Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bruning, N. S.
Right arrow Articles by Liverpool, P. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Membership in Quality Circles and Participation in Decision Making

Nealia S. Bruning

University of Manitoba

Patrick R. Liverpool

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

This study is an examination of the relationship between membership in quality circles and desired and perceived actual levels of employee participation on work-related and economic/strategic issues. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted on questionnaire responses from 224 nonsupervisory employees from three manufacturing plants. The results indicated that reliable differences in levels of desired and perceived actual participation were found due to quality circle (QC) membership and company. When differences between companies on employee demographic profiles, need for dominance, task characteristics formalization, and management attitudes about participation were controlled for; only one univariate difference due to company remained. Similar MANOVA analyses for outcome variables (absenteeism, turnover, work satisfaction, and organizational commitment) indicated a multivariate difference due to company and to the interaction between company and QC membership. Univariate analyses indicated the differences were apparent with turnover, work satisfaction, and organizational commitment. The covariate analyses eliminated some but not all of the significant differences.

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 29, No. 1, 76-95 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0021886393291005
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
J. Langan-Fox, S. Code, R. Gray, and K. Langfield-Smith
Supporting Employee Participation: Attitudes and Perceptions in Trainees, Employees and Teams
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2002; 5(1): 53 - 82.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceHome page
J. A.-M. Coyle-Shapiro
Employee Participation and Assessment of an Organizational Change Intervention: A Three-Wave Study of Total Quality Management
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, December 1, 1999; 35(4): 439 - 456.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of ManagementHome page
D. J. Glew, A. M. O'Leary-Kelly, R. W. Griffin, and D. D. Van Fleet
Participation in Organizations: A Preview of the Issues and Proposed Framework for Future Analysis
Journal of Management, June 1, 1995; 21(3): 395 - 421.
[Abstract] [PDF]