1. Human ressource management strategies and the impact on employee well- being in Danish firms Paper presentation on NWLC 12. june, Stream 22: Nordic management and organization now and in the future. Kjeld Nielsen and co-author Peter Nielsen Aalborg University, Department of Sociology and Soclal work, LEO-group

2. Core areas (Questions and discussion) 1. How does management strategies impact on well-being of employees? 2. This paper differentiates between control and commitment strategies and uses data from Meadow project (1) to check their impact on employee well-being. 3. In its discussion sections, the paper suggests a less clearcut distinction between control and commitment.

3. Why? HRM litterature general distinction between ”hard” and ”soft” HRM to meet the goals. Control by quantative and qualitative goals (1/3 and nearly ½ of employees; Meadow employee survey) But, what does “control” mean for well-being, when employees (92%) cannot reach to do their jobs (cf. Meadow employee survey)? HRM between control and ”consent” or commitment form from labour (Legge 1995,Hyman 1987, Guest 1987) Control- and commitment strategies: Case study from a danish industrial organisation: Machine industry 1987/88 -> ideal types

4. HRM strategies and well-being? From industrial to knowledge society Control strategy Rigid jobs Low skilled labour force Technical-economic management style Adapted learning Individuel work orientation Numerical flexibility Cost on peripheral labour force Labour force performed wage labour role and submit the authority on work place ”Industrial worker” Low well-being? Commitment strategy Flexible jobs High skilled labour force Motivated management style Developed oriented learning Group work orientation Functionel flexibility Investment in core labour force Labour force involved and engaged in their job and organisation by using potential skills and knowledge ”Knowledge worker” High well-being?

5. HRM - strategies impact on well-being So, HR-strategies maybe have different impact on industrial and knowledge workers` well- being. What does the litterature say about HRM strategies and well-being? 1. Employees should have discretion and responsibility to do the work, for instance influence, participation and involvement in planning the daily work processes or in changing radically the work (Kern & Schuman 1984, Banke & Clematide 1989, Karasek 1990, Ellström 1994, Legge 1995, Bergman 1995, Nielsen & Pedersen 2014) 2. Control of knowledge worker from industrial society to the knowledge society (Nielsen m. fl. 2008). Paradoxically, the control and measurements of performance is still increasing, in spite of the labour force, in the knowledge society represents a huge degree of “tacit knowledge”. But labour force involves and finds meaning in doing work by using their knowledge and skills in extreme, strained labour processes (Olsén 2008:47f). Maybe, employees find still well-being in doing work that demand (potential) knowledge and skills of the individual labour force (Karasek 1999). 3. Generally, Warr (2013) conceptualizes that well-being means an emotional condition of the individual i.e. affects or experiences that are “primitive, universal and simple, irreducible on the mental plane” (affective well-being).

6. Commitment strategy: Conceptions, measurements and result Commitment (investment, functionel flexibility, involvement, discretion and trust) Commitment included both individual identify to execute a job and emotionally identify the values and goals of the company (Guest, 1987) Commitment strategy is measured by discretion in working processes (job commitment) That means that management allocate responsibility and competence to the employees through -Planning, execution and evaluate and correct the tasks within the working process -Involvement directly or indirectly in decisions within some areas as change of work organization or skills and competence. To measure commitment strategy by discretion, four items has been used: In which degree of your working time can you choice or change: a. Working tasks? b. Working intensity? c. Order of the tasks you execute? d. How you execute your job?

7. Commitment strategy and well-being (result) Positive significant connections between discretion in work and high well-being i.e. (working tasks (gamma.190), working intensity (gamma.287), order of the tasks (gamma.176), job execution (gamma.150).

8. Control strategy: Conceptions, measurements and result Control strategy (Cost, numerical flexibility, individual jobcontrol, non- social relations, but accept authority on work place) Measurements The control strategy is measured on both quantitative and qualitative dimensions: To measure control strategy, three items has been used 1.Do you in your work find goal that are related to a.Quantity of the produced or delivered items? b.Quality for instance rejection or satisfaction of the customer? 2.Are you unable to meet these goals? 3.How often do you work actually with rigid deadlines and how do you compare deadlines to 2009?

9. Summery results: Control strategy and Well-being Quantative control increases the possibility for low well-being. Qualitative control increases the possibility for median well-being. Well strong connection between unable to meet the goals and low well-being Strong connection between rigid deadlines and low well-being.

10. The future: More control through commitment strategy? More control: 1. Furthermore, managers find that surveillance of firms´ production and service delivering has been increased since 2009 – 2012 from 89% to 93% (Meadow, Employer Survey 2012). 2. From 2009 – 2012, 92 % of the employees experience that they encounter more difficulties in meeting job goals. (Meadow, Employee Survey 2012). High degree of commitment: Meadow Employer Survey confirm a high degree of employee involvement in decisions on work organisation (planning and execution (61%) og quality of control (65%: Employees job/73%: managers jobs)) So, The analytic distintion between commitment- og controlstrategy being blurred. Issues: do these forms for commitment strategy (individual control) reduce well-being among employees? What means increased individual control through commitment strategies for the impact on well-being of employees?

11. Why? From fordistic to post-fordistisk production (more skills, more motivation and more flexible jobs,-> more control through employee skills and motivation?) More high skilled labour force on labour marked expects increased demand to do their job career and organisation Danish firms: Voluntaristic decisions in HRM practice based on actors “free will” in working life may promote well-being among the employees. – Pragmatic and strategic oriented decisions in HRM practice. Do strategic management on HRM practice mean more detailed control (MBO) and reduced well-being? or can HR actors ”free will” be maintained in HRM pratice and shape increased well-being?