collective bargaining can lead to higher labor costs, which can make businesses less competitive. While unions can negotiate for higher wages and benefits, these costs may be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
It is important to note that the effectiveness of collective bargaining can vary depending on a number of factors, including the strength of the union, the bargaining power of the employer, and the economic climate. By understanding both the advantages and disadvantages of collective bargaining, stakeholders can make informed decisions about its use in the workplace.
Non-Unionized Collective Bargaining
In a non-unionized environment, collective bargaining may take the form of individual negotiations or team-based negotiations (Schnabel, 2020). Individual negotiations involve discussions between individual employees and their managers to determine pay and working conditions. While this approach can be flexible and tailored to individual needs, it may also lead to disparities in pay and benefits and can be time-consuming and inefficient. Team-based negotiations, on the other hand, involve representatives from a group of employees negotiating with management. This approach can be more efficient and equitable than individual negotiations, but it may still lack the formal structure and power dynamics of unionized collective bargaining.
In a non-unionized environment, individual and team-based negotiations can offer several advantages. One of the key benefits is flexibility (Schnabel, 2020). Individual negotiations allow for personalized discussions and tailored agreements, taking into account specific circumstances and needs. This can lead to more equitable outcomes for employees. Team-based negotiations can be more efficient than individual negotiations, as they allow multiple employees to address common concerns and negotiate collectively. This can save time and resources for both employees and employers.
While individual and team-based negotiations have their advantages, they also have some drawbacks. One of the main challenges is the potential for power imbalances (Ünal & Emel, 2009). In individual negotiations, employees may feel pressured to accept less favorable terms, especially if they are in a weak bargaining position. Similarly, in team-based negotiations, the outcome may be influenced by the relative power of the negotiating teams. Another issue is the lack of formal structure and legal protections that are typically associated with unionized collective bargaining. Without a union to represent their interests, employees may be more vulnerable to unfair treatment and exploitation. Moreover, individual and team-based negotiations can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. It may require significant effort and time to negotiate with each employee or team, which can be a burden on both employees and management.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of individual and team-based negotiations depends on various factors, including the company culture, the specific needs of employees, and the bargaining skills of both parties. While these approaches can be beneficial in certain circumstances, it is important to be aware of their limitations and potential drawbacks.
The Impact on GE
The extent to which these forms of collective bargaining apply to General Electric (GE) depends on the specific country and region. In some countries, GE may operate in heavily unionized industries, such as manufacturing, where collective bargaining with unions is common (Bamber & Lansbury, 2024). In other countries, GE may have a more non-unionized workforce, where individual negotiations or team-based negotiations are more prevalent. However, even in non-unionized environments, GE may engage in informal forms of collecting bargaining employee feedback, such as employee surveys, suggestion boxes, or town hall meetings, to gather and address their concerns.
Balancing the Pros and Cons
Collective bargaining, a process that empowers employees to negotiate their working conditions, can take various forms depending on the level of unionization. In unionized settings, formal negotiations between unions and management lead to collective bargaining agreements, ensuring fair treatment and standardized conditions. While effective, this approach can be time-consuming and adversarial. In non-unionized environments, individual or team-based negotiations offer flexibility but may lack the power dynamics and protections of unionized bargaining. The optimal approach for GE depends on the specific context, balancing the benefits of collective bargaining with potential drawbacks. Ultimately, the goal is to create a work environment that fosters employee engagement, productivity, and job satisfaction.
References
Ackers, P. (2019). Neo-pluralism as a research approach in contemporary employment relations and HRM: Complexity and dialogue. In Elgar introduction to theories of human resources and employment relations (pp. 34-52). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Aleks, R., Maffie, M. D., & Saksida, T. (2020). The role of collective bargaining in a digitized workplace. Reimagining the governance of work and employment, 85.
Alshemmari, J. M. H. J. (2023). An empirical study on employee empowerment role in increasing efficiency of employee performance. Journal of Logistics, Informatics and Service Science, 10(1), 52-71.
Bamber, G. J., & Lansbury, R. D. (Eds.). (2024). International and comparative industrial relations: A study of developed market economies. Taylor & Francis.
Caligiuri, P., Lepak, D., & Bonache, J. (2010). Managing the global workforce. John Wiley & Sons.
Coelho, R. (2024). Reasons for Employees to Leave an Organization.
Compa, L. A. (2014). An overview of collective bargaining in the United States.
Cradden, C. (2011). Unitarism, pluralism, radicalism… and the rest. Université De Genève, 36(8), 1-22.
Hayter, S. (2015). Unions and collective bargaining. Labour Markets, Institutions and Inequality, 95-122.
Hayter, S. (Ed.). (2011). The role of collective bargaining in the global economy: Negotiating for social justice. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Heckscher, C. C. (2018). The new unionism: Employee involvement in the changing corporation with a new introduction. Cornell University Press.
Heery, E. (2016). Framing work: Unitary, pluralist, and critical perspectives in the twenty-first century. Oxford University Press.
Higgins, P., Roper, I., & Gamwell, S. (2016). HRM as an emerging new managerial profession. In Perspectives on contemporary professional work (pp. 286-312). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Imran, U. D., Ghazwan, M. F., & Firmansyah, F. (2024). The Effect of Recognition and Appreciation on Employee Motivation and Performance. Economics and Digital Business Review, 6(1), 1-18.
Jacoby, S. M. (2018). The embedded corporation: Corporate governance and employment relations in Japan and the United States.
Jahangir, M. (2024). Impact of Extrinsic rewards on Employees Motivation: a case of telenor pakistan.
Kaufman, B. E. (2008). Paradigms in industrial relations: original, modern and versions in‐between. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 46(2), 314-339.
King, D. R. (2024). Exploring the Influence of Distributed Work Arrangements on Employee Engagement in the New Normal Work Environment (Doctoral dissertation, Temple University).
Laaser, K., & Bolton, S. (2022). Absolute autonomy, respectful recognition and derived dignity: Towards a typology of meaningful work. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(3), 373-393.
Martin, S. L., Liao, H., & Campbell, E. M. (2013). Directive versus empowering leadership: A field experiment comparing impacts on task proficiency and proactivity. Academy of management Journal, 56(5), 1372-1395.
McColgan, A. (2015). Measures to address the challenges of work-life balance in the EU Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. European Commission.
Meyerson, D. E. (2008). Rocking the boat: How tempered radicals effect change without making trouble. Harvard Business Review Press.
Mihalcea, A. (2017). Employer branding and talent management in the digital age. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 289-306.
Nambisan, S., Wright, M., & Feldman, M. (2019). The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes. Research policy, 48(8), 103773.
NEUENFELDT, E., & SULÍKOVÁ, R. The Role of Leaders in Promoting Creativity in the Workplace: An Examination of Individual and Organizational Antecedents in Innovation Management.
Osborne, S., & Hammoud, M. S. (2017). Effective employee engagement in the workplace. International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16(1), 4.
Savitz, A. (2013). Talent, transformation, and the triple bottom line: How companies can leverage human resources to achieve sustainable growth. John Wiley & Sons.
Schnabel, C. (2020). Union membership and collective bargaining: Trends and determinants (pp. 1-37). Springer International Publishing.
Schnabel, C. (2020). Union membership and collective bargaining: Trends and determinants (pp. 1-37). Springer International Publishing.
Spechler, J. W. (2017). General Electric Corporation. In Reasonable Accommodation (pp. 99-112). Routledge.
Stahl, G. K., Björkman, I., Farndale, E., Morris, S. S., Paauwe, J., Stiles, P., … & Wright, P. M. (2007). Global talent management: How leading multinationals build and sustain their talent pipeline (Vol. 34). Fontainebleau: Insead.
Ünal, A. F., & Emel, G. G. (2009, April). The Effect of Framing and Power Imbalance on Negotiation Behaviors and Outcomes. In Operations Research Proceedings 2008: Selected Papers of the Annual International Conference of the German Operations Research Society (GOR) University of Augsburg, September 3-5, 2008 (pp. 407-412). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
