F.D. Pot

Workplace innovation for better jobs and performance

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to describe the need for workplace innovation policies and practices in Europe and evaluate programs that already have been developed. Design/methodology/approach - The paper describes the concept of workplace innovation and trends in society explaining its emergence. The paper then presents and discusses the results of evaluation research as far as this is available. Findings - A growing number of countries is conducting or developing some kind of programme on workplace innovation. These programmes differ in size and governance. Evaluation research shows that simultaneous improvement of performance and quality of working life is possible under certain conditions such as the participation of employees in change projects. Research limitations/implications - Concepts and designs of evaluation research projects differ considerably. This gives new challenges for companies, trade unions, governments and researchers. In EU2020, little attention is paid to workplace innovation but there is a ray of hope in the draft integrated guidelines for employment policies and in the Flagship Initiative Innovation Union. Originality/value - Social innovation in the workplace, or workplace innovation, is a new concept, covering to some extent new practices that appear to be relevant for organisations and governments.

Social Innovation of Work and Employment

Social innovation of work and employment are prerequisites to achieve the EU2020 objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It covers labour market innovation on societal level and workplace innovation on organisational level. This paper focuses on the latter. Workplace innovations are social both in their ends (quality of working life, well-being and development of talents together with organisational performance) and in their means (employee participation and empowerment). Complementary to technological innovations they regard innovations in social aspects of organisations such as work organisation, HRM and work relations. Workplace innovation – or innovative workplaces as it is sometimes called – deserves to be better incorporated in EU policies, as also has been recommended by the European Economic and Social Committee and the OECD. Some countries have experienced the benefits of national campaigns already.

The importance of organizational level decision latitude for well-being and organizational commitment

Purpose This paper focusses on participation in the workplace and examines the relative importance of different dimensions of job control in relation to subjective well-being and organizational commitment. These dimensions are (1) job autonomy (within a given job), (2) functional support (from supervisor and colleagues) and (3) organizational level decision latitude (shop floor consultancy on process improvements, division of labor, workmates, targets, etc.). Interaction with work intensity is looked at as well. Design/methodology/approach Measurements and data were taken from the European Working Conditions Survey 2010. The paper focusses on salaried employees only. The sample was further limited to employees in workplaces consisting of at least fifty workers. There are 2,048 employees in the final sample, from Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Within the European Union these countries were selected because of their sufficiently high levels of combined job control categories and more or less comparable work organization and labor relations. In this paper the focus is not on differences between countries and adding more countries would have introduces country characteristics as intermediate variables. Findings In the regression analyses, functional support and organizational level decision latitude showed stronger relations with the outcome variables than job autonomy. There was no relation between work intensity and the outcome variables. Two-way interactions were found for job autonomy and organizational level decision latitude on subjective well-being, and for functional support and organizational level decision latitude on organizational commitment. A three-way interaction, of all job control variables combined, was found on organizational commitment, with the presence of all types of job control showing the highest organizational commitment level. No such three-way interaction was found for subjective well-being. There was an indication for a two-way interaction of work intensity and functional support, as well as an indication for a two-way interaction of work intensity and organizational level decision latitude on subjective well-being: high work intensity and low functional support or low organizational level decision latitude seemed to associate with low well-being. No interaction was found for any dimension of job control being high and high work intensity. Research limitations/implications Although this study has all the limitations of a cross sectional survey, the results are more or less in accordance with existing theories. This indicates that organizational level decision latitude matters. Differentiation of job control dimensions in research models is recommended, and so is workplace innovation for healthy and productive jobs. Originality/value Most theoretical models for empirical research are limited to control at task level (e.g. the Job Demand-Control-Support (JDCS) model of Karasek and Theorell. The paper aims at nuancing and extending current job control models by distinguishing three dimensions/levels of job control, referring to sociotechnical systems design theory (De Sitter) and action regulation theory (Hacker) and reciprocity (Akerlof). The policy relevance regards the consequences for work and organization design.

Assessment of Stress Risks and Learning Opportunities in the Work Organization

Organizational innovation and recent European legislation on work organization require instruments, to be used by practitioners, for the assessment of jobs and the redesign of the structure of the division of labour. In The Netherlands the so-called WEBA-instrument (conditions for well-being at work) has been developed to assess stress risks and learning opportunities. The foundation of the instrument refers to the Dutch modern sociotechnical systems theory, the Karasek demand-control theory and the German action regulation theory. Its application is becoming widespread because, among other reasons, this instrument is supported by the Labour Inspectorate of The Netherlands. Besides a presentation of the instrument and its foundation, some examples will be given and some theoretical and practical problems discussed.

Workplace Innovation and Wellbeing at Work

Workplace innovation promises to improve organisational performance, quality of working life and consequently wellbeing at work simultaneously. In this chapter the focus is on wellbeing at work, how this promise can be founded theoretically and how the connection of workplace innovation and wellbeing at work has been and can be integrated in policies in Europe. The relation between workplace innovation and wellbeing at work is well-founded, empirically as well as theoretically. It is argued that the ‘conditional approach’ (‘primary prevention’) is a more successful strategy to realise the workplace innovation promises than improving individual coping behaviour (‘secondary prevention’).

Conclusion: The Way Forward with Workplace Innovation

This chapter summarises the state of the art on workplace innovation policy in Europe and discusses the similarities and dissimilarities across theoretical and practical approaches presented in this book. We aim to identify some points of convergence and mutual reinforcement within and across policy, theory, empirical, and practical approaches. To this end we will offer some pointers for the future of workplace innovation in the areas of policy, theory, research, and practice.

European Policy on Workplace Innovation

Workplace innovation is gaining profile as an emerging European policy, creating organisational performance and quality jobs. Workplace innovation is part of a broader EU economic and social policy to support organisational change in companies. How can this emergence of interest in workplace innovation, this new elan, be understood? This chapter describes the development of European policies regarding work organisation and workplace innovation over the last 20 years and its societal context. Over the years, the EU has only partly embraced the issue of workplace innovation, leaving most of the support to disparate national policies. Digitalisation and robotisation offer new opportunities for an integrated policy including EU-agendas on innovation, digitalisation, skills and occupational health.

Towards the High Road of Workplace Innovation in Europe? An Illustration of the Usefulness of the Dataset of the European Working Conditions Survey

The European Union is committed to improve competitiveness and move into the ‘new’ economy by improving working conditions (article 131 of the European treaty). The EU intends to build on its increasingly skilled workforce and encourage organisations to engage as much as possible on the ‘high road’ to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, instead of on the ‘low road’ of cost cutting. The success of this strategy will depend largely on the capacity of organisations to foster employee motivation and well-being through discretion at work (job autonomy, decision latitude) and organisational participation. These are core elements of workplace innovation . An analysis carried out in 2013 by Gallie and Zhou (Eurofound 2013) of the 2010 5th European Working Conditions Survey data (the ‘EWCS’) has confirmed that employees working in high involvement work systems can enhance both company performance and employee well-being. Building on the 6th EWCS 2015, this chapter aims at describing the patterns of employee involvement in 2015, exploring its associations with job quality , employees’ engagement and well-being. This analysis confirms the importance of the combination of job autonomy and organisational participation for job quality, engagement and employee well-being. These topics of job autonomy and organisational participation are crucial elements for workplace innovation (see Chap. 5 in this volume). This work is merely a first step and further in-depth work on the issue is sorely needed.

Introduction: The Need to Uncover the Field of Workplace Innovation

Since the 1990s there has been growing concern among companies on how they can remain productive and innovative in a globalised market and in the so-called knowledge economy.

Innovative Arbeitsgestaltung und neue Arbeitsverhältnisse

In seinem interessanten Aufsatz klart Matthias Trier die Bedingungen fur innovatives Verhalten sowie die Konsequenzen fur die Arbeitsorganisation und fur Lernprozesse im Beruf und an Bildungseinrichtungen. Er folgert, dass Wissen, Fahigkeiten und Wertesysteme die wichtigsten Voraussetzungen der Steuerung innovationsfordernder Aktionen sind.