Margaret Collinson

Empowerment and Managerial Labor Strategies Pragmatism Regained

Hopes that senior managers attach to programs of empowerment are often dashed in practice. Yet, little research has been conducted into whether lower level managers embrace the language of empowerment, and if not, how they view efforts to develop employee commitment. Case study research in six named organizations in the United Kingdom reveals that managers did not use the term empowerment and that they distinguished its claims to give substantial freedom to employees from more meaningful concepts such as autonomy and involvement. Empowerment meant little because of the financial and other constraints on autonomy, whereas more specific efforts to improve involvement had clear effects on employee behavior. The language of empowerment is not used to mislead workers and hence theories that see empowerment as an insidious form of labor control are not sustained.

MISMANAGING SEXUAL HARASSMENT: PROTECTING THE PERPETRATOR AND BLAMING THE VICTIM

The EC has recently ratified a code of practice on sexual harassment in the workplace. Drawing on case study material, argues that initiatives designed to formalize the procedures for dealing with sexual harassment are necessary but by no means sufficient for its effective management. Presents case studies which outline how sexual harassment can be mismanaged both by professional managers and by trade union representatives.

Leading questions: What’s new about Leadership-as-Practice?

It appears that leadership studies is now in the throes of a ‘new movement’, one that, according to its leading exponent, is ‘destined to shake the foundations of the very meaning of leadership in the worlds of both theory and practice’ (Raelin, 2016b: 1). This ‘leading questions’ article questions three of Raelin’s central claims for this Leadership-as-Practice perspective namely that this approach supersedes other post-heroic perspectives, constitutes a distinct ‘movement’ and is more radical than critical leadership studies. Arguing that these claims are excessive and have little or no substantial supporting evidence, I suggest that Leadership-as-Practice is better seen as one variant of post-heroic leadership. Furthermore, I contend that the primary weakness of Leadership-as-Practice is its continued lack of critical engagement, particularly in relation to its neglect of asymmetrical power relations and control practices in all their multiple forms.