The power of workers. Knowledge work and the power balance in Scandinavian countries
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-10-2014-0121 |
| Date | 04 April 2016 |
| Pages | 390-405 |
| Published date | 04 April 2016 |
| Author | Karen Modesta Olsen |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Industrial/labour relations |
The power of workers
Knowledge work and the power
balance in Scandinavian countries
Karen Modesta Olsen
Department of Strategy and Management,
Norwegian School of Economics (NHH), Bergen, Norway
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine how occupations and the institutional setting
shape the power balance (individual bargaining power) between employees and employers. It builds on
theoretical approaches on knowledge work and institutional theory.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper uses the European Social Survey data in 2010/2011 to
compare the power balance between employees and employers in three countries: Denmark, Sweden,
and Norway. Multinomial logit regression was employed.
Findings –The results show that occupation and the institutional setting shape the power balance
between employees and employers. Employees in highly skilled occupations perceive greater power
vis-à-vis their employer, and employees in Denmark, characterized by greater flexibility for employers,
perceive less power than in Sweden and Norway. In addition, age and gender are important
demographic factors determining employees’perceived power towards their employers.
Originality/value –The literature makes a number of assumptions with regard to the attitudes and
behaviour of knowledge workers. However, research that compares employees in knowledge work
with other occupational groups is scarce. This paper adds to the literature by comparing employees in
highly skilled knowledge work with employees in lower skilled occupations. It also empirically shows
how different approaches to definitions of knowledge work correspond.
Keywords Employee relations, Power, Institutional theory, Knowledge work
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
This paper addresses a core topic in sociology of work and organizations: the control
and power of workers. Two trends in the labour market accentuate the need to know
more about the power balance that exists between employees and employers. First,
there has been an expansion in higher education over recent decades. This has led to
researchers arguing that there is a shift in the transfer of power from the employer
to the employee (Reed, 1996). Second, in many European labour markets, there is a
trend towards more flexibility for employers in employment decisions and less security
for workers (Heyes, 2011). These two trends may have distinct consequences for
employees and may influence the power of occupational groups differently. In this
paper, we examine employees’perceptions of the balance of power across occupations
in three “inclusive”employment regimes.
Previous research presents a divergent picture of the power balance between
knowledge workers and their employers. On the one hand, researchers argue that
knowledge and professional workers have a strong position vis-à-vis their employers.
The essence of this argument is that the value of their labour is linked to their expertise
and skills, which are easily transferred to another firm, leaving them in a stronger
position with regard to individual bargaining power. Because knowledge workers are
the owners of their own human capital and therefore the means of production,
employers depend on them to a larger extent than other workers (Reed, 1996; Robertson
Employee Relations
Vol. 38 No. 3, 2016
pp. 390-405
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-10-2014-0121
Received 16 October 2014
Revised 22 May 2015
Accepted 18 June 2015
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
390
ER
38,3
and Swan, 2004; Teece, 2003; von Nordenflycht, 2010). Additionally, it is generally
assumed that knowledge workers derive their power from individual bargaining in the
workplace rather than from institutional power in the form of trade unions
(see Pernicka and Reichel, 2014). On the other hand, the critical management literature
argues that knowledge workers often do routine work (Alvesson, 2001). Thus, they do
not necessarily do expert work that matches their formal qualifications. Furthermore,
the empirical basis for the “distinctness”of knowledge workers is scarce and the
findings mixed (Mastekaasa, 2011; Huang, 2011; Benson and Brown, 2007).
The inconsistent picture calls for more studies that compare knowledge workers to
other occupational groups.
The many claims regarding knowledge workers seem to be universal regardless of
country and labour market situation. In order to shed light on how institutional and
labour market features may influence the position of knowledge workers, we apply a
“comparable cases”design, studying Denmark, Sweden, and Norway (Svallfors et al.,
2001; Lijphart, 1975). The Scandinavian countries are characterized as “inclusive”
employment regimes (Gallie, 2003) where employees have relatively more autonomy
and power than in other European countries (Gallie, 2003; Gooderham et al., 2015;
Edlund and Grönlund, 2008). If inequality in the power balance between occupational
groups is prevalent in these countries characterized by “inclusiveness”, it may be even
more pronounced in countries where labour markets are more segmented and
employers have a stronger position. Although the Scandinavian countries share many
similarities, there are some institutional differences between these countries. The
development of the “flexicurity”-model in Denmark constitutes one difference between
the Scandinavian countries (Madsen et al., 2011). This model provides Danish
employers with flexibility on staffing issues, combined with security for workers
through generous unemployment benefits and active labour market policies. The
greater flexibility for Danish employers may be crucial for the power balance between
employees and employers. Thus, the study may also have policy implicatio ns through
its revelation of how the institutional setting shapes the power balance between
employees and employers.
In this paper, we address two main questions: first, how does the power balance
(individual bargaining power) vary between occupational groups, and second, to what
extent does the institutional context shape the power balance? We compare employees
across occupational groups and nations in terms of relative power between employee
and employer. We measure the power balance by two dimensions: first, how easy/
difficult it is to get a similar or better job, and second, how easy/difficult it is for the
employer to replace the worker. Both of these dimensions pertain to issues of individual
bargaining power and control: how workers can secure future income and control over
the work situation.
Theoretical background
Defining knowledge work
Very generally, we can distinguish between two main approaches by which to define
“knowledge workers”: what workers do, involving factors such as the level of
autonomy, complexity, variety, and problem-solving (Benson and Brown, 2007) and
what workers are educated to do, that is, individuals’formal education. The latter
definition is commonly found in research on occupational groups, such as lawyers,
accountants (von Nordenflycht, 2010), consultants (Donnelly, 2009), and medical
professionals (Mastekaasa, 2011). Furthermore, one has distinguished between highly
391
The power of
workers
To continue reading
Request your trial