A mutual gains perspective on workplace partnership: Employee outcomes and the mediating role of the employment relations climate
Open accessAbstract
Recent years have witnessed increased research on the role of workplace partnership in promoting positive employment relations. However, there has been little quantitative analysis of the partnership experiences of employees. This article examines how the kinds of attributions employees make regarding indirect (union‐based) and direct (non‐union‐based) employee participation in workplace partnership might influence the process of mutual gains. It uses employee outcomes to reflect partnership gains for all stakeholders involved (i.e. employees, employers and trade unions). The article contributes to existing knowledge of workplace partnership by examining the potential role of the employment relations climate as an enabling mechanism for the process of mutual gains. The findings suggest mutual gains for all stakeholders are varied and mediated through the employment relations climate.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A mutual gains HR approach requires an organizational atmosphere of workplace partnership enabling direct employee participation in decision-making processes and space for employees' perspectives and expectations.
“A mutual gains HR approach requires an organizational atmosphere of workplace partnership enabling direct employee participation in decision-making processes and space for employees' perspectives and expectations (Valizade, Ogbonnaya, Tregaskis, & Forde, 2016).”
From Common Good HRM: A paradigm shift in Sustainable HRM? (2020) · cites this paper as Valizade, Ogbonnaya, Tregaskis, & Forde, 2016
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194 · see citing works
NISHII, L. H., LEPAK, D. P., & SCHNEIDER, B. (2008) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00121.x · Cited by 1,410 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Common Good HRM: A paradigm shift in Sustainable HRM?
Aust, I., Matthews, B., & Muller-Camen, M. (2020) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100705 · Cited by 531 · see citing works
Cooper, B., Wang, J., Bartram, T., & Cooke, F. L. (2019) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.21934 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
- Authors
- Valizade, D., Ogbonnaya, C., Tregaskis, O., & Forde, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- University of East Anglia (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Valizade, Danat
- Venue
- Human Resource Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-05-27
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 351-368
- ISSN
- 0954-5395 (ISSN-L)
- 1748-8583
- OpenAlex
- W2342624789
- Cited by
- 78
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 19.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Human Resource Management Journal (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (acceptedVersion)
- Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
- Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Labor Movements and Unions
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
- Keywords
- workplace partnership, mutual benefit, employee participation, trade unions, employee attributions, employee outcomes, mediation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
