IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

STUDY OF FUNCTIONING OF PARTICIPATIVE COMMITTEES IN NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION OF INDIA (COIMBATORE)

Dr. K. Sundar * Dr. J. Sundararaj** P. Ashok kumar***

ABSTRACT
The study of functioning of the participative committees reveals that, members show interest in attending committee meetings, take active part in discussion and have no fear of unions reaction or managements vindictive action, while expressing opinion unpalatable to them. Management does not try to muffle their voice nor does it adopt any domineering attitude. But the other side of the coin is not so rosy. Worker-representatives sometimes adopt rigid postures, notwithstanding the rightness of the stand of the other. What dampens workers enthusiasm in the scheme and makes them gradually skeptic is the lack of seriousness shown in implementing members suggestions. Though there is a very favourable psychological environment, failure to act upon members suggestions fouls it, breeds discontent among workers and would finally toll the knell of participative programme. What is urgently required is the constitution of machinery for implementing at least those suggestions which are feasible. Suitable training progarmme on the conduct of participative committee meetings in a professional fashion is sure to address some of the ills and deficiencies unearthed in the present study. KEY WORDS: Decision Making, Employee Participation, NTC, WPM, Participative Committee.

* Associate Professor, Commerce Wing, DDE ** Assistant Professor, Commerce Wing, DDE ***Ph.D Research Scholar, Department of Commerce

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

76

IJRIME
INTRODUCTION

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

The concept of Workers' Participation in Management (WPM) has been exercising the thoughts of management experts, industrial owners, the working class and the research scholars the world over so much that many countries have attempted to give practical shape to it in one form or another. It is one of the widely debated issues in industrial relations. Diversity of views makes difficult a clear understanding of the concept. "Participation is one of the most misunderstood ideas that have emerged from the field of human relations". The traditional view that the owners of capital have unbridled right to manage the enterprise the way they fancy and that the employees, once paid wages do not have any say in any matter, does not hold good any longer. A laborer can no more be viewed as one hired to carry out his masker's bidding. Out of this realization came the voice of employee's protest against management's whimsical action. The demand for a role to play in decision-making at least in areas affecting his rights found expression in the scheme of participative management. This concept has assumed such singular significance in to-day's changing industrial environment that it can no more be brushed aside as something impracticable on the ground of non-existence of certain pre-requisites. Just as political democracy has become acknowledged the best form of Government of a country with all its shortcomings, industrial democracy has become the cry and clamor of those who cherish freedom for the working class. Participation in management is only a process of democratizing the industrial structure. The participative management is one of the noble concepts in democratizing the industrial structure. Decision-making process forms undoubtedly an integral part of participative system of management. Participation may, however, take various forms- from the lowest level of information sharing up to the highest stage of codetermination. Different types of participation can be in vogue in the same organization for different levels of decision-making. While face-to-face interaction is enough for on-the-job issues which brook no delay, deep deliberations at properly convened meetings are indispensable before final decision is arrived at on important issues. Workers representatives on committees sit with management nominees for discharging one of the most important functions of management, namely decision-making. In

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

77

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

this back drop this article intends to analyse how far the participative meetings in NTC Mills under study can be considered to be a meaningful exercise in participative managerial system.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:
Now an attempt is made to review the earlier studies to identify the important goals of participative management. Marrow Alfreds et.al (1967) gave a vivid and valuable account of how a conflict ridden company improved its performance beyond all expectation through encouragement of full participation and facilitating free flow of communication among employees through effective implementation of WPM through committees. Reed M. Powell and John L. Schlacter (1972) found on a field experiment in a government organisation in Ohio that productivity of the work groups did improve through strengthening participative committees. Larry E. Griner (1973), on the basis of an opinion survey of 318 executives on the characteristics of participative leadership, found that convincing the subordinates to accept changes received the highest rating among the various traits. Mills (1997) observed that participative system, if introduced in true spirit through committees, had the potential to shoot industrial conflict and usher in a greater harmony in contemporary world. Wellins Byham and Willion (1991) held that if workers are given decision making power in respect of decision areas relevant to their work, through right mechanism like participative committees the quality of decision would certainly improve. Kestler et al (2002) distinguished between the impact of consultative and substantive forms of participation and established that workers who were given greater autonomous control over the methods and pace of work and made decisions that substantially affected the production process under participatory systems practiced through high powered committees, showed higher productivity results than ones who were merely consulted on work and productivity related decisions. Kelly and Harrison (1992) in their study proved the close relationship between committee form of participative systems and harmonies relationship between workers and management. It is clear from the above reviews (Abroad and India) that no research work has been done in the textile mills under the control of NTC, Coimbatore, and Chennai, India on the various aspects of functioning of participative committees. The present study intends to bridge the gap.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

78

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

In India the experiment with the scheme of workers participation in management has been very tardy, and discouraging. Success stories are a few in numbers, while dismal failures abound. A scheme accepted the world over to be one capable of contributing to organisational effectiveness by reducing areas of friction through power-sharing and employee-development has not been much of a success in India in a number of even public sector undertakings, despite Governments efforts to secure workers active involvement at various levels of management. Many research studies conducted in Indian context have un earthed many factors blocking the effective functioning of WPM. In this back drop an attempt is made to study the effectiveness of functioning of WPM in Indian context in the public sector environment. The participative schemes are put in to practice through various fora in the mills sampled for the study. The participative committee is one of the fora through which workers participate through the representatives. The very scheme has been in operation for almost two decades in the mills under study. However there is no study taken up till date to find out the effectiveness of the functioning of the various participative committees. Whether the participative management practiced through committees in the mills is on the sound track or facing rough weather is the problem worth pursuing. SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY National Textile Corporation Ltd. A public sector undertaking has been experimenting with different scheme to secure workers involvement in the process of decision-making. A study on the functioning of WPM through participative committees is supposed to throw light on the many aspects of functioning of WPM committees like frequency of committee meetings, participative spirit of members of the committees, attitude of members at the meeting, nature of problems discussed, barriers blocking free discussion and administrative Hurdles. The outcome of this research would help mill administration in making suitable changes in the functioning of committees thereby realizing the goals of WPM to the full extent. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 1. To measure the frequency of committee meetings and participative spirit of members of

the committees

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

79

IJRIME
2. thereat. 3. 4.

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

To explore the attitude of members at the meeting and nature of problems discussed

To investigate barriers blocking free discussion and administrative hurdles. To offer suggestions for making the functioning of participative committees effective.

METHODOLOGY The study is based on survey method which analyses the attitude and perception of respondents. POPULATION FOR THE STUDY The views of only 14 of the management respondents (out of a total of 31) who are actually members of various participative committees were sought on the functioning of committees in this chapter. In other words, the entire worker-representative (25) and the management nominees (14) constitute the response category for the study. Collection of Data Interview schedule was designed to collect information from the representatives of workers and management nominees staff on the various aspects of functioning of participative committees. Frame work of analysis The collected data have been analysed in tabular form with the help of simple percentages. Likerts five point scale was used to measure the degree of their existing and desired influence in different decision-areas. Limitations of the study 1. Since the study is purely based on perception of workers, there is a possibility of prejudice or predilection having entered into their perception. 2. The findings of the study cannot hold good for all organisations for all time as these variables vary organisation to organisation. Results and Discussion Table - 1Regularity in Conducting Meetings

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

80

IJRIME
Category of Respondents 1 Very much satisfied 2

Volume1Issue2
To Some Satisfied extent satisfied 3 4 5

ISSN-2249- 1619

No opinion Dissatisfied

Total

7 (2-6)

Workers Representatives Management Nominees Total

4 (16.0)

21 (84.0)

25 (100) 14 (100) 39 (100)

10 (71.4)

4 (28.6)

14 (35.9)

25 (64.1)

Source: Computed from primary data Are you satisfied with the regularity in conducting meetings?.

Table 1 point to a majority opinion (64%) expressing dissatisfaction at the irregularity in conducting committee meetings, with as high as 84 per cent of worker-representatives feeling frustrated. The curious fact is that even 29 per cent of management nominees have expressed the same feeling, while a vast majority of them (71%) indicating satisfaction to some extent. All are unanimous in their opinion that meetings are not held regularly. Table 2 Perceived Reasons for not Holding the Meetings as Scheduled Workers Category of Respondents Pressure of Unforeseen work No Total

apathy Managements particular apathy issue to be discussed 5 6

circumstances (lack of quorum)

7 (2-6)

Workers Representatives Management Nominees

8 (32.0)

17 (68)

25 (100)

3 (21.4)

9 (64.3)

2 (14.3)

14 (100)

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

81

IJRIME
Total 3 (7.7)

Volume1Issue2
17 (43.6) 17 (43.6)

ISSN-2249- 1619
2 (5.1) 39 (100)

Source: Computed from primary data What reason do you attribute to the failure in holding meetings as per schedule?. Table No. 2 portrays the possible reasons for not holding the meetings regularly. The opinion is divided equally between unforeseen circumstances and managements apathy (44%). But a deeper analysis points to a sharp division of opinion on the majority view as between the two respondent groups, worker-representatives (68 per cent) attributing irregularity in the conduct of meetings to managements apathy and management nominees (64%) to unforeseen circumstances. Table 3 Participative Urge of Worker-Representatives: Regularity in Attending Committee Meetings Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often 3 Occasionally No Opinion 4 5 Never 6 Total 7 (2-6) Workers Representatives Management Nominees Total 25 (100) 14 (100) 39 (100) Source: Computed from primary data Whether worker-representatives make it a point to attend participative committee meetings without fail?. 25 (100) 14 (100) 39 (100)

Table 3 presents the perception of committee members on these issues. As for attendance, there is unanimity of view (100%) that workers-representatives make it a point to attend meetings always. This is also corroborated by the views of management nominees.

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

82

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

Table 4 Participative Urge of Worker-Representatives: Pre-Meeting Preparation Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often Occasionally 3 4 No Opinion 5 Never 6 Total 7 (2-6) A. Pre-meeting consultation with colleagues B. Gathering information from Management Source: Computed from primary data A Before attending the meetings, do you discuss the issues on the agenda with your colleagues and invite their suggestions?. B Do you try to gather information and data from concerned authority on issues to be discussed at the meeting? 2 (8) 13 (52) 3 (12) 10 (40) 9 (36) 13 (52) 25 (100) 25 (100)

Table 4 reveals a small majority of respondents (52%) often have prior consultation, and that 40 per cent, occasional consultation. Only eight per cent of members have observed that they always make it a point to consult and seek suggestion before attending the meeting. As regards gathering information from management, the same Tale 7.4 points to a little disappointing experience. A majority (52%) never takes pains to get necessary data from management and only 12 per cent of the respondents often do this. This shows that members have not become mature enough to do this home work prior to the meeting. Table 5 Participative Urge of Workers- Representatives: Persons Consulted Persons Consulted 1. Colleagues 6 (24) Response

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

83

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2
2. Union Officebearers 3. Politicians 4. Superiors 16 (64) 3 (12) 5. Nobody Total 25 (100)

ISSN-2249- 1619

Source: Computed from primary data

As for people with whom consultation is made, (Table 5) a majority view (64%) points to union office bearers and a small minority (12%) to opinion from superiors. Only twenty-four per cent of the respondents have stated that they consult with their colleagues. What this item brings forth is that since the worker-representatives are nominated by the Union, they seek opinions and suggestions from the union office-bearers. Another point made clear is that none of them has consultation with politicians. Table 6 Post-Meeting Discussion with Colleagues Persons Consulted 1. Always 20 (80) 2. Often 5 (20) 3. 4. Sometimes Never Total 25 (100) Source: Computed from primary data Do you inform your colleagues about the discussion that took place at the committee meetings?
International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

Response

84

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

Table 6 portrays that 80 per cent of the respondents who belong to workers category take pains always to inform their colleagues on what had happened at the committee meetings, while the remaining 20 per cent do this function often. This indicates that members do this important piece of work satisfactorily. It was ascertained that the committee members do this usually at gate meetings. Table 7 Opinion of Management Nominees on the Attitude of Worker-Representatives at the committee Meeting Nature of Attitude 1. Very much cooperative 2. Co-operative 4 (28.6) 6 (42.9) 3. Indifferent 3 (21.4) 4. 5. No opinion Hostile 1 (7.1) Total 14 (100) Source: Computed from primary data Response

Table 7 brings to the fore the attitude of worker-representatives as perceived by management nominees. It is also healthy in that 43 per cent of the opinion is for cooperative and that 29 per cent hold it to be very much cooperative. Indifferent attitude is perceived by 21 per cent of management nominees, while a bare 7 per cent considers it to be hostile. Table 8 Opinion of Worker-Representatives on the Attitude of Management Nominees at the committee Meeting
International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

85

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2
Nature of Attitude 1. Very much cooperative 2. Co-operative 8 (32) 11 (44) 3. 4. No opinion Indifferent 3 (12) 5. Hostile 3 (12) Total 25 (100) Response

ISSN-2249- 1619

Source: Computed from primary data What has been the attitude of worker-representative at the committee meetings?

Table 8 shows the perception of workers representatives on the attitude of management nominees at the committee meetings. The view of the majority of the respondents varies from cooperative (44%) to very cooperative (32%). Twelve per cent of the respondents view their attitude to be indifferent. But the diametrically opposite view to one of very cooperative i.e. hostile attitude is also presented (12%). Table 9 Perception of Worker-Representatives on the Attitude of Management Nominees on Unpalatable Issues Nature of Attitude 1. 2. 3. Serious Vindictive Indifferent 19 (76) 4. No opinion Response

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

86

IJRIME
5.

Volume1Issue2
Appreciative 6 (24) Total 25 (100)

ISSN-2249- 1619

Source: Computed from primary data What is the attitude of the management nominees when issues unpalatable to them are discussed? As for issues which are not to the liking of the management, Table 9 discloses that management (76%) is perceived to be adopting an indifferent attitude. A very small minority (24%) considers them to be appreciative of the issues unmindful of the bad taste they leave on management. Indifference in this context is not a desirable indication. Table 10 Opinions on Raising of Unrelated Issues Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often 3 Occasionally No Opinion Never 4 5 6 Total 7 (2-6) Workers Representatives 16 (64) Management Nominees 7 (50) Total 7 (17.9) Source: Computed from primary data It is alleged that matters wholly unrelated to the agenda are brought for discussion. Do you agree?. 7 (50) 23 (59) 9 (23.1) 9 (36) 25 (100) 14 (100) 39 (100)

Table 10 discloses that a majority of worker-representatives (64%) have agreed that problems not wholly related to the scope of the committee are raised sometimes. Thirty-six per cent of them have, however, denied the raising of such issues. As for managements opinion, it is equally divided as between often and sometimes. The only consolation is that such problems are not raised at every meeting.
International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

87

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

Table 11 Opinion on Raising Worker-related Issues only Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often 3 Occasionally No Opinion Never 4 5 6 Total 7 (2-6) Workers Representatives 12 (48) Management Nominees 10 (71.4) Total 10 (25.7) Source: Computed from primary data It is alleged that no interest is shown in discussing issues relating to the promotion of enterprise goals i.e. workers interest alone is given serious thought. Do you agree?. 4 (28.6) 16 (41.0) 13 (33.3) 13 (52) 25 (100) 14 (100) 39 (100)

As for limiting the scope of discussion only to items relating to workers interest. Table 11 reveals that a bare 52 per cent of worker-representatives disagree with this view. Al the management respondents have expressed the view (71 per cent strongly) that worker-representatives showed no interest in discussing issues relating to the promotion of enterprise goals. It can be concluded that workers interest is confined to the area of their welfare only. Table 12 Opinion on Impracticable Suggestions Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often 3 Occasionally No Opinion Never 4 5 6 Total 7 (2-6) Workers Representatives 12 (48) Management Nominees 10 (71.4) Total 4 (28.6) 7 (18.0) Source: Computed from primary data
International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

13 (52)

25 (100)

14 (100)

14 (35.9)

18 (46.1)

39 (100)

88

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

It is alleged that worker-representatives bring impracticable suggestions. Do you agree?.

With regard to the impractical nature of issues raised by workers. Table 12 discloses that 72 per cent of the worker-representatives totally disagree with the view. However, 50% of management nominees have observed that worker representatives often resort to the practice of raising problems, which cannot be solved at the mill level. But others have said that this happens only occasionally (sometimes). Table 13 Barriers Blocking free Discussion: Frank Exchange of Views Category of Respondents 1 Always 3 (12) Workers Representatives Often 19 (76) 11 (78.6) Management Nominees 3 (7.7) Total 3 (12) Source: Computed from primary data To what extent are the discussions at the committee meetings free and frank?. 30 (76.9) 19 (76) Occasionally No Opinion Not at all 3 (12) 3 (21.4) 6 (15.4) 3 (12) Total 25 (100) 14 (100) 39 (100) 25 (100)

Table 13 portrays the perception of all participant respondents (both worker and management category) on issues blocking frank exchange of opinions. While 77 per cent of the total respondents hold that discussion is frank to a large extent, 8 per cent indicate it to be absolutely frank. The fact that emerges is that but for a small minority of 15 per cent who hold that free exchange is observable to some extent, all the others are satisfied with the frankness of discussion at the meetings.

Table 14 Barriers Blocking Free Discussion: Worker-Representatives Opinion on Postmeeting Reaction

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

89

IJRIME
S.No. Category of Respondents 1

Volume1Issue2
Strongly Agree 2 Agree 3 No opinion 4

ISSN-2249- 1619
Disagree 5 Strongly disagree 6 Total 7 (2-6)

A. Unions threatening attitude

7 (28)

2 (8)

12 (48) 22 (88)

4 (16)

25 (100) 25 (100)

B. Managements vindictive attitude Source: Computed from primary data

3 (12)

A Do you agree that you will be harassed for your views if they run counter to counter to those of the union?. B Do you agree that you will be harassed for your views, if they are against are against those of the management?

Table 14 discloses that a majority members (64%) rejection of the statement (16% - very strong rejection) portrays no fear of unions threatening reaction for expression of views which are unpleasant to it. However, twenty-eight per cent of the respondents agree with the statement. The same Table 7.14 points out that a vast majority (88%) flatly deny that they have any such apprehension for views expressed against management. They have also observed that management does not resort to such vindictive measures. Even the small minority (12%) holding a slightly opposite view, observed that they are afraid of the management sometimes because some of the managerial personnel show their wrath indirectly by getting easily provoked even for minor lapses at the work spot. Table 15 Barriers Blocking Free Discussion: Committed and predetermined Attitude S.No. Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often Sometimes 3 4 No opinion 5 Never 6 Total 7 (2-6) 1. Workers Representatives 16 (64) 4 (16) 5 (20) 25 (100)

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

90

IJRIME
2. Management Nominees

Volume1Issue2
10 (71.4) 4 (28.6)

ISSN-2249- 1619
15 (100)

Source: Computed from primary data Due to committed decisions, meetings get prolonged resulting in waste of participative time. Do you agree?

Table 15 portrays a vivid picture. A significant majority of total respondents (67%) point that due to committed decisions meetings get prolonged often. Even when the views are analysed category-wise, it points to the same result, both worker-representatives and management nominees giving the same opinion. Only a small minority (21 per cent) says that such a situation happens sometimes. Table 16 Barriers Blocking Free Discussion: Personal Attacks Sidelining Main Issues S.No. Category of Respondents 1 Always 2 Often Sometimes 3 4 No opinion 5 Never 6 Total 7 (2-6) 1. Workers Representatives 3 (12) 2. Management Nominees 5 (35.7) Source: Computed from primary data Personal attacks and counter allegations mar the proceedings of the participative meetings. Do you agree? 17 (68) 9 (64.3) 5 (20) 25 (100) 14 (100)

Table 16 presents the views of both the groups of committee members on this issue. A vast majority of both workers representatives (68%) and management nominees (64%) and have shown that personal attacks and counter allegations mar the proceedings of the meetings only sometimes. Twelve per cent of the former and thirty-six per cent of the latter category point out that this happens often. The views of 20 per cent of worker-representatives that this never

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

91

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

happens is to be brushed aside as being borne out of a desire to project a good image of the committee members. Table 17 Administrative Hurdles Workers Representatives Issues SA 1 A 2 NOP 3 (2-1) A 12 (48) B 13 (52) 2 (8) C 3 (12) 20 25 D 4 SD 5 Total 6 SA 7 (6-5) 4 8 Management Nominees A 8 NOP 9 D 10 SD 11 (10-9) 2 (14.3) 2 (14.3) 12 (85.7) 14 (100) 2 7 (50) 7 (50) 2 3 14 (100) 14 (100) 14 (100) 14 (100) 14 (100) Total 12

(100) (28.6) (57.1) 25

(80) (100) 25 25

(100) (100) D 13 (52) E 25 (100) Source: Computed from primary data 9 (36) 3 25

(12) (100) (14.3) 25 (100) 7 (50)

(14.3) (21.4)

A No secretarial facilities are provided (for circulating agenda, writing minutes). etc. etc) B Management does not make available sufficient data for making correct decisions. C Management does not release members for attending meetings on the ground that there are too many committee meetings D Management usually takes a very long time for implementing decisions or sometimes fails to implement at all. E There is no mechanism for follow-up action on the decision arrived at participative forums.

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

92

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

Table 17 indicates the perception of respondents belonging to both worker-representatives and management nominees on these issues. As regards provision of secretarial facilities, (Issue A) only 14 per cent of the management respondents disagree with the view. It points to the failure of the management in providing this essential facility as communication of decision arrived at to all the employees would be held up otherwise. There is unanimity in the opinion expressed by worker-representatives. Management agrees that while agenda is duly sent, and minutes recorded, a lot can still be done in this respect.

CONCLUSION
The study of functioning of the participative committees reveals that, members show interest in attending committee meetings, take active part in discussion and have no fear of unions reaction or managements vindictive action, while expressing opinion unpalatable to them. Management does not try to muffle their voice nor does it adopt any domineering attitude. But the other side of the coin is not so rosy. Worker-representatives sometimes adopt rigid postures, notwithstanding the rightness of the stand of the other, Passionate obstinacy to toe only the line of ones group or discussion with blinkers of predetermined decisions negates the very purpose of participative approach. What dampens workers enthusiasm in the scheme and makes them gradually skeptic is the lack of seriousness shown in implementing members suggestions. The interest shown and the expectations raised when their suggestions are invited vapour into thin air because they remain unattended to for long. Though there is a very favourable psychological environment, failure to act upon members suggestions fouls it, breeds discontent among workers and would finally toll the knell of participative programme. What is urgently required is the constitution of machinery for implementing at least those suggestions which are feasible. Suitable training progarmme on the conduct of participative committee meetings in a professional fashion is sure to address some of the ills and deficiencies unearthed in the present study.

REFERENCE:
1. Alfred J. Marrow et.all 1967. Management by Participation, Creative Climate for Personnel and Organizational Development. New York: Harper & Row.

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

93

IJRIME

Volume1Issue2

ISSN-2249- 1619

2. Kelley, M.R. and B. Harrison. 1992. "Unions, Technology and Labour Management cooperation", L. Mishel a P.B. Yoos (eds.), N.Y.: M.E. 3. Kester, G., Zammit, E. and Gold, M. 2002. "New Frontiers of Democratic Participation at Work." Paper delivered at the II' Conference of the International Association for the Economics of Participation (IAFEP, Catholic University of Brussels, 4-6 July). 4. Larry E. Griener. 1973. What managers think of participative leadership? Harward Business Review, March April, PP. 111-117. 5. Mills, T. 1977. "Leadership from Abroad: European Development in Industrial Democracy", in W.D. Hesler and J.W. Houks (eds.), A Matter of Dignity Inquires into the Humanization of Work. London. University of Notre dam Press. 6. Reed M. Powell, and Hohn L. Schlacter. 1972. Participative Management a Panacea? Academy of Management Journal, Vol, 14, No. 2, June, PP. 165-173. 7. Wellins, R.S., W. C. Byham and l. M. Wilson. 1991.V Empowered Teams. San Francisco: losseo-Bass.

International Journal of Research in IT, Management and Engineering www.gjmr.org

94