indeed be a process of consolidation around two poles. Iversen and Pontusson
(2000: 3–8), for example, speak of ‘dual convergence’ in industrial relations:
‘there is a trend toward convergence on the German model of coordinated
industry-level bargaining among the coordinated market economies...
and...toward convergence on the dual American model of firm-level bargain-
ing and a large non-union sector among the liberal market economies’. One
possible explanation, suggest Hall and Soskice (2001: 56), is that ‘firms are not
essentially similar across nations’ and should not be expected to respond to
similar pressures in a uniform manner. As Thelen notes, employers in liberal
market economies may regard collective bargaining institutions as externally
imposed constraints which they are anxious to escape if circumstances permit;
whereas in coordinated market economies the ‘national-level bargaining insti-
tutions have been shored up not just by strong unions, but by employers who
realize the extent to which the plant-level cooperation that they seek with
labor is underwritten and sustainedby the collective management of labor
markets above the plant level’ (2001: 72–3).
One key implication is that even if managements are increasingly in the
driving seat, their strategic choices are likely to reflect distinctive traditions and
the nationally specific institutional landscape. This is not immutable: financial
liberalisation linked to the spread of Anglo-American conceptions of ‘share-
holder value’ (reinforced by the growing hegemony of US accounting proto-
cols) may shift perspectives significantly; and perhaps the spread of US-style
MBAs may also be encouraging more standardised management behaviour. Yet
different strategies can be expected to persist if one rejects the idea that there
is ‘one best way’ of organising work and workers, whether in the individual
firm or at the level of the macroeconomy (Hyman, 1987). Contract-based
systems which encourage exit, and status-based systems which foster voice,
have their reciprocal costs and benefits for managements, and there can be no
decisive measure of their comparative advantage.
As Kitschelt et al. conclude, ‘there are undoubtedly trends toward
convergence in advanced capitalism, but these do not rule out that regions and
countries respond to such challenges in partially path-dependent ways...that
reflect the sometimes competitive, sometimes cooperative, search among politi-
cal actors for new solutions to old dilemmas’. Accordingly, ‘we can be certain
that the diversity that has characterized the entire history of capitalism will
continue. Stable contours of that diversity, however, are not yet in sight’ (1999:
428, 460). Lowering our sights to industrial relations institutions and com-
pany-level employment regimes, the same holds true. For those who seek clear
predictions and straightforward recipes, this may be a frustrating conclusion.
For those sceptical of certainties and favourable to human self-determination,
it offers grounds for optimism.
In the next chapter Keith Sisson takes this analysis of convergence and
divergence one step further by moving to the regional level of analysis and
reflecting about the prospects for the ‘Europeanisation’ of industrial relations.
428 International Human Resource Management