Abstracts
Summary
National Culture and Union Membership: A Cultural-Cognitive Perspective
Moving beyond the normative and regulative perspectives of neo-institutional theory, this study adopted a cultural-cognitive perspective to study the influence of multiple dimensions of national culture on union membership. Cultural frameworks were compared using data from the World Values Survey that were matched to GLOBE and Hofstede national culture scores (n = 43,867 employees, 32 countries). Contrasts between GLOBE and Hofstede scores revealed that GLOBE culture constructs were better predictors and they also enabled an improved understanding of the relationships between national culture and union membership. This resolved the paradoxical lack of a significant relationship between collectivism and union membership in prior research. Specifically, union membership was positively related to institutional collectivism but not to in-group collectivism. Also, that fact that GLOBE Performance Orientation was negatively related to union membership explained why Hofstede’s Masculinity was negatively related to union membership in prior research. Moreover, prior research on union membership tended to use either individual level (i.e., employees) variables, or macro level (i.e., country) variables to explain union membership. Recently developed statistical techniques enabled the analysis of both individual and country level variables in a hierarchical model. Results show that union membership was positively related to sex (female), education, and institutional collectivism, and negatively related to occupation (supervisors and professionals) and performance orientation. There were curvilinear relationships between union membership and age and uncertainty avoidance. Younger and older people were less likely to be union members. Low or high uncertainty avoidance increased union membership. The juxtaposition of the influences of Age and Uncertainty Avoidance on union membership revealed an interesting phenomenon. Opposing curvilinear relationships (concave vs. convex), suggested a complex yet interrelated relationship between age and uncertainty avoidance that is worthy of future research. At different ages people may use uncertainty avoidance differently to evaluate the risks and benefits of union membership.
Keywords:
- Unions,
- collectivism,
- performance orientation
Résumé
La culture nationale et la syndicalisation : une approche culturelle et cognitive
Voulant aller au-delà des perspectives normatives et régulatrices de la théorie néo-institutionnelle, cette étude se sert d’une perspective culturelle et cognitive pour étudier l’influence portée par les dimensions multiples d’une culture nationale sur la syndicalisation. Dans ce but, les structures culturelles ont été comparées en utilisant des données du World Values Survey qui ont été associés aux résultats de GLOBE et Hofstede sur la culture nationale (n = 43 867 employées, 32 pays). Des contrastes entre les résultats de GLOBE et de Hofstede ont démontré que ceux de GLOBE fournissaient de meilleurs indices et qu’ils offraient une meilleure compréhension de la relation entre la culture nationale et la syndicalisation. Ceci a résolu le paradoxe concernant l’absence d’un rapport important entre le collectivisme et la syndicalisation dans les recherches précédentes.
Plus précisément, la syndicalisation a été associée de manière positive au collectivisme institutionnel, mais non pas au collectivisme en groupe. De plus, le fait que l’orientation de performance de GLOBE ait été associée de manière négative à la syndicalisation explique le rapport négatif entre la masculinité et la syndicalisation chez Hofstede dans les recherches précédentes.
Par ailleurs, les recherches précédentes sur la syndicalisation ont utilisé en général soit des variables au niveau individuel (c’est-à-dire des employés), soit des variables au niveau macro (c’est-à-dire du pays) pour expliquer la syndicalisation. Des techniques statistiques développées récemment ont permis l’analyse à la fois des variables individuelles et nationales dans un modèle hiérarchique. Les résultats ont démontré que la syndicalisation était associée de manière positive au sexe (féminin), au niveau de scolarité et au collectivisme institutionnel; la syndicalisation était aussi associée, de manière négative, au travail (superviseurs et professionnels) et à l’orientation vers la performance.
Nous avons aussi observé des rapports curvilignes entre la syndicalisation et l’âge et le désir d’éviter l’incertitude. Il est moins probable que les personnes plus jeunes et les plus âgées deviennent membres d’un syndicat. Un désir exceptionnellement bas ou haut d’éviter l’incertitude augmenterait la syndicalisation. La juxtaposition des influences de l’âge et du désir d’éviter l’incertitude sur la syndicalisation révèle un phénomène intéressant. Des rapports curvilignes opposés (concave et convexe) suggèrent un rapport complexe mais étroitement lié entre l’âge et le désir d’éviter l’incertitude qui mérite d’être approfondi dans des recherches ultérieures. Il est possible que les gens d’âges différents se servent différemment du désir d’éviter l’incertitude pour évaluer les risques et les avantages de la syndicalisation.
Mots-clés:
- syndicats,
- collectivisme,
- orientation de performance
Resumen
La cultura nacional y el sindicalismo: una perspectiva cognoscitiva-cultural
Este estudio ha ido más allá de las perspectivas normativas y regulatorias de la teoría neo-institucional, al adoptar una perspectiva cognoscitiva-cultural para estudiar la influencia que las dimensiones múltiples de la cultura nacional tienen sobre el Sindicalismo. Se compararon los marcos culturales usando información de la Encuesta Mundial de Valores y los índices nacionales de cultura de GLOBE y Hofstede (n = 43,867 empleados, 32 países). El contraste entre los índices de GLOBE y Hofstede reveló que las construcciones culturales de GLOBE eran mejores pronósticos y pudieron brindar un entendimiento mejorado de las relaciones entre la cultura nacional y el Sindicalismo. Esto solucionó la paradójica falta de una relación importante entre el colectivismo y el Sindicalismo en estudios previos. De manera específica, el Sindicalismo se relacionó positivamente con el colectivismo institucional, pero no con el colectivismo grupal. Asimismo, el hecho de que la Orientación de Desempeño de GLOBE se relacionara negativamente con el Sindicalismo, explicó la razón por la que la Masculinidad de Hofstede fue relacionada de la misma manera, en investigaciones anteriores. Aún más, las investigaciones previas sobre el Sindicalismo tuvieron la tendencia a usar ya sea las variables de nivel individual (por ejemplo, los empleados) o las de nivel macro (por ejemplo, el país) para explicar la misma. Las técnicas estadísticas desarrolladas recientemente hicieron posible el análisis tanto de las variables a nivel individual como de las nacionales, en un modelo jerárquico. Los resultados demostraron que el Sindicalismo estaba relacionado de manera positiva con el sexo (femenino), educación y colectivismo institucional y se relacionaba de manera negativa con la ocupación (supervisores y profesionales) y la orientación del desempeño. Se percibe una relación curvilínea entre el Sindicalismo y la edad y la tendencia a eludir situaciones de incertidumbre. Era menos probable que las personas más jóvenes o de mayor edad, pertenecieran a un sindicato. Una mayor o menor tendencia a eludir situaciones de incertidumbre aumentaba el Sindicalismo. La yuxtaposición de la influencia de la edad y la tendencia a eludir situaciones de incertidumbre sobre el Sindicalismo reveló un fenómeno interesante. Las relaciones curvilíneas opuestas (cóncavas contra convexas), sugirieron una relación compleja, aunque interrelacionada, entre la edad y la tendencia a eludir situaciones de incertidumbre, que vale la pena investigar a futuro. A diferente edad, las personas pueden utilizar de diferente manera la tendencia a eludir situaciones de incertidumbre con el fin de evaluar los riesgos y beneficios del Sindicalismo.
Palabras claves:
- sindicatos,
- colectivismo,
- orientación de rendimiento
Appendices
References
- Allen, Steven G. 1995. “Unit Costs, Legal Shocks, and Unionization in Construction.” Journal of Labor Research, 13 (3), 367–377.
- Aycan, Zeynep, Rabindra N. Kanungo, and Jai B. P. Sinha. 1999. “Organizational Culture and Human Resource Management Practices: The Model of Culture Fit.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30 (July), 501–526.
- Baron, James N., Alison Davis-Blake, and William T. Bielby. 1986. “The Structure of Opportunity: How Promotion Ladders Vary within and Among Organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 31 (2), 248–274.
- Beaumont, Phil B., and Richard I. D. Harris. 1998. “The Importance of National Institutional Arrangements: The Case of Trade Union Membership and Unemployment.” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9 (December), 1064–1075.
- Bender, Keith A., and Peter J. Sloane. 1999. “Trade Union Membership, Tenure, and the Level of Job Insecurity.” Applied Economics, 31 (January), 123–135.
- Black, Boyd. 2001. “National Culture and Industrial Relations and Pay Structures.” Labour, 15 (June), 257–277.
- Blanchflower, David. G. 2007. “International Patterns of Union Membership.” British Journal of Industrial Relations, 45 (1), 1–28.
- Blanchflower, David G., and Richard B. Freeman. 1992. “Going Different Ways: Unionism in the U.S. and other OECD Countries.” Industrial Relations, 31 (Winter), 56–79.
- Blanchflower, David G., and Richard B. Freeman. 1997. “The Attitudinal Legacy of Communist Labor Relations.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 50 (April), 438–459.
- Blanchflower, David G., and Andrew J. Oswald. 2006. “Psychological Distress GHQ–N6 is Quadratic in Age and Shaped by Childhood Adversities: Evidence for Sixteen Countries.” Dartmouth College Working Paper.
- Blaschke, Sabine. 2000. “Union Density and European Integration: Diverging Convergence.” European Journal of Industrial Relations, 6 (2), 217–236.
- Bleise, Paul D. 2000. “Within-Group Agreement, Non-Independence, and Reliability: Implications for Data Aggregation and Analysis.” Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations. K. K. Klein and S. W. J. Koslowski, eds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 349–381.
- Brockerman, Petri. 2004. “Perceptions of Job Instability in Europe.” Social Indicators Research, 67 (July), 283–314.
- Bronfenbrenner, Kate. 1997. “The Role of Union Strategies in NLRB Certification Elections.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 50 (January), 195–212.
- Bryson, Alex, Rafael Gomez, Morley Gunderson, and Noah Meltz. 2005. “Youth-Adult Differences in Demand for Unionization: Are American, British, and Canadian Workers all that Different?” Journal of Labor Research, 26 (Winter), 155–167.
- Calmfors, Lars, Alison Booth, Michael Burda, Daniele Checci, Robin Naylor, and Jelle Visser. 2001. “The Future of Collective Bargaining in Europe.” The Role of Unions in the Twenty-First Century. T. Boeri, A. Brugiavini, and L. Calmfors, eds. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1–156.
- Clark, Andrew, and Andrew Oswald. 1993. “Trade Union Utility Functions: A Survey of Union Leaders Views.” Industrial Relations, 32 (3), 391–412.
- Clark, Paul F., Clive J. A. Fullager, Daniel E. Gallagher and Michael E. Gordon. 1993. “Building Union Commitment among New Members: The Role of Formal and Informal Socialization.” Labor Studies Journal, 18 (3), 3–16.
- Cohen, Yinon, Yitchak Haberfeld, Guy Mundlak and Ishak Saporta. 2003. “Unpacking Union Density: Membership and Coverage in the Transformation of the Israeli IR System.” Industrial Relations, 42 (4), 692–711.
- Cregan, Christina. 2005. “Can Organizing Work? An Inductive Analysis of Individual Attitudes toward Union Membership.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 58 (January), 282–304.
- Deshpande, Satish P., and Jacob Joseph. 1997. “Unionization in the United States and India: An Empirical Investigation.” Journal of Psychology, 131 (5), 512–518.
- Dickens, William T. 1983. “The Effect of Company Campaigns on Certification Elections: Law and Reality Once Again.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 36 (4), 560–575.
- Duncan, Greg. J., and Frank P. Stafford. 1980. “Do Union Members Receive Compensating Wage Differentials?” American Economic Review, 70 (June), 355–371.
- Freeman, Richard B., and James L. Medoff. 1984. What do Unions Do? New York, NY: Basic Books.
- Fullagar, Clive J. A., Daniel G. Gallagher, Michael E. Gordon and Paul F. Clark. 1995. “Impact of Early Socialization on Union Commitment and Participation: A Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 147–157.
- Gani, Abdul. 1996. “Who Joins the Unions and Why? Evidence from India.” International Journal of Manpower, 17 (6/7), 54–65.
- Garcia, M. Fernanda, Richard A. Posthuma, and Mark V. Roehling. In Press. “Comparing Preferences for Employing Males and Nationals Across Countries: Extending Relational Models and Social Dominance Theory.” International Journal of Human Resource Management.
- Hofstede, Geert. 2001. Culture’s Consequences. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- House, Robert J., Paul J. Hanges, Mansour Javidan, Peter W. Dorfman, and Vipin Gupta. 2004. Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Howell, Jon P., Jose de la Cerda, Sandra M. Martinez, Leonel Prieto, Arnoldo Bautista, Juan Ortiz, Peter Dorfman, Maria J. Melendez. 2007. “Leadership and Culture in Mexico.” Journal of World Business, 42, 449–462.
- Hundley, Greg. 1988. “Education and Union Membership.” British Journal of Industrial Relations, 26 (July), 195–201.
- Hundley, Greg. 1989. “Things Unions Do, Job Attributes, and Union Membership.” Industrial Relations, 28 (Fall), 335–355.
- Hurd, Richard, Ruth Milkman, and Lowell Turner. 2003. “Reviving the American Labour Movement: Institutions and Mobilization.” European Journal of Industrial Relations, 9 (1), 99–118.
- Inglehart, Ronald, Miguel Basanez, Jaime Diez-Medrano, Loek Halman, and Ruud Luijkx. 2004. Human Values and Beliefs. Mexico City, Mexico: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.
- Jarley, Paul, and Jack Fiorito. 1991. “Unionism and Changing Employee Views toward Work.” Journal of Labor Research, 12 (Summer), 223–229.
- Kuruvilla, Sarosh, Daniel Gallagher, and Kurt Wetzel. 1993. “The Development of Members’ Attitudes toward their Unions: Sweden and Canada.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 46 (3), 499–515.
- Lansbury, Russell D., and Marian Baird. 2004. “Researching HRM and Employment Relations in a Global Context: Choosing Appropriate Methodologies.” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15 (May), 429–432.
- Lewin, David, and Peter Feuille. 1983. “Behavioral Research in Industrial Relations.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 36 (3), 341–360.
- Linz, Susan J. 2004. “Motivating Russian Workers: Analysis of Age and Gender Differences.” Journal of Socio-Economics, 33 (July), 261–290.
- McClean, Robert A., William L. Sanders, and Walter W. Stroup. 1991. “A Unified Approach to Mixed Linear Models.” The American Statistician, 45 (February), 54–64.
- McSweeney, Brendan. 2002. “Hofstede’s Model of National Cultural Differences and their Consequences: A Triumph of Faith — A Failure of Analysis.” Human Relations, 55 (January), 89–118.
- Meyer, John W., and Brian Rowan. 1977. “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.
- Moulton, Brent R. 1990. “An Illustration of a Pitfall in Estimating the Effects of Aggregate Variables on Micro Units.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 73 (2), 334–338.
- Newton, Lucy A., and Lynn M. Shore. 1992. “A Model of Union Membership: Instrumentality, Commitment, and Opposition.” Academy of Management Review, 17 (April), 275–298.
- North, Douglass C. 1989. “Institutional Change and Economic History.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 145, 238–245.
- Olson, Mancur. 1971. The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Premack, Steven L., and John E. Hunter. 1988. “Individual Unionization Decisions.” Psychological Bulletin, 103 (March), 223–234.
- Price, Robert, and George S. Bain. 1983. “Union Growth in Britain: Retrospect and Prospect.” British Journal of Industrial Relations, 21 (March), 46–68.
- Raudenbush, Stephen W., and Anthony S. Bryk. 2002. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- SAS Institute. 2005. The GLIMMIX Procedure. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
- Savery, Lawson K. 1990. “Men and Women in the Workplace: Evidence of Occupational Differences.” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 11 (2), 13–16.
- Schnabel, Claus, and Joachim Wagner. 2007. “Union Density and Determinants of Union Membership in 18 EU Countries: Evidence from Micro Data, 2002/03.” Industrial Relations Journal, 38 (1), 5–32.
- Schneider, Susan C., and Jean-Louis Barsoux. 1997. Managing Across Cultures. London: Prentice-Hall.
- Schur, Lisa A., and Douglas L. Kruse. 1992. “Gender Differences in Attitudes towards Unions.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 46 (1), 89–103.
- Scott, W. Richard. 2001. Institutions and Organizations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Singer, Judith D. 1998. “Using SAS PROC MIXED to Fit Multilevel Models, Hierarchical Models, and Individual Growth Models.” Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24 (Winter), 323–355.
- Singh, Gangaram. 2001. “National Culture and Union Density.” Journal of Industrial Relations, 43 (September), 330–339.
- Smith, Peter B., and Shalom H. Schwartz. 1997. “Values.” Handbook of Cross-cultural Psychology. J. W. Berry, M. H. Segall, and C. Kagitcibasi, eds. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 77–118.
- Snape, Ed, and Andy W. Chan. 2000. “Commitment to Company and Union: Evidence from Hong Kong.” Industrial Relations, 39 (July), 445–459.
- Stinchcombe, Arthur L. 1997. “On the Virtues of the Old Institutionalism.” Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 1–18.
- Strauss, George. 1964. “Professional or Employee-Oriented: Dilemma for Engineering Unions.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 17 (4), 519–533.
- Tajfel, Henri, and John C. Turner. 1986. “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior.” Psychology of Intergroup Relations. S. Worchel and W. G. Austin, eds. Chicago: Nelson Hall, 7–24.
- Triandis, Harry C. 1994. “Cross-Cultural Industrial and Organizational Psychology.” Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2nd ed.). H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, and L. M. Hough, eds. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 103–172.
- Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1981. “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science, 211, January, 453–458.
- Ullman, Lloyd. 1975. “Multinational Unionism: Incentives, Barriers, and Alternatives.” Industrial Relations, 14 (1), 1–31.
- Van den Berg, Annette, and Wim Groot. 1992. “Union Membership in the Netherlands: A Cross Section Analysis.” Empirical Economics, 17 (4), 537–564.
- Visser, Jelle. 2006. “Union Membership Statistics in 24 Countries.” Monthly Labor Review, 129 (January), 38–49.
- Voos, Paula B. 1983. “Deterimants of U.S. Unionism: Past Research and Future Needs.” Industrial Relations, 22 (3), 445–450.
- Waddington, Jeremy, and Colin Whitston. 1997. “Why Do People Join Unions in a Period of Membership Decline?” British Journal of Industrial Relations, 35 (December), 515–546.
- Western, Bruce. 1997. Between Class and Market. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Wolfinger, Russ, and Michael O’Connell. 1993. “Generalized Linear Mixed Models: A Pseudo-Likelihood Approach.” Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 4, 233–243.
- Youngblood, Stuart A., Angelo S. DeNisi, Julie L. Molleston, and William H. Mobley. 1984. “The Impact of Work Environment, Instrumentality Beliefs, Perceived Labor Union Image, and Subjective Norms on Union Voting Intentions.” Academy of Management Journal, 27 (September), 576–590.