The Third European Survey on The Third European Survey on Working ConditionsWorking Conditions

Carried out in the 15 member nations Carried out in the 15 member nations in 2000in 2000

Around 1500 workers were Around 1500 workers were interviewed in each country giving a interviewed in each country giving a total of 21,703total of 21,703

The survey covers the active The survey covers the active population, i.e. persons at the time of population, i.e. persons at the time of the interview were either salaried the interview were either salaried employees or self-employedemployees or self-employed

Sample designSample design

The sample design is a multi-stage random The sample design is a multi-stage random sampling, called ‘random walk’.sampling, called ‘random walk’.

The identification of sampling points is based The identification of sampling points is based on the Eurostat territorial breakdown for each on the Eurostat territorial breakdown for each country (NUTS II) and population density.country (NUTS II) and population density.

The selected sample is weighted so that the The selected sample is weighted so that the sample is identical to the target population sample is identical to the target population according to six variables: region, city size, according to six variables: region, city size, gender, age, sector of activity and gender, age, sector of activity and occupational categoryoccupational category

Response rateResponse rate

Structure of the Structure of the questionnairequestionnaire

The questionnaire is divided into 8 basic The questionnaire is divided into 8 basic sectionssections

Section 1: Background information on the Section 1: Background information on the interviewee and his place of work (nationality, interviewee and his place of work (nationality, age, size of firm, sector of activity, etc.)age, size of firm, sector of activity, etc.)

Section 2: Physical environment (basically Section 2: Physical environment (basically designed to capture factors affecting health, designed to capture factors affecting health, safety and stress at work)safety and stress at work)

Section 3: Time (measures factors related to Section 3: Time (measures factors related to working time)working time)

Structure of the Structure of the questionnairequestionnaire

Section 4: Organisational Section 4: Organisational environment: captures work environment: captures work organisation (e.g. learning, problem-organisation (e.g. learning, problem-solving, complexity, repetition, team solving, complexity, repetition, team organisation, quality standards, etc.organisation, quality standards, etc.

Section 5: Social environment: mainly Section 5: Social environment: mainly focuses on forms of communication focuses on forms of communication and assistance received at workand assistance received at work

Structure of the Structure of the questionnairequestionnaire

Section 6: Outcomes in terms of Section 6: Outcomes in terms of health, safety and job satisfactionhealth, safety and job satisfaction

Section 7: Demographics: marital Section 7: Demographics: marital status, gender, structure of status, gender, structure of householdhousehold

Section 8: Mainly information on Section 8: Mainly information on payment system and level of payment system and level of earningsearnings

Comparison of organisational Comparison of organisational modes for the EU-15modes for the EU-15

Lorenz and Valeyre (2005, 2006)Lorenz and Valeyre (2005, 2006)

Lorenz, Lundvall and Valeyre (2006)Lorenz, Lundvall and Valeyre (2006)

Arundel, Lorenz, Lundvall and Valeyre Arundel, Lorenz, Lundvall and Valeyre (2006)(2006)

Field of studyField of study

Salaried employees working :Salaried employees working : in establishments with at least 10 persons in establishments with at least 10 persons in both manufacturing and servicesin both manufacturing and services

Total population studied : 8 081 personsTotal population studied : 8 081 persons

Draws primarily on Section 4: Organisational Draws primarily on Section 4: Organisational environmentenvironment

Table 1Organisational Variables

Percent of employees

Team work 64,2

Job rotation 48,9

Responsibility for quality control 72,6

Quality norms 74,4

Problem solving activities 79,3

Learning new things in work 71,4

Complexity of tasks 56,7

Discretion in fixing work methods 61,7

Discretion in setting work pace 63,6

Task monotony 42,4

Task Repetitiveness 24,9

Horizontal constraints on work pace 53,1

Hierarchical constraints on work pace 38,9

Norm-based constraints on work pace 38,7

Automatic constraints on work pace 26,7

Source: Third Working Condition survey. European Foundationfor the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

A visual display of the first two factors of MCA analysis

Learn

_Learn

Autc

_Autc

Autm

_Autm

Caut

_Caut

Chie

_Chie

Chor

_Chor

Cmpl

_Cmpl

Cnor

_Cnor

Team

_Team

Mono

_Mono

QN

_QN

QC

_QC

Rep

_Rep

Rot

_Rot

Pbsolv

_Pbsolv

Learning

Lean production

Taylorist

Simple

-0,8

-0,4

0

0,4

0,8

-0,6 -0,2 0,2 0,6 1

factor 1

Code : Xxx : presence of the characteristic _Xxx: absence of the characteristic Autm: autonomy in work methods Autc: Autonomy in work speed Learn: learning new things Pbsolv: probelms solving activity Complx: complex tasks QC: responsibility for quality control QN: precise quality norms

Team: team workRot: job rotationMono: task monotonyRep: task repetivenessCaut: automatic constraints on work paceCnorm: quantitative norm constraints on work paceChier: hierarchical constraints on work paceChor: horizontal constraints on work pace

Summary of results for the 4-cluster solution

(percent of employees in each cluster)

Discretionary learning

organisation

Lean production

Taylorism Simple organisation

All

Autonomy fixing work methods 89,1 51,8 17,7 46,5 61,7

Autonomy setting work rate 87,5 52,2 27,3 52,7 63,6

Learning new things in work 93,9 81,7 42,0 29,7 71,4

Problem solving activities 95,4 98,0 5,7 68,7 79,3

Complexity of tasks 79,8 64,7 23,8 19,2 56,7

Responsibility for quality control 86,4 88,7 46,7 38,9 72,6

Quality norms 78,1 94,0 81,1 36,1 74,4

Team work 64,3 84,2 70,1 33,4 64,2

Job rotation 44,0 70,5 53,2 27,5 48,9

Monotony of tasks 19,5 65,8 65,6 43,9 42,4

Repetitiveness of tasks 12,8 41,9 37,1 19,2 24,9

Horizontal constraints on work rate 43,6 80,3 66,1 27,8 53,1

Hierarchical constraints on work rate 19,6 64,4 66,5 26,7 38,9

Norm-based constraints on work rate 21,2 75,5 56,3 14,7 38,7

Automatic constraints on work rate 5,4 59,8 56,9 7,2 26,7

Source : Third Working Condition survey. European Foundationfor the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

Differences in forms of work organisation by sectors, Differences in forms of work organisation by sectors,

establishment sizes and occupationsestablishment sizes and occupations ‘‘Discretionary learning’ forms of work organisation:Discretionary learning’ forms of work organisation:

financial and business services; electricity, gas and waterfinancial and business services; electricity, gas and water managers; other executives; techniciansmanagers; other executives; technicians

‘‘Lean’ forms of work organisation:Lean’ forms of work organisation: manufacturing: vehicles; electrical end electronics; wood and papermanufacturing: vehicles; electrical end electronics; wood and paper blue collars blue collars increasing with the sizeincreasing with the size

‘ ‘Taylorist’ forms of work organisation:Taylorist’ forms of work organisation: manufacturing: textile, garments and leather; food processing; wood and paper; manufacturing: textile, garments and leather; food processing; wood and paper;

vehiclesvehicles machine operators and assemblers; unskilled workersmachine operators and assemblers; unskilled workers increasing with the sizeincreasing with the size

‘‘Simple structure’ or ‘traditional’ forms of work organisation:Simple structure’ or ‘traditional’ forms of work organisation: services: land transport; personal services; tradeservices: land transport; personal services; trade sales and service staff; unskilled workerssales and service staff; unskilled workers decreasing with the sizedecreasing with the size

Table 3Forms of Work Organisation by Sector of Activity

(percent of employees by organisational class)

Discretionary learning model

Lean production Taylorism Simple organisation

Mining and quarrying 42,4 41,5 3,4 12,7

Food processing 18,4 34,9 24,6 22,1

Textiles, garments, leather products

27,2 25,9 30,2 16,8

Wood and paper products 27,6 40,7 23,9 7,8

Publishing and printing 31,1 43,8 14,1 11,0

Chemicals and plastics 34,7 34,1 21,9 9,2

Metal products and mechanical engineering

31,8 35,7 19,8 12,7

Electrical engineering and electronics

41,5 38,5 8,6 11,4

Transport Equipment 28,1 38,7 23,2 10,0

Other industrial production 50,9 22,1 18,4 8,5

Electricity, gas and water 58,5 19,4 6,2 15,8

Construction 40,9 31,4 10,6 17,1

Wholesale and retail trade 41,5 20,4 11,7 26,4

Hotels and restaurants 29,7 25,8 16,6 27,9

Land transport 26,3 24,0 10,2 39,5

Other transport 39,2 36,1 5,0 19,7

Post and telecommunications 38,1 27,1 7,7 27,1

Financial services 58,1 21,5 3,4 16,9

Business services 57,6 18,7 6,9 16,7

Personal services 39,7 18,9 7,6 33,8

Total 39,1 28,2 13,6 19,1

Source: Third Working Condition survey. European Foundation

for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

Table 4Forms of Work Organisation according to Occupational Category

(percent of employees by organisational class)

Discretionary learningmodel

Lean production

Taylorism Simple organisation

Managers 69,1 24,7 0,2 6,0

Engineers and professionals

75,9 14,0 5,2 4,9

Technicians 61,0 24,6 2,4 12,0

Clerks 43,2 21,9 9,4 25,5

Service and shop and market sales

persons

30,3 21,4 12,4 35,9

Craft and related trades

34,2 38,5 16,5 10,8

Machine operators and assemblers

15,7 37,7 24,3 22,3

Unskilled trades 14,8 23,9 26,7 34,5

Total 39,1 28,2 13,6 19,1

Source: Third Working Condition survey. European Foundation

for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

Table 5National Differences in Organisational Learning Modes

(percent of employees by organisational class)

Discretionary learning

organisation

Lean production Taylorist organisation

Simple organisation

Belgium 38,9 25,1 13,9 22,1

Denmark 60,0 21,9 6,8 11,3

Germany 44,3 19,6 14,3 21,9

Greece 18,7 25,6 28,0 27,7

Italy 30,0 23,6 20,9 25,4

Spain 20,1 38,8 18,5 22,5

France 38,0 33,3 11,1 17,7

Ireland 24,0 37,8 20,7 17,6

Luxembourg 42,8 25,4 11,9 20,0

Netherlands 64,0 17,2 5,3 13,5

Portugal 26,1 28,1 23,0 22,8

United Kingdom 34,8 40,6 10,9 13,7

Finland 47,8 27,6 12,5 12,1

Sweden 52,6 18,5 7,1 21,7

Austria 47,5 21,5 13,1 18,0

EU-15 39,1 28,2 13,6 19,1

Source : Third Working Condition survey. European Foundation

for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

Forms of work organisation Forms of work organisation

across European nationsacross European nations ‘‘Learning’ forms of work organisation: Learning’ forms of work organisation:

+ : Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden+ : Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden - : Southern countries and Ireland- : Southern countries and Ireland

‘‘Lean’ forms of work organisation:Lean’ forms of work organisation: + : UK, Ireland, Spain and France+ : UK, Ireland, Spain and France - : Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Austria- : Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Austria

‘‘Taylorist’ forms of work organisation:Taylorist’ forms of work organisation: + : Southern countries and Ireland+ : Southern countries and Ireland - : Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden- : Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden

‘ ‘Simple’ forms of work organisation:Simple’ forms of work organisation: + : Southern countries+ : Southern countries - : Netherlands, Denmark, Finland and UK- : Netherlands, Denmark, Finland and UK

Table 8Logit Estimates of National Effects on the Use of Work Organisation Forms

Logit estimates without structural controls Logit estimates with structural controls

Learning Lean Taylorism Simple Learning Lean Taylorism Simple

Belgium -0,22 0,32 -0,03 0,01 -0,23 0,42* -0,11 -0,09

Denmark 0,63** 0,14 -0,82** -0,79** 0,79** 0,29 -0,86** -1,06**

Germany

Greece -1,24** 0,35 0,85** 0,31 -1,33** 0,42 0,84** 0,12

Italy -0,61** 0,24* 0,46** 0,20* -0,51** 0,20 0,33** 0,16

Spain -1,15** 0,96** 0,31* 0,04 -1,15** 1,08** 0,06 -0,17

France -0,26** 0,72** -0,29* -0,27** -0,32** 0,84** -0,33** -0,38**

Irlande -0,92** 0,91** 0,45 -0,27 -1,11** 1,14** 0,47 -0,50

Luxembourg -0,06 0,33 -0,21 -0,11 -0,17 0,42 0,00 -0,20

Netherlands 0,81** -0,16 -1,10** -0,59** 0,79** 0,02 -0,94** -0,74**

Portugal -0,81** 0,47** 0,58** 0,05 -0,78** 0,51** 0,44* -0,01

UK -0,40** 1,03** -0,31** -0,56** -0,68** 1,32** -0,24* -0,72**

Finland 0,14 0,45* -0,15 -0,71* -0,01 0,63** -0,07 -0,78*

Sweden 0,33* -0,07 -0,77** -0,01 0,22 0,06 -0,68* 0,00

Austria 0,13 0,12 -0,10 -0,24 0,33 0,14 -0,26 -0,43*

* : significant at 5% ** : significant at 1% Reference country : GermanySource : Third European Survey of Working Conditions. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living andWorking Conditions.

Figure 2

BE

DK

DE

ELES

FR

IT

LU

NL

AT

PT

FI

SE

UK

20

30

40

50

60

% D

iscr

etio

nary

learn

ing

0 5 10 15 20% Adopters

Figure 3

BE

DK

DE

ELES

FR

IT

LU

NL

AT

PT

FI

SE

UK

20

30

40

50

60

% D

iscr

etio

nary

learn

ing

40 50 60 70% Non-innnovators

BE

DK

DE

ELES

FR

IT

LU

NL

AT

PT

FI

SE

UK

2030

4050

60%

Dis

cret

iona

ry le

arni

ng

0 5 10 15% Strategic innovators

Exploring the links between organisational modes and innovative performance

BE

DK

DE

EL

ES

FR

ITLU

NL

AT

PT FI

SE

UK

1520

2530

3540

% L

ean

0 5 10 15% Strategic innnovators

Figure 6

BE

DK

DE

EL

ES

FR

ITLU

NL

AT

PTFI

SE

UK

1520

2530

3540

% L

ean

0 5 10 15 20% Adopters

BE

DK

DE

EL

ES

FR

ITLU

NL

AT

PTFI

SE

UK

1520

2530

3540

% L

ean

40 50 60 70% Non-innovators

BE

DK

DE

EL

ES

FR

IT

LU

NL

AT

PT

FI

SE

UK

4050

6070

80%

Dis

cret

iona

ry le

arni

ng +

lean

20 40 60 80 100% enterprises training

The relation between organisational modes and institutional context

BE

DK

DE

FR

NL

AT

FI

SE

UK

.3.4

.5.6

.7.8

DL

/ D

L +

lean

1 1.5 2 2.5 3Overall EPL

BE

DK

DE

FR

LU

NL

AT

FI

SE

UK

.3.4

.5.6

.7.8

DL

/ D

L +

lean

65 70 75 80Net replacement rate