PRODUCTIVE PRAGMATISM: Industrial democracy under neoliberal capitalist conditions

• Published in: International journal of action research Vol. 19; no. 1; pp. 7 - 48
• Main Authors: Ravn, Johan E., Imaz Alias, Oier, Ortega, Igor, Haga, Trond Sanne, Greenwood, Davydd J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Leverkusen Verlag Barbara Budrich 31.05.2023
• Subjects: Capitalism; Comparative analysis; Corporate culture; Industrial democracy; Labor unions; Neoliberalism; Open systems; Participation; Political behavior; Pragmatism; Strategic planning; System theory
• DOI: 10.3224/ijar.v19i1.02
• ISSN: 1861-1303

This essay presents two case examples of the context and practices of industrial democracy: Norwegian industrial democracy exemplified with the Aker case and the Mondragon Cooperative Experience (a term Mondragon often uses to describe its whole structure and history). The comparison illustrates the necessity of combining general systems theory, the distinction between political and socio-technical participation, and the role of ethos, worldview, and heedfulness in understanding how these enterprises operate and manage ongoing challenges. Our central motive is to promote the expansion of organizational democracy within the global industrial system as a superior and more humane alternative to global neoliberal capitalism. These are not simple comparisons because these systems have different histories, contexts, and dynamics. In making the comparison, we show that the constant process of balancing and rebalancing political and socio-technical participation is a key dynamic in keeping such democratic systems viable. We also show that enterprise ethos and worldview, far from being an add-on or a “soft” dimension, is the bedrock on which such systems rely. After making this general presentation, we put these systems in motion to show how they address the challenges of downsizing and strategic planning. Downsizing and strategic planning show both systems’ ability to face unexpected events and effectively cope with their potential consequences. We conclude that the differences between the cases show there is no one right way to create democratic organizations, but that paths exist and remain open for many different versions of these more humane and successful industrial organizations so necessary for creating sustainable societies.