M.B.A. / The importance of a free market in a post apartheid South Africa has been acknowledged. The benefits should be spread so that all individuals may be able to share in the wealth generated by the people within the country. Privatisation is one mechanism for redistributing the wealth ofthe State, and the use of an Employee Share Ownership Participation Scheme (E.S.O.P.S.) is a way in which the wealth can be spread over a large proportion ofthe population. This was a basic policy of Thatcher's Government in the U.K. The same rationale is apt for the South African situation. An E.S.O.P.S., is similar to a profit sharing or a pension plan, and may be grouped with various holistic empowerment strategies. There are however two fundamental differences from these two traditional plans: 1. It invests only in the equity ofthe employer 2. The E.S.O.P.S., provides the organisation with an increased finance tool, through an increased ability to borrow. One of the business trends, in the U.S.A. and the U.K. and more recently in South Africa has been to extend the ownership of shares to employees. This secures a stake in the company, an avenue for retiring owners, and as protection against hostile takeover bids. Other motives that have been used are, as an educational experience and also as a part of participative management philosophy. The author has made a study of the acceptance of E.S.O.P.S., schemes in the South African Mining Industry and the impact of this concept on the workers through an attitude survey. The author headed the Department of Mining Engineering in the new University of Johannesburg, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment. He lectures the subjects Mineral Engineering Management, Coal Mining and Coal Services to candidates for the National Diploma (NO) and Bacculareus Technologae (B Tech) in Mining Engineering.

M.Com. (Industrial Relations) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Arts, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 1997 / While employee participation has existed in various forms since the late 19th century, the thinking behind terms like 'participative management' and 'stakeholding' began to take root after the second world war in some companies in the major industrial nations ...[No abstract provided. Information taken from first chapter] / MT2017

Lam Pik Ki. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-80). / Abstracts in English and Chinese; questionnaire in Chinese.

Not available / text

M.Comm. / Empowerment is one of the most discussed topics relating management style, culture, structural change and employee satisfaction. Once a company has introduced an employee empowerment strategy, there is very little guidance on how to determine if the strategy is effective and successful. Management is defined as getting things done through other people. What is to be done is not exactly described or- prescribed. No tasks are defined, the definition is generic and should fit all organisations, structures and people (Pretorius, 1997:1). However, over time a lot of management theories have evolved in describing the "how" of management. Together with these approaches, structures, cultures and management styles have formed that were and are still in use by companies today. The world has evolved from an Industrial Age to an Information Age where information is freely available. In an ever-increasing pace of change, most companies are changing the structure, culture and management styles in which they operate to keep up to improve market share, communications and productivity. Most bigger and older companies grew up in the era of structured power. This hierarchical structure of power has its origin in the Industrial Age. The emphasis was on mass production, standardisation, specialisation, stability and security. But even that has changed as "change" become the buzzword for survival. There has been a move in the late eighties and nineties, where change is the only constant. It is influenced by a total new set of needs, and left with the need for different attitudes, behaviour, management style and modus operandi. Responsible empowerment is seen by some as an essential part change management, because it can lead to both increased productivity, quality and employee satisfaction. Since there may be as many negatives talked about employee empowerment as there are positives, it is clear that empowerment does not work for all organisations. It is one of the most difficult aspects of continual improvement to implement (Stebbins, 1998). Involving people in the decisions they make, to make them feel responsible and accountable for their work is something that takes time, patience and perseverance. The idea of employee empowerment has considerable appeal to the participating business leaders and many are convinced that empowerment offers substantial potential benefits to companies,

D.Com. (Industrial Relations) / This study contains the results of an investigation that was undertaken to determine managers' perceptions with respect to readiness for productivity bargaining. In the chapters dealing with the theoretical aspects, the author has defined productivity, analysed the factors that have an impact upon productivity and discussed the relationship between productivity, collective bargaining and worker participation. Remuneration systems, performance and productivity improvement were also discussed. A critical evaluation of productivity bargaining in practice was done in order to illustrate the abovementioned theoretical concepts from a practical viewpoint. A conceptual model of organisational change factors which determine the readiness for productivity bargaining and a questionnaire which was derived from it, was developed and provided the basis for the empirical research. Using the questionnaire and statistical analysis, the perceptions of management at different levels of seniority and who negotiate with trade unions on a decentralised or centralised basis within different industries in the PWV-geographical area, were tested in order to determine whether there are significant differences regarding readiness for productivity bargaining. The questionnaire addressed the following main dimensions: worker participation, productivity awareness and productivity bargaining and management behavior and values within the bargaining relationship. Three hypotheses were formulated and tested statistically. Firstly, the hypothesis was stated that there are significant differences between the perceptions of management at different levels of seniority regarding readiness for productivity bargaining. They would perceive readiness for productivity bargaining differently since it is expected that they would be at different levels of readiness for this form of collective bargaining. In order to ascertain whether the hypotheses are valid or not, a questionnaire was completed by 15 executive managers, 61 senior managers and 79 middle managers. The questionnaire was constructed using seven-point interval scales where the respondent could indicate one as extreme~y negative and seven as extremely positive in response to each item. Responses were grouped per management category in order to test the perceptions of managers at different levels of seniority regarding readiness for productivity bargaining. Use was made of a MANOVA, an ANOVA and a one-way F-test (Scheff~) and no significant differences were found between the perceptions of managers at different levels of seniority regarding readiness for productivity bargaining. The second hypothesis was formulated and stated that there are significant differences between the perceptions of managers regarding readiness for productivity bargaining in organisations with decentralised and centralised bargaining forums. The author suspected that the degree of centralisation or decentralisation of the bargaining process could have an influence on readiness for productivity bargaining. In order to determine whether the hypothesis (as stated) was correct, all responses in the two bargaining categories were compared with each other. The results were tested using the Hotelling T2 test and the author confirmed empirically that there are no significant differences between the perceptions of management which make use of different (centralised versus decentralised) bargaining forums. Thirdly the hypothesis was stated that there are significant differences between the perceptions of management regarding readiness for productivity bargaining in different industries. It was expected that industries would differ in terms of managers' perceptions of· the abovementioned aspect, but there was uncertainty as to whether these differences would be significant regarding productivity bargaining. Using a MANOVA, an ANOVA and a one-way F-test (Scheff~) it was determined that there are significant differences between the perceptions of ~anagement in different industries regarding readiness for productivity bargaining. Qualitative data which was obtained from Human Resources Managers, trade union representatives, academics/consultants and other authorities on the subject during a series of personal interviews conducted during the Pilot-study, was confirmed by the abovementioned empirical findings. The general conclusion is that there is not a readiness for productivity bargaining amongst managers in the PWV-geographical area. In order to develop this readiness, several actions are required as part of an integrated productivity strategy. Specific actions include a self-audit during which managers evaluate the present and desired levels of worker participation, productivity awareness and -bargaining and their own behaviour and values within the bargaining relationship. These recommendations are discussed in detail in the last chapter. A chapter was dedicated to the formulation of guidelines for management and organised labour regarding productivity.

Recent theories of democracy agree in rejecting the 'classical' theory and in giving only a minor place to popular participation. Attempts to defend the 'classical' theory have failed to show that the rejection is unjustified given the empirical evidence of the political apathy of the ordinary man. Chapter 1. The theory of a very influential forerunner of recent theorists, Schumpeter, is discussed. The work of Mayo, Dahl and Sartori, theorists concerned to establish the defining characteristics of democracy, is examined. They agree that the essential feature is the electoral competition of leaders. So long as a certain minimum of the electorate periodically vote nothing further is required of them. Sartori argues that apathy is "nobody's fault". Three theories of stable democracy, complementary to those of the first group of writers, are discussed. Berelson, Almond and Verba, and Eckstein are concerned with the attributes of the citizen and the forms of non-political authority structures required for a stable democratic system. It is argued that all the writers considered adhere to a common theory of democracy: the contemporary theory. The critics of this theory argue a) that despite claims to the contrary, a new normative theory has been produced: b) that the 'classical' theory has been misunderstood. Chapter II. It is argued that although facts and values can be distinguished from each other there is no unbridgeable, logical gulf between tnem; rather a two-way relationship exists and values are 'vulnerable' to facts. Further it is argued that it is not possible for political theorists to use certain key terms, e.g. political equality, in a purely descriptive sense. An evaluative background is needed to make particular interpretations intelligible. The evaluative framework of the contemporary theory of democracy, which includes a model of tne ideal (private) citizen, is discussed. The notion of one 'classical' theory of democracy is shown to be a myth. The contemporary theory descends from 'classical' theorists (e.g. Bentham) who held the sane narrow, protective view of participation. Other 'classical' theorists held a very different view of participation. Chapter III. On the basis of a discussion of the participatory theories of two 'classical' theorists, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and J.S. Mill, and one twentieth century theorist, G.D.H. Cole, it is argued that the significant contribution to democratic theory of the theorists of participation is the recognition of an inter- relationship between the form of, and operation of, political institutions and the attributes of individuals interacting within them. The major hypothesis of these theorists is that participation is educative, in the widest sense of that term. The psychological impact of participation, and the political control it gives to citizens, means that the more men participate the better able they are to do so; the political system becomes self-sustaining. In Mill's and Cole's theories it is argued that if citizens are to participate at national level then they need 'practice' in more familiar spheres. Cole argues that the most important area for such participation is industry, so that industrial authority structures must therefore be democratised. Chapter IV. Despite criticisms of the contemporary theory of democracy no attempt has been made to provide even the beginnings of a modern participatory theory of democracy that retains the essentials of the earlier theories. It is argued that the crucial variable in the political socialisation process is the authority structures of familiar spheres of social life, the most important area being industry. The democratisation of this area makes possible the transformation of the existing political culture. The evaluative framework of a modern participatory theory of democracy is discussed, including its wide definition of the 'political' itself. The theory argues that all men are potentially political animals; what is missing at present is the institutional setting to develop this potentiality. Chapter V. Recent "empirical" democratic theory has ignored the important fact that the existing pattern of political participation is linked to class position. Furthermore, the social and psychological characteristics correlated with low rates of participation are not a random collection of items but form a non-participation syndrome; a syndrome having both cognitive and psychological aspects. The empirical data in The Civic Culture support the argument of the participatory theory that the workplace is crucial for political socialisation. Other important, but neglected, evidence on this point is reviewed. It is argued that the typical social- isatlon process of the working class citizen, culminating, crucially, in socialisation in the workplace, accounts for the psychological aspect of the syndrome. The (inter-related) cognitive aspect of the syndrome is that apathy arises becaude participation in the existing system seems pointless to the ordinary citizen. This aspect of the explanation is supported by a reinterpretation of working class respondents' replies to scales designed to ensure political efficacy, and "authoritarianism" in the sense of commitment to democratic norms. Chapter VI. The available evidence on participation in industry has been neglected by students of political socialisation and democracy. The argument that leisure is now more important than work is shown to be unconvincing. Participation at the lower (shop floor) level and the higher management level must be distinguished. Ihere is a good deal of evidence to show both that the ordinary worker wants more participation at the lower level and that it is feasible. Evidence on experiments with participation at this level, and the collective contract in the mining and automobile industries is reviewed. The arguments of the participatory theory is also supported by experiments with small groups and by the writings of many modern management theorists who argue that lower level participation is essential for real efficiency in the enterprise. Chapter VII. Most definitions of participation in industry are very imprecise, and 'participation' and 'democracy' are often used as synonyms, so that clarification is necessary. Pseudo-participation and two forms of participation (in decision making) are distinguished: partial and full participation. The claim that democracy in industry already exists is rejected. It is shown that it is a mistake to equate 'democracy' and 'participation'. To influence both aspects of the non-participation syndrome higher level participation is required. Three British examples of higher level participation are discussed, at Glacier Metal, John Lewis Partnership, and the Scott Bader Commonwealth. In general this, and other evidence, indicates that workers have little interest in higher level participation. But too hasty a conclusion should not be drawn, as evidence also indicates that the lower level in the enterprise acts as a 'training ground' for the higher, so that a system combining opportunities at both levels would be required for the maximum interest and activity. Chapter VIII. For an example of an attempt to democratize industry over a whole economy one has to turn to the Yugoslav system of workers' self management. One major problem in assessing the system is the role of the Communist League. It is argued that though important this does not completely nullify the self-management structure. Another important factor is the economic reforms of 1965, especially since they have helped to increase the influence of 'experts' within the enterprise and within the workers' council itself.

published_or_final_version / Business Administration / Master / Master of Business Administration

M.Ed. (Educational Management) / Please refer to full text to view abstract