1

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 1

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CONTROL ABOUT HOW

PEOPLE ARE MANAGED IN THE WORKPLACE

Esther Adewale

Organisational behavior and human resources management

BE 486-7-AU

Business management

Essex University

Date -13/11/2023

Lecturer- Piccoli Beatrice

[no notes on this page]

-1-
 2

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 2

Introduction

The complicated dynamics of the employment relationship and organizational control

1
constitute the foundation of efficient workplace people management. Closely examining these 1. Question Why is this
labelled as article? This is an
essay..
notions reveals a complex interaction that substantially impacts workers and workplace
[sa23968]

autonomy. This article aims to dive into the complexities of these notions, shedding light on

their influence on people and the changing landscape of organizational control in today's

workplaces. The awareness that the employment relationship is a dynamic interaction between

employers and workers is central to this investigation. As molded by this relationship, the terms

and circumstances of employment establish the groundwork for organizational control

mechanisms to take effect. By closely evaluating these factors, we may acquire insights into

the power structures, communication dynamics, and behavioral expectations that define the

workplace. Organizational control emerges in various ways, each with its consequences for

employee management. Edwards' typology of rules, which includes direct, technical,

bureaucratic, and normative rules, offers a systematic framework for comprehending these

systems. This typology serves as a lens through which we may examine how businesses direct,

power, and influence their workforce's behavior (Bratton et al., 2021). The critical topic

motivating this investigation is the changing form of organizational governance in modern

settings. Human resource management strategies must be constantly reassessed as sectors

experience transformational transitions affected by technology breakthroughs, shifting social

2
standards, and developing work arrangements. Understanding these transitions is critical for 2. transitions
Please check how to frame
firms looking to match their control techniques with employee expectations and social introduction to essays, there
are too many points here
transformations. The article will explore the influence of organizational control on workers and [sa23968]

workplace autonomy as it navigates this terrain. A complete examination will emerge by

evaluating case studies, theoretical frameworks, and real-world examples, highlighting the

delicate balance necessary to maintain a happy work environment while ensuring corporate

-2-
 3

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 3

goals are attained. This essay goes beyond academic discourse, highlighting the practical

consequences of human resource management in the modern day. Because organizational

control is changing, a strategic strategy that recognizes the intricacies of the employment

relationship, respects individual autonomy, and connects corporate objectives with the

changing expectations of a dynamic workforce is required.

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control

The employment relationship is a complex and dynamic interaction between

employers and workers that sets the terms and circumstances of labor. According to Huczynski

and Buchanan's essential work is vital to this understanding since their foundational

contributions provide a thorough knowledge of the varied nature of this critical part of

organizational life. Their work focuses on the complex interplay of power, communication,

and expectations that characterizes the employer-employee relationship (Buchanan

&Huczynski, 2013). Corporate control takes numerous forms within this relationship, as stated

by Edwards' typology in 1979. Direct control entails management monitoring, in which

managers watch and govern workers' conduct. Technical management uses technology and

systems to direct and shape work processes, assuring efficiency and standard conformance.

Through rules, procedures, and hierarchies, bureaucratic control is developed, giving a

structured framework for organizational functioning. On the other hand, normative control acts

via shared values and conventions, generating a feeling of alignment with the company culture.

These many types of power are critical for firms to regulate and steer employee behavior.

Organizations develop frameworks to guarantee that individual behaviors match more

significant corporate objectives, whether via direct supervision, technology integration,

bureaucratic processes, or shared ideals. Understanding and managing these controls

effectively is critical in molding workplace dynamics and impacting overall organizational

success.

[no notes on this page]

-3-
 4

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 4

Forms Of Organizational Control

According to Edwards' typology he provides a valuable framework for

comprehending the multidimensional nature of organizational control, segmenting it into

several forms that play critical roles in determining workplace dynamics (Rudolph et al., 2021,

pp 1-35). The first aspect of this type is direct control, which is management oversight in which

supervisors actively watch and steer workers' behavior. This hands-on approach guarantees that

objectives and standards are met.

Technical control, on the other hand, uses technology to govern work operations

effectively. Automation, surveillance systems, and digital tools are essential for optimizing

processes and guaranteeing compliance with established rules. This kind of management shows

the modern dependence on technical improvements to increase productivity and uniformity.

The third aspect in Edwards' typology is bureaucratic control, which presents itself via defined

norms and procedures guiding organizational activities. This structure gives order and

predictability but adds rigidity, which may influence adaptation (Duggan et al., pp.114-132).

The fourth factor, normative control, occurs via shared values and standards within the

company culture. Organizations establish a cohesive and collaborative work environment by

creating a shared understanding of acceptable actions and attitudes. Carter Goodrich's idea of

the "Frontier of control" broadens this debate by incorporating the concept of indeterminacy in

labor contracts. This idea recognizes the dynamic nature of employment relationships, focusing

on firms' strategic methods to influence employee behavior and results. It acknowledges that

control systems must change to account for the inherent uncertainties in labor contracts,

exhibiting the agility necessary in modern workplaces. Together, Edwards' typology and

Goodrich's notion provide a complete lens for analyzing organizational control, providing

insights into businesses' many processes to govern and shape their workforce.

Contemporary Challenges in Organizational Control: Velvet vs Iron Fist

[no notes on this page]

-4-
 5

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 5

According to Jermier's examination of organizational control of a striking contrast via

the notions of "velvet glove" and "iron fist." These metaphors encompass two contrasting

techniques to exert influence within the corporate setting, revealing intricate dynamics that

significantly affect today's workplaces. The "velvet glove" represents a gentler, more

convincing control approach emphasizing subtlety and collaboration (Jermier, 1998, pp 235-

256). The "iron fist" implies a more forceful and authoritarian attitude, emphasizing rigorous

adherence to norms and hierarchical systems.

These characteristics are essential in the context of knowledge work organizations

since the nature of work is often collaborative, creative, and dependent on the expertise of

individual contributors. The tricky balance between allowing individuals liberty and keeping

corporate control becomes a significant problem in such workplaces (Giglioni & Bedeian,

2019, pp. 3-16). The "velvet glove" strategy recognizes the importance of encouraging

creativity, innovation, and individual initiative. It understands that knowledge workers who are

intrinsically motivated flourish when they are given the freedom to explore ideas and contribute

to initiatives.

The contrast with the "iron fist" emphasizes the inherent tension in organizational

dynamics. While autonomy is necessary for developing a creative and motivated workforce,

some supervision is required to guarantee alignment with company objectives, consistency,

and risk mitigation. The clash between these two methods reflects companies' more

considerable difficulty in dynamic, knowledge-intensive sectors. The study of Rockmann and

Langfred emphasizes the conflict's current significance. Their observations shed light on how

knowledge work firms deal with the inherent conflict between individual aspirations for

autonomy and corporate imperatives for control (Langfred & Rockmann 2016, pp 629–657).

The battle to strike the correct balance may be seen in adopting numerous management

approaches, each with consequences for employee happiness, creativity, and overall

[no notes on this page]

-5-
 6

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 6

organizational success. Essentially, the "velvet glove" vs. "iron fist" debate is a microcosm of

the more significant trend in organizational management tactics (Edwards & Richard,1979).

As knowledge work organizations navigate the complexities of the modern workplace while

embracing flexibility and innovation, choosing between these approaches becomes a strategic

decision with profound implications for organizational culture, employee morale, and,

ultimately, the ability to thrive in an ever-changing business landscape. The importance of these

notions resides in their capacity to explain the complexities of control mechanisms and their

adaptation to the needs of modern information work contexts.

Impact of Organizational Control on Workplace Autonomy

Investigating the effect of organizational control on workplace autonomy reveals a

complex and dynamic interaction that creates the current corporate environment.

Contemporary businesses face the enormous problem of balancing management requirements

and workers' growing expectations for autonomy. The idea of "coercion," an expression of

power dynamics inside organizational systems, is at the heart of this complication (Griffin et

al., 2020). Management uses coercion to impose control, typically at the price of human

autonomy. Strict regulations, monitoring methods, and hierarchical structures may create a

climate in which people feel driven to comply, diminishing the liberty they want. While this

forceful technique provides a sense of control, it may have negative implications such as

decreased morale, higher stress, and decreased overall work satisfaction.

Resistance is a natural reaction to tight constraints, emphasizing the human need for

autonomy and self-determination. Employees may respond to restrictive regulations by

expressing their agency and contesting perceived infringements on their independence(Simons,

2019, pp 173-194). This resistance may take many forms, ranging from subtle disobedience to

outright dissatisfaction. As a result, firms are forced to perform a careful balancing act to allow

employee autonomy without jeopardizing operational efficiency or broader goals.

[no notes on this page]

-6-
 7

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 7

This delicate balance is critical to maintaining staff engagement and performance.

Excessive control may suffocate creativity and innovation, undermining the characteristics that

lead to a lively and effective workplace. On the other hand, a lack of control may result in

disorder, reducing the organization's capacity to fulfill strategic objectives (Spurk & Straub,

2020, p.103-435). A comprehensive awareness of the individual requirements and expectations

of the workforce is required to strike the correct balance, admitting that a one-size-fits-all

approach to control is unworkable in the varied and developing terrain of the contemporary

workplace. Organizations must establish a culture of trust, open communication, and mutual

respect to navigate this intricate dynamic. Giving workers greater autonomy improves job

happiness and creates a more motivated and inventive team. A deliberate alignment of

corporate objectives with individual ambitions may convert the workplace into a dynamic and

flexible environment where control is used sparingly, and autonomy drives organizational

success.

Changing Dynamics of Organizational Control

A seismic paradigm change in organizational control dynamics is happening in the

ever-changing terrain of the modern workplace. This transition is inextricably related to

significant changes in organizational structures and cultural norms, necessitating a severe

reevaluation of established management techniques. The conflict between compulsion and

resistance emerges as a prominent subject, demonstrating control systems' fluid and dynamic

character in this new century (Ansari, 2019, pp 443-446). The conventional "iron fist" style of

corporate management, marked by authoritative commands and rigorous standards, is meeting

with growing opposition from the contemporary workforce. Employees seek a more

collaborative and participative work environment, and strict control methods might result in

resistance, lowering morale and productivity. This opposition needs a more nuanced and

adaptive "velvet glove" approach a strategy that blends influence, persuasion, and cooperation

[no notes on this page]

-7-
 8

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 8

to connect business objectives with employee autonomy and ambitions. The idea of

indeterminacy complicates these control dynamics even further. Organizations have the

problem of managing personnel in an environment where predictability is elusive. Traditional

control tactics are being tested by indeterminacy, as inflexible structures become ineffective in

uncertain and constantly changing work conditions. This needs a paradigm change toward more

flexible and responsive control methods that enable people to negotiate rugged terrain while

meeting corporate goals.

In this age of uncertainty, adaptation becomes essential. Organizations must be

adaptable and able to rebalance their control techniques in response to evolving internal and

external dynamics. It is critical to embrace a culture of continual learning and growth,

promoting an atmosphere in which people are encouraged to share ideas and solutions. This

flexibility improves organizational resilience and keeps a motivated staff feeling empowered

rather than confined by control mechanisms (Kellogg et al., 2020, pp 366-410). The modern

workplace necessitates a shift away from the rigid and authoritative control paradigms of the

past. Coercion, resistance, and adaptability interaction exemplify the changing nature of control

systems. Adopting a "velvet glove" strategy and managing the difficulties of indeterminacy

position companies to prosper in an age when flexibility, cooperation, and adaptation are

critical success drivers. Organizations that rebalance their control tactics set the way for a

productive workplace that supports employee autonomy and innovation.

Discussion and Analysis

A rigorous examination highlights firms' need to adapt to the demands of the

contemporary workplace proactively. The "velvet glove vs. iron fist" problem highlights

businesses' enormous obstacles in retaining control while establishing a good and productive

work environment. The "velvet glove" approach to organizational management is softer and

more convincing, stressing cooperation, flexibility, and employee empowerment. The "iron

[no notes on this page]

-8-
 9

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 9

fist" represents a more forceful and authoritarian posture based on rigorous regulations,

hierarchies, and close surveillance. Striking a careful balance between these two extremes is

critical since it directly impacts the overall company environment and, as a result, employee

well-being and performance. Case studies, especially those focusing on knowledge work

organizations, provide instructive instances of the complex dance between autonomy and

control. Rigid control measures risk suffocating the same traits that fuel success in these

situations, where creativity and innovation are crucial. Employees who work in knowledge

work flourish when they are free to experiment with new ways and offer unique insights into

issue resolution. The requirement for autonomy in knowledge work organizations derives from

realizing that creativity thrives in an atmosphere where people are free to think freely and

question established conventions. Using an "iron fist" attitude in such situations stifles creative

thought and may lead to demotivation, resistance, and, eventually, a decrease in inventive

outputs. Organizations that negotiate this fine line effectively benefit from a highly motivated,

engaged, and creative staff. They stimulate creativity and problem-solving by using a "velvet

glove" approach that supports autonomy while offering required direction and assistance. This

adaptation to the modern workplace is a strategic requirement, recognizing that old command-

and-control methods are inadequate for harnessing the full potential of today's knowledge-

driven economy (Pianese et al., 2023, pp 326–345). The complex interaction between the

"velvet glove" and the "iron fist" in organizational management shows the contemporary

workplace's difficulties and prospects. Organizations must carefully calibrate their approach,

especially in knowledge work environments where autonomy is not only a desired bonus but a

fuel for innovation and long-term success. Organizations position themselves to prosper in the

ever-changing world of work by embracing agility and developing a culture that appreciates

autonomy and control.

Conclusion

[no notes on this page]

-9-
 10

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 10

As a result of this investigation, it is clear that the employment relationship and

organizational control are critical components in the complicated tapestry of managing people

in the workplace. The trip through these complex parts, seen via Edwards' typology and the

contradiction between the soft glove and the iron fist, emphasizes the need for adaptation in

modern workplaces. The growth of organizational control mechanisms reflects the dynamic

character of today's workforce and the ever-changing work context. Edwards' typology of

controls, which includes direct, technical, bureaucratic, and normative rules, gives a complete

framework for comprehending corporations' varied tactics to regulate their people. This

development results from an internal desire to align with the altering dynamics of businesses

driven by technology breakthroughs, globalization, and changing social expectations rather

1
than a reaction to external influences. The silk glove and iron fist paradigm juxtaposes and 1. silk
silk?
highlights the difficult balancing act that organizations must do. On the one hand, a softer, [sa23968]

more persuasive approach (the velvet glove) is required to build a healthy workplace culture

that encourages creativity, innovation, and employee pleasure. A more forceful technique (the

iron fist) may be necessary to maintain order and guarantee that organizational goals are

attained. Striking this balance is not a one-size-fits-all undertaking; it requires a sophisticated

awareness of the workforce's requirements and expectations within the business context.

Balancing employee liberty with corporate control is a significant subject in this

conversation. The appeal for flexibility resounds strongly, highlighting that as work dynamics

evolve, businesses must handle these difficulties proactively. This entails understanding

workers' changing expectations and building a working culture that promotes autonomy within

the confines of business goals. Organizations must examine the more significant implications

of evolving organizational environments as they handle these difficulties. The ripple effects

extend beyond individual employee experiences, affecting workplace autonomy and company

performance. A forward-thinking and resilient institution will be able to build a culture that

- 10 -
 11

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 11

respects and uses individual liberty while retaining effective organizational control. Finally,

this investigation encourages organizations to consider the intricate interplay between the

employment relationship and corporate governance as a continuous journey that necessitates

adaptability, strategic foresight, and a commitment to the well-being of the workforce and the

organization.

[no notes on this page]

- 11 -
 12

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 12

Reference list
Ansari, S.L. and Bell, J., 2019. Symbolism, collectivism, and rationality in organizational

control. In Management Control Theory (pp. 443-466). Routledge.

Bratton, J., Gold, J., Bratton, A. and Steele, L., 2021. Human resource management.

Bloomsbury Publishing.

Buchanan, D. and A. Huczynski (2013), chapters 3, 15, and 16 (on technology, organizational

structure, and organization design)

Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R. and McDonnell, A., 2020. Algorithmic management

and app‐work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and

HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), pp.114-132.

Edwards, Richard C. (1979). Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace In the

Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books; London: Heinemann. (Google Scholar,

physical copy in library)

Giglioni, G.B. and Bedeian, A.G., 2019. A conspectus of management control theory: 1900-

1972. In Management Control Theory (pp. 3-16). Routledge.

Griffin, R.W., Phillips, J.M. and Gully, S.M., 2020. Organizational behavior: Managing

people and organizations. CENGAGE learning.

Jermier, J.M. (1998), ‘Critical Perspectives on Organizational Control,’ Administrative

Science Quarterly, 43(2): 235-256. (Moodle)

Kellogg, K.C., Valentine, M.A. and Christin, A., 2020. Algorithms at work: The new

contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), pp.366-410.

Langfred, C.W. and K.W. Rockmann (2016), ‘The Push and Pull of Autonomy: The Tension

Between Individual Autonomy and Organizational Control in Knowledge Work,’

Group & Organization Management, 41(5) 629–657. (Moodle)

[no notes on this page]

- 12 -
 13

Employment Relationship and Organizational Control 13

Pianese, T., Errichiello, L. & da Cunha, J.V. (2023) Organizational control in the context of

remote working: A synthesis of empirical findings and a research agenda. European

Management Review, 20(2), 326–345.

Rudolph, C.W., Allan, B., Clark, M., Hertel, G., Hirschi, A., Kunze, F., Shockley, K., Shoss,

M., Sonnentag, S. and Zacher, H., 2021. Pandemics: Implications for research and

practice in industrial and organizational psychology. Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, 14(1-2), pp.1-35.

Simons, R., 2019. The role of management control systems in creating competitive

advantage: new perspectives. In Management Control Theory (pp. 173-194).

Routledge.

Spurk, D. and Straub, C., 2020. Flexible employment relationships and careers in times of the

COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, p.103435.

[no notes on this page]

- 13 -