Employees as Stakeholders

Dinesh Pant

23rd February, 2023

Derek C. Jones, 1997 article “Employees as stakeholders” discusses about the impact on
how workplace democracy is promoted through public policy how the employee stakes
should be represented than whether they should be considered stakeholders. Derek C.
Jones is a James R. Ferguson Professor of Economics at Hamilton College, Clinton and
Visiting Professor of Economics at London Business School. According to Derek Jones ,
the economic case is not simply a requirement for increasing workplace democracy; in
fact, it might currently be the most significant. This is a dramatic development from
twenty years ago in Britain, when the economic argument for participatory democracy
was hardly ever raised. He also discusses the theoretical model that classifies and
describes various forms of employee ownership and involvement. Jones hopes that this
typology will demonstrate that workplace democracy can take many different forms in
practice, some of which are depicted in the grid; emphasizing just the components of
workplace democracy that involve involvement in control may be misleading. The same
is true of the economic factors.

Any study must have some goals that demonstrate the justifications for performing the
research. The following are the study's main goals:

1. To investigate whether performance is enhanced if firms use employment

involvement in decision making and financial returns.
2. To know the combination of participation in economic returns and workplace
democracy.
3. To ensure the business is successful,
4. To set the conceptual framework which distinguish alternative forms of employee
participation and ownership.
5. To focus on the effects of participation in control.

Derek C. Jones (1997) asserts that fostering employee voice and interaction is one
strategy to motivate staff to boost company performance. The article defines alternative
forms of employee retention and ownership and makes comparisons between them. It
draws the line between two essential rights that come with asset ownership: the right to
manage the asset and the right to take pleasure in the income it generates. When there is a
mix of participation in control rights and involvement in return rights, the possibility
about their having a significant and long-lasting impact on the enterprise's financial
performance is higher. Participation in economic returns and workplace democracy
together are likely to have a higher impact than the sum of their individual effects. This
article is necessary to find out the importance of employee as stakeholder. The people that
design, produce, market, and transport your items are your employees. They determine
whether your enterprises succeed or fail. They have a stake in your business since you
give them a salary and guarantee their employment.

The author has used the primary as well as secondary data for the information and
evidence. The researcher personally observed, assessed, and interpreted both occurrences
in the organization; this is primary data that the author has used. The researcher has
documented significant details and facts after having watched the events. The author's
opinions are the fundamental base of this article. This article was created by the author,
who also obtained the information necessary to support his perspective. The author has
mentioned about the equity sharing as employee share ownership plans (ESOPs),
industrial common ownership movement (ICOM), profit sharing with participation
programs, quality circles involving majority of workers. The methodology shown in the
table also provides some explanations for why profit-maximizing businesses may not
always freely adopt productivity-improving programs. The author believes that a portion
of the explanation is due to the numerous obstacles that workplace democracy must
overcome.

Because your employees are your company's most valuable resource, treat them with the
same respect that you treat your consumers. Consumers might be what keeps your
company or business successful, but without your staff's commitment and toil, you won't
attract customers in the first place. The outcome of schemes that only allow participants
to participate in economic rewards, without any participation in control, may be
uncertain; it may be positive or bad. The outcome will also typically be minor, it was
further suggested. The author asserted that a combination of involvement in control rights
and participation in return rights increases the chance of a significant and long-lasting
impact on the organization's financial performance.

However, the fact that the benefits of a program that invests in participation frequently
appear only after a protracted learning process, while the costs of implementing the
program are borne up front, is one of the hurdles. Because the benefits can vary and may
not always apply equally strongly, some businesses may not wish to implement such
programs. Employees may be required to possess different abilities that they are not
interested in learning under the strictest type of involvement. The lack of data on the
distribution of ownership among employees in employee-run enterprises also creates a
challenge in the link between theoretical and empirical research. He contends that
employers may use their position to manipulate labor markets to either keep employment
levels above those that are consistent with generating profits at the current rate or to
increase earnings above the going wage rate at the expense of profits.

Hence, employees of the company are invested in the company's performance in order to
be paid and keep their jobs. Employees may have a health and safety focus depending on
the nature of the business. Many people value alignment between their own sense of
purpose and the goals of the business. The author’s main focus is that combining the two
types of schemes, workplace democracy and financial participation, increases the
likelihood of favorable outcomes.