Analysis of the economic differences between capitalist and labour-owned enterprises

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorFernández Guadaño, Josefina
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-20T10:38:45Z
dc.date.available2023-06-20T10:38:45Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.description.abstractPurpose – In recent years, an increasing interest in the participative practices of the workpeople in their companies has taken place in the European Union. Taking advantage of this situation, the purpose of this paper is to show additional evidence of the benefits from companies with majority worker’s capital participation as opposed to firms that do not follow this approach. Bearing in mind, also, that Spain is the only European country with the juridical form of financial majority participation of the workpeople, in order to recommend it in the European context according to the reached results. Design/methodology/approach – To study whether or not there are differences in the two types of companies, a logistic regression model is used. Findings – In this study, results indicate that business profitability (return on assets), productivity and equity capital coefficient are not significant variables for the purpose of determining the distinguishing features of labour-owned firm (LOF) as against capitalist firm. The only variable of those originally included which has turned out to be significant is the financial profitability (return on equity). Practical implications – Initial proposal: specific European law governing investment capital of employees. Originality/value – The study will be useful to show the characteristics of Spanish LOFs (operating under their own legal structure) and their benefits. Keywords Return on capital employed, Spain, Business enterprise, Business analysis, Employees Paper type Research paper
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Administración Financiera y Contabilidad
dc.description.facultyFac. de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statuspub
dc.eprint.idhttps://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/23477
dc.identifier.citationAghion, P. and Tirole, J. (1997), “Formal and real authority in organizations”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 105, pp. 1-29. Batt, R. and Appelbaum, E. (1995), “Worker participation in diverse settings: does the form affect the outcome, and if so, who benefits?”,British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 353-78. Cooke, W.N. (1994), “Employee participation programmes, group based incentives and company performance: a union-nonunion comparison”, Industrial and Labour Relations Review, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 594-609. European Commission (1989), “Communication from commission concerning its action programme relating to the implementation of the community charter of basic social rights for workers”, COM (89) 569 Final, Brussels, 29 November. European Commission (1991), The PEPPER Report: Promotion of Employee Participation in Profits and Enterprise Results in the Member States of the European Community, Directorate-General Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs, Luxembourg. European Commission (1992), Council Recommendation of 27th July 1992 Regarding the Promotion Among Member States of Employee Participation in the Profits and Business Results of Companies (Including Shareholding). European Commission (1998), Resolution of 15th January 1998 Concerning the Second PEPPER Report on the Promotion Among Member States of Employee Participation in the Profits and Business Results of Companies (Including Shareholding), COM(1998) 697. European Commission (2002), European Parliament Resolution Relating to the Commission Communication to the Council, the Parliament, the Social and Economic Committee and the Regional Committee Regarding a Framework for the Financial Participation of Employees (COM(2002) 364–(2002/2243(INI)). European Commission (2006), The PEPPER III Report: Promotion of Employee Participation in Profits and Enterprise Results in the New Member and Candidate Countries of the European Union, Institute for Eastern European Studies, Free University of Berlin, Berlin, 353 pages. Fernie, S. and Metcalf, D. (1995), “Participation, contingent pay, representation and workplace performance: evidence from Great Britain”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 279-315. Hair, J.F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Analysis, Prentice-Hall, New York, NY. Jones, D., Kato, T. and Pliskin, J. (1997), “Profit sharing and gain sharing: a review of theory, incidence and effects”, in Lewin, G., Michell, D. and Zaide, M. (Eds),The Human Resource Management Handbook, Part I, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 153-74. Kruse, D. and Blasi, J. (1997), “Employee ownership, employee attitudes, and firm performance: a review of the evidence”, in Lewin, G., Michell, D. and Zaide, M. (Eds), The Human Resource Management Handbook, Part I, JAI Press, Greenwich CT, pp. 113-51. Lejarriaga Perez de Las Vacas, G. (2002), “Participación financiera de los trabajadores y creación de valor: una propuesta operativa de comportamiento con relación a los objetivos empresariales”, CIRIEC-España, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 73-98. Le´vy Mangin, J.P. and Varela Mallou, J. (Directores) (2003), Ana´lisis Multivariable para las Ciencias Sociales, Pearson Prentice-Hall, Madrid. Martín López, S. (2007), Estudio analítico de las implicaciones del pago único de la prestación por desempleo particularizado para las Sociedades Laborales madrileñas, Universidad Complutense, Madrid. Melgarejo, Z., Arcelus, F.J. and Simon, K. (2007), “Accounting for profitability: differences between capitalist and labour-owned enterprises”, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 34, pp. 485-501. Morales, A.C., Monzo´n, J.L. and Chaves, R. (2003), “La empresa autogestionada en retrospectiva”, in Morales, A.C., Monzón, J.L. and Chaves, R. (Eds), Análisis económico de la empresa autogestionada, CIRIEC-Espanña, Valencia, pp. 7-47. Oyer, P. (2004), “Why do firms use incentives that have no incentive effects?”,Journal of Finance, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 1619-41. Perotin, V. and Robinson, G. (2003),Participation of Profit and Ownership: A Review of Issues and Evidence, European Parliament, Luxemburg. Poutsma, E. (2001), Recent Trends in Employee Financial Participation in the European Union, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin. Poutsma, E., Kalmi, P. and Pendleton, A. (2006), “The relationship between financial participation and other forms of employee participation: new survey evidence from Europe”, Economic and Industrial Democracy, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 637-67. Sesil, J.C. (2006), “Sharing decision-making and group incentives: the impact on performance”, Economic and Industrial Democracy, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 587-607. Terradillos Ormaetxea, E. (2004), “Iniciativas comunitarias para la promoción de la participación (financiera y otras) en la empresa”, in Landa Zapirain, J.P. (Cood), Nuevas formas de participación de los trabajadores y gobierno de la empresa, Albacet, Bomarzo, pp. 55-68. Vanek, J. (1970), The General Theory of Labor Managed Marked Economies, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. Weitzman, M. and Kruse, D. (1990), “Profit sharing and productivity”, in Blinder, A. (Ed.), Paying for Productivity: A Look at the Evidence, Brookings, Washington, DC, pp. 95-141.
dc.identifier.issn0306-8293
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/50881
dc.issue.number6
dc.journal.titleInternational Journal of Social Economics
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final691
dc.page.initial679
dc.publisherEmerald
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.subject.keywordReturn on capital employed
dc.subject.keywordSpain
dc.subject.keywordBusiness enterprise
dc.subject.keywordBusiness analysis
dc.subject.keywordEmployees.
dc.subject.ucmAdministración de empresas
dc.subject.ucmEmpresas
dc.subject.unesco5311 Organización y Dirección de Empresas
dc.subject.unesco5311 Organización y Dirección de Empresas
dc.titleAnalysis of the economic differences between capitalist and labour-owned enterprises
dc.typejournal article
dc.volume.number36
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication57582547-9266-487a-a8e5-d99a4da6ab27
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery57582547-9266-487a-a8e5-d99a4da6ab27
Download
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
IJSE_JFG_Differences_between_LOF_and_Non-LOFs.pdf
Size:
90 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
downoload Download
Collections
Artículos