of teams, job rotation, job design, etc. More recently there have been attempts to
evaluate thecombinedeVect of such practices. As introduced above, recent work
suggests that such practices are most eVective when used together as interrelated
systems referred to variously as ‘Xexible,’ ‘high-commitment,’ and ‘high-performance’
work systems (Florida et al. 1998 ). MacDuYe( 1995 a) argues for the integrated
‘bundling’ of high-involvement work systems, high-commitment HR practices, and
lean operations. It is the mutually reinforcing nature of these bundles of practices
taken together which characterizes high-performance workplaces. An underlying
themeinthisresearchisthatWrms should create a high degree of internal consistency,
or ‘Wt’, across their activities (Youndt et al. 1996 ).
MacDuYe( 1995 a) presents data from sixty-two car assembly plants^7 in support
of two related arguments: (a) that ‘innovative’ HR practices aVect performance as
interrelated elements in an internally consistent HR bundle, and (b) that these
bundles contribute most to manufacturing quality and productivity when they are
integrated under the organizational logic of aXexible production system (his term
for lean manufacturing). HisWndings indicate that lean production plants with
team-based work systems, high-commitment HR practices, and low inventory levels
consistently outperform ‘mass production’ plants. A key element of his argument is
that these systems support employee participation and training so as to contribute
to the expansion of workforce skill and the enhancement of conceptual knowledge
necessary for the problem-solving and continuous improvement of the lean model.
TheseWndings appear therefore to be consistent with those who argue that
factories, speciWcally those located in advanced economies and seeking to compete
on innovation and value added, will be sites of learning and creativity underpinned
by the ongoing development of worker skills. Snell and Dean ( 1992 ) review the
Wndings from a number of research projects into such developments and conclude
that they represent ‘a trend toward ‘‘upskilling’’ employees into ‘‘knowledge work-
ers,’’ whose responsibilities include not only physical work’ (Snell and Dean 1992 :
472 ). This returns us to the emphasis on innovation in manufacturing which has
called into question the traditional division of labor under Taylorist approaches,
for example as outlined by Kenney and Florida’s ( 1993 ) ‘innovation-mediated
production.’ The central features here are the reintegration of production and
innovation and of intellectual and physical labor.
(^7) The measures of high involvement work systems which MacDuYe( 1995 a) researches are as
follows: the percentage of the workforce involved in formal work teams; the percentage of the
workforce involved in employee involvement groups; the number of production related suggestions
received per employee; the percentage of these suggestions implemented; the frequency of job rotation
within and across teams and departments; and whether production workers are responsible for quality
inspection and data gathering. He assesses the evidence for high commitment HR policies on the
basis of the following criteria: whether hiring emphasizes an openness to learning and interpersonal
skills; pay systems contingent upon performance; single status workplace (common uniform,
common parking, common cafeteria, no ties); levels of initial training for new recruits (including
workers, supervisors, and engineers); and levels of ongoing training for experienced employees.
hrm and contemporary manufacturing 413