Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 425

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

High Performance and the Transformation of Work? The Implications of Alternative Work Practices for the Experience and Outcomes of Work

Godard, John·2001·ILR Review

Abstract

Using data from a 1997 telephone survey of 508 employed Canadians, the author explores the implications for workers of alternative work practices (AWPs) associated with the high-performance model. There are three main findings. First, moderate levels of AWP adoption were associated with increased “belongingness,” empowerment, task involvement, and ultimately job satisfaction, esteem, commitment, and citizenship behavior. At higher levels of adoption, however, these associations declined in magnitude and even became negative. AWP adoption was also associated with more stressful work. Second, whereas traditional (that is, supervised) group or team systems represented a substantial improvement over individualized work arrangements, “lean” and “team” forms of work organization associated with the high-performance model did not. Third, although team-based work and information sharing had positive effects, team autonomy and responsibility for a good or service—both associated with the high-performance model—had negative effects, as did “Just-in-Time” (JIT) systems and re-engineering programs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/001979390105400402

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 425

Metadata

Authors
Godard, J.
Venue
ILR Review
Published
2001-07
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
776-805
ISSN
  • 0019-7939 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-271X
OpenAlex
W2154824251
Cited by
425
References
2
FWCI
32.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.