RICHARD WALTON

Quality of Work Life Activities:

A Research Agenda

This article reviews knowledge about "quality of work life" (QWL} as a

guide to the assessment and development of this field of professional
activities. "Work structuring," "humanization of work," and
"sociotechnical systems" are used interchangeably with QWL. Topics
considered include evaluation methodology, planned diffusion of QWL
activities, and collective bargaining and QWL activities.

This article reviews knowledge about "quality of work life" (QWL) as a guide to the
assessment and development of this field of professional activities. Quality of work
life and the term work restructuring, which I personally prefer, will refer to a pattern
of work innovations that has developed during the past decade in the United States.
Many firms have sought a more satisfied, committed, and capable work force and better
output by designing new work structures, such as combining jobs to create whole tasks;
assigning these tasks to teams that can self-manage inspection, maintenance, planning,
scheduling, and work assignment; cross-training workers for broader flexibility;
adopting more participative patterns; designing pay to reward individual learning and
group performance; and decreasing status differentials.
Two other terms commonly applied to this phenomenon are humanization of work
and sociotechnical systems. The four terms cited are often used interchangeably, al-
though for professionals directly involved, certain labels have had special connota-
tions.
Sociotechnical systems, first utilized by Trist and others in the United Kingdom
in the 1950s, include a codified methodology for analyzing and a defined set of principles
for designing work systems. The guiding objective is the joint optimization of the
social-human and technical-economic dimensions of work organization. Activities
called work restructuring have resulted in similar work systems but have not necessarily
employed the sociotechnical language and methodology.
Humanization of work and QWL were popularized in the early 1970s. Originally,
these terms referred specifically to changes that enhanced the human experience at
work or, stated negatively, decreased the social and psychological costs incurred in
producing goods and services. A definition of QWL criteria first proposed in 1972
(Walton, 1973), slightly modified, appears relevant today: (a) adequate and fair pay;
(b) safe environment; (c) bill of rights, including equity and due process; (d) develop-
ment of human capacities; (e) advancement opportunities; (f) human relations; (g)
total life space, for example, balance of work and family; (h) social relevance of em-
ployer; and (i) employees' influence over decisions that affect them. Another definition
of QWL is proposed by Herrick and Maccoby (1975) in a more normative spirit.
Quality of work life is defined by several principles: security, equity, democracy, and
individuation.
The activities under these four labels seem to converge in both the means they employ
and the ends they seek. Increasingly, all four recognize the potential for improving
both business and human outcomes at the same time; the need for work system planning

484 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980

Copyright 1980 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.
0033-0175/80/1103-0484J00.75
 to include many aspects of the content and environment of work; and the importance
for workers to help shape the work system. Even the current differences in the elab-
orate methodology implementation may be narrowing. Elden (Note 1) has analyzed
the evolution of the sociotechnical approach and sees it now as characterized by an
"effort to simplify and demystify the relevant knowledge," and make it more available.
Conversely, those whose restructuring methods have not been described in detail, myself
included, are recognizing the need for more specification of their tools and design
principles.
Activities related to the previous terms are at the center of a broader spectrum of
work improvements in the United States. One other group of activities is less ambi-
tious, and another group of activities is more radical in the reform it seeks.
The less ambitious activities focus on one immediate part of a work system such as
job design, work teams, participative management, or productivity sharing. These
simpler initiatives have been discussed in the literature since the early 1950s, and al-
though these specific changes take on broader meaning when part of a major restruc-
turing, the findings in this literature are still relevant. (See Srivastva et al., 1975.)
The more radical reforms are industrial democracy experiments and worker-owned
and managed enterprises. Bernstein (1976) presents a conceptual model of the
components of workplace democracy, inductively derived from a review of cases ranging
from worker-owned plywood companies in the United States to self-managed enter-
prises in Yugoslavia. The necessary components include participation in decisions,
economic sharing, management-level information, a bill of rights, due process, and
a participative consciousness. Zwerdling (1978) analyzes 15 different experiments,
including some that do not meet all of Bernstein's criteria and fall into what we call
the central region. Whereas Bernstein builds theory, Zwerdling reports practice.
Bernstein concludes that democracy does not exist without participatory consciousness,
and Zwerdling observes that a major disabling factor is the lack of business and
managerial skills in workers.
Whyte and associates (Whyte, 1977) at Cornell are studying the management sys-
tems that develop when employees also become the owners. In the last few years,
employee-owned firms have arisen out of corporate divestitures, largely motivated by
employees' desire to avoid plant closings. The research finds that economic democracy
does not necessarily result from employee ownership. Modification of the conventional
hierarchy takes time, if it takes place at all.
Continuation of the type of research by Bernstein and Zwerdling into workplace
democracy will tell us whether these ideologically motivated systems eventually will
lead to forms of worker ownership. And continuation of Whyte's research into em-
ployee ownership will determine whether these economically motivated systems will
eventually lead to self-management. Both are open questions.
Returning to a consideration of what we call the central region, one must ask whether

RICHARD WALTON, Professor of Business Administration at the Graduate School of Business

Administration of Harvard University, has written two books, A Behavioral Theory of Labor
Negotiations (with McKersie) and Interpersonal Peacemaking, and authored more than 50
articles on the behavioral sciences, focusing on problem areas in human affairs. He is on the
editorial board of the Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
REQUESTS FOR REPRINTS should be sent to Richard Walton, Harvard University Graduate
School of Business Administration, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163.

Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 485

3. UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR:
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE ACTIVITIES

these activities are part of a fad or of a long-term transformation process. The answer
to this question will determine whether the rest of the research agenda presented here
is of low or high importance. Ideally, the answer should be based on the following
type of research.
First, we should track trends in the problems to which QWL work is addressed.
This is the customary approachsurveying job dissatisfaction, absenteeism, and
turnover. But these indexes, by themselves, have doubtful predictive value. To il-
lustrate, at the height of attention to "blue-collar blues," a U.S. Labor Department
study reported that there was no conclusive evidence of a large decline in job satisfaction.
Between 1958 and 1973 satisfied workers in the U.S. labor force had fluctuated between
81% and 92% (Quinn, Staines, & McCullough, 1974). Similarly, at the same time,
another study (Flanagan, Strauss, & Ulman, 1974) reported increased absenteeism
and turnover; they then explained these increases by demographic changes in the labor
force, that is, an increased proportion of groups with characteristically high quit and
absentee rates. We need to ascertain which types of data about symptoms are of greater
significance.
A second type of pertinent research would involve longitudinal studies of managerial
values concerning QWL and worker consciousness of QWL issues. If indexes of these
values and consciousness show a trend upward, then we can confidently expect the
search for improved work structures to continue. A study of a cross-section sample
of the Fortune 500 could provide findings indicative of national trends of values and
consciousness.
A third type of research would survey the previously mentioned sample of firms to
determine what manifest changes in the work structure are occurring either as part
of formal programs or as part of an evolutionary process: Is there a decrease in status
differentials between managers and workers? Is there greater communication of the
rationale for decisions? Is there greater consultation of subordinates?
My own projection of a long-term process of transformation assumes that trends
do exist toward more humane values in management, higher consciousness of QWL
issues by workers, and work structures that minimize status differentials and enhance
communication and consultation. These assumptions need to be and can be subjected
to more empirical tests.

Design and Implementation of QWL Activities

The design elements discussed below have received high attention in QWL efforts
(Cummins, 1978; Srivastva et al., 1975).
First, more explicit attention is given to job content than to any other elements of
innovative structures. The early contributions by the sociotechnical researchers, in-
cluding Eric Trist and Lou Davis, are generally supported but also refined by practice
and research. Hackman and Oldham (1980) cite studies, including their own, that
support certain hypothesized relationships among job attributes, psychological states,
and outcomes that are central to the innovations of the 1970s. (See also Figure 1.)
Second, work teams are often a key feature of the innovative work structures. The
literature indicates that certain design choiceswhether to utilize a team structure
and, if so, how to define team boundaries and responsibilitiesdepend on the nature
of the interdependencies inherent in the technology and the preferences and capacities
of members for working groups. However, these work team design issues have not

486 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980

 CRITICAL
CORE JOB PSYCHOLOGICAL OUTCOMES
CHARACTERISTICS STATES

Skill variety
Experienced
Task identity . meaningfulness of the
work
Task significance

Experienced High internal

Autonomy responsibility for outcomes work motivation
of the work

Knowledge of the actual

Feedback from job results of the work
activities

Figure 1. (From Work Redesign by J. R. Hackman and G. R. Oldham, 1980, p. 77.

Copyright 1980 by Addison-Wesley. Reprinted by permission.)

been subject to recent research of the type devoted to work content. Relevant, of course,
are earlier studies at Harvard, after the Hawthorne experiments that examined in-
formal groups that provided members with social satisfaction and protection, and the
later Michigan studies of group dynamics that typically involved task groups in lab-
oratories or in peripheral elements of real work structures. Thus, it is time to return
again to an investigation of the structure, functioning, and development of face-to-face
groups, this time as integral parts of the formal structure.
Third, another design element is the reformulation of supervisory roles to support
the intent of other changes. The case study literature consistently shows that super-
visory reactions, which often include confusion, anxiety, and resentment, constitute
one of the more problematic areas in work restructuringa conclusion also supported
by preliminary findings of a comparative field study of six projects being conducted
by Schlesinger and myself.
Fourth, pay schemes sometimes are conceived as the cornerstone of new work
structures. Plantwide bonus schemes based on productivity increases may provide
the leading edge for development of participative mechanisms and other changes. More
often, pay schemes, such as those based on skill acquisition, play a supporting role in
structures incorporating more challenging work and work teams (Lawler & Olson,
1977).
Two areas of controversy run through the discussion of the design of innovative work
systems. One issue relates to the importance of individual differences and the other
to the role of extrinsic versus intrinsic motivational factors.
Research continues to confirm that individual differences exist in desire for and
response to more challenging work. On the one hand, conventional work structures

Vol. 17, No. 3 June 1980 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 487

3. UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR:
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE ACTIVITIES

have not recognized individual differences. They tend to settle for the least common
denominator in terms of readiness for job challenge and task responsibility. Thus,
they represent a good fit for those who tend to prefer simple tasks that require little
attention. On the other hand, some argue that the innovative work structures developed
during the early 1970s simply fit another, equally limited group of workers.
Thus, we need to study the question, Does the central tendency of the new work
design better match the central tendency of workers' needs and capabilities? More
importantly, does the work design better accommodate the diversity of preferences and
capabilities among the workers involved?
The intrinsic-extrinsic issue sometimes is phrased, Do workers regard work as
simply an instrumental activity, or do they want it to be self-actualizing? More often,
it is phrased, What motivates workersthe paycheck or attractive work? The
questions are more appealing conceptually than they are instructive practically for
work design. Practically, the two motives are treated as having relative strengths that
can change over time; moreover, the new designs typically strengthen both intrinsic
and extrinsic motivators.
I expect that studies of American work innovations would show, as they have indi-
cated in Europe (Weil, Note 2) that workers in innovative systems have not had to
choose between more interesting work and more pay; that where there has been in-
creased intrinsic satisfaction, there also has been improvement in pay, reflecting the
workers' greater contribution. As Bluestone of the United Auto Workers (UAW)
has said,

While his rate of pay may dominate his relationship to his job, he can be responsive to the opportunity for
playing an innovative, creative, and imaginative role in the production process. (Bluestone, Note 3,
p. 4)

In the past few years, a number of researchers have developed instruments for as-
sessing characteristics of jobs, existing needs and skills of employees, and readiness
for change. For example, Hackman and his associates are testing a job diagnostic
survey they developed to diagnose jobs prior to work redesign and to evaluate change
efforts. Even when these instruments have high face validity, as I believe their survey
does, we still must ask, Under what conditions do these instrumented methods yield
better diagnostic data and provide a better basis for deciding next steps than an approach
using less structured face-to-face discussions with managers and workers about their
reactions to existing conditions and their perceptions of possibilities for change? We
need more empirical evidence on the relative merits of these quite different diagnostic
strategies.
The literature on introducing and managing work innovations is growing. For
example, Drexler and Lawler (1977) analyzed in detail the development of union-
management projects, concluding that a multitier implementation structure had po-
tential advantages in terms of dissemination and higher level support but slowed initial
progress at a site and created other complications. Equally instructive are several other
studies that have documented some of the more publicized projects, for example,
Rushton Mines (Trist, Susman, & Brown, 1977), Harmon Industries in Bolivar,
Tennessee (Macy, Note 4), and General Foods in Topeka, Kansas (Walton, 1977b).
The Rushton Mines experience underscores the crucial importance of political dy-
namics in a union-management project. Although both Bolivar and Topeka were
judged effective over a significant period of time (5 and 6 years, respectively), both also

488 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980

demonstrated the difficulty of ensuring the continuous evolution of a work system
toward its ideal.

Evaluation Methodology

Peterson (1977) identified several problems that have hindered evaluation of QWL
projects: "Halo" effects discourage independent readings on different outcome
variables; the timing of assessments does not permit a test for durability; potential
moderating variables are not identified; job design effects are not isolated from other
events in natural settings; and bias affects reports by those closely associated with the
innovation.
Unfortunately, attempts to avoid these problems by employing an experimental
group design with large samples often compound the difficulties. Consider, for ex-
ample, the following assessment of an organizational change project (Porras & Harris,
Note 5):

The research used a quasi-experimental, multiple time-series design involving approximately 100 auton-
omous business units spread"across the U.S. Three interventions using corporate OD staff as consultants
were conducted in each of the experimental units (N = 69). The focuses of the three interventions were
on human relations and participative group problem-solving, team development, and improving unit ef-
fectiveness, respectively. The first two interventions were conducted at the unit site and involved both
managers and unit staff, the third intervention occurred off-site and involved only managers. The goals
of the OD program were to improve the quality of work life in the units and to improve the unit's effectiveness,
(p. 2)

The goals of the evaluation research were to assess the impact of the program, to de-
termine conditions related to positive versus negative outcomes, and to gain a better
understanding of the change process. The research relied on two sources of data
self-administered questionnaires and regular unit performance data. The findings
were that the interventions had mixed resultssome favorable, some unfavorable.
The study does not permit us to determine whether the basic ideas embodied in the
technique lacked validity or whether there were deficiencies in the tactical skill of the
change agents in establishing rapport, communicating, listening, and pacing the ac-
tivities. The researchers' discussion does relate negative outcomes to specific inade-
quacies in the design of the intervention, but ironically, the poor intervention design
seems to have been an inadvertent result of the evaluative research design itself.
The logic of the research design created pressure toward larger sample sizes, resulting
in spreading limited professional consulting resources (four change agents) over larger
numbers of units (60 geographically dispersed units), the effects of which were,

There was not much time to help units deal with unresolved issues which were raised by the change agents'
visits . . . . There was little opportunity to adjust to greatly different needs as the intervenors moved from
one unit to another. (Porras & Harris, Note 5, pp. 34-35)

The logic of the research design also meant that the units that were to receive the
"experimental treatment" were randomly assigned, as were the units in the control
group. A random assignment precluded diagnosis to determine the need for change
and the appropriateness of the interventions and denied potential participants an in-
formed choice.
Although the previous evaluation documented an intervention that was less ambitious
than those generally contemplated in this review, it illustrates the difficulties en-

Vol. /1, No. 3 June 1980 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 489

3. UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR:
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE ACTIVITIES

countered with methodologies typically regarded as "scientific" in the social sciences.

Another drawback of such elaborate assessment methodologies is their dollar cost, which
sometimes exceeds that of the intervention itself..
I believe we urgently need to develop more cost-effective approaches to evaluation
in this field. For example, I propose for consideration an evaluation team of two union
officials, two managers, and two behavioral scientists, each category of membership
balanced with one member who tends to be more optimistic and the other more skeptical
toward the innovation in question. The team would visit the sites of one or two major
work-restructuring projects over the course of several years. Those who would agree
to serve on such a team would do so at least in part because of their prior interest in
developing their own understanding of such innovative efforts. They would be urged
to employ the skills, techniques, and intuitions they normally use to evaluate other
management processes and union programs and be required to set forth their findings
in writing.
Costs and benefit comparisons could be made between such an approach and other
evaluation methods such as a journalist's account, an anthropological-type investigation,
and a questionnaire survey. What type of findings does each method produce? And
what value does each of these different types of knowledge have for whom ? How
credible for each of a number of audiences are the findings produced by the different
methods? I suspect that the proposed team assessment approach would prove to be
more cost-effective in terms of a number of purposes that assessment research is intended
to serve.

Planned Diffusion of QWL Activities

That learning is occurring with experience is suggested by the research into systematic
efforts to spread new work structures, including a recent study by Walton (1977a).
His earlier research had investigated why, in seven of eight firms studied, the success
of work restructuring in a single plant was not accompanied by wide diffusion of the
innovation to other plants in the firm, even though stated policies favored diffusion.
The recent study analyzed in detail three diffusion programs that were successful or
promising. The three firms studied were very different in many respects, but all were
well managed, their managements were attuned to the human dimension, and their
innovations were pragmatically oriented.
A major choice faced in intrafirm diffusion programs is whether to spread a par-
ticular innovative structure found to be effective in pilot projects or to disseminate the
underlying principles. The study suggests that the level of concreteness versus ab-
straction depends on the amount of diversity in the firm. In one firm with similar
plants, the innovations were efficiently and successfully transferred from one plant
to the next with little variation. Another firm was highly diversified in manufacturing
technologies and competitive strategies; the forms that work restructuring took were
highly varied, although generally successful. In the first, innovations were charac-
terized at a relatively concrete level; in the second, in relatively abstract terms.
Another finding was the variety of vehicles that were used in these firms for trans-
mitting innovations, each of which had a natural fit with the unique circumstances
of the firm employing them. One company relied heavily on the movement of inno-
vative managers from one unit to another. Another firm related new work structures
to their introduction of new technological devices like trolleys, buffers, and robots. Still

490 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980

a third illustrated the explicit structures, roles, and activities that can be orchestrated
to promote the spread of social innovations.
Perhaps the most fruitful target in the United States today for systematic research
into the diffusion process is the QWL activities of General Motors and the UAW.
General Motors has moved to a leading position in this fieldin terms of both amount
of activity and its innovative characterand its diffusion strategy appears to differ
significantly from any of the three studied by Walton.
Myrseth (1977) researched the adoption behavior of plant managements in a large
geographically dispersed manufacturing firm. Sometime during the previous decade,
the managers studied had learned about team building, a sensing technique, arid/or
work restructuring. Myrseth found that the incubation period often takes years be-
tween the initial seeding of one of these ideas about a social innovation and the initiatives
to utilize the social innovation. The change agents had tended to underestimate this
period. Hurrying the process sometimes had decreased the likelihood of informed
and rational choice.

Collective Bargaining and QWL Activities

Research bearing on QWL and collective bargaining has addressed three issues. First,
research has described and explained the views of labor union leaders. White (1977)
found that publicly articulated union responses to innovative job design had shifted
from negative in!972-1974to neutral in!975-1977 and that in both of these periods
the union's actual responses tended to be more positive than the articulated views. A
more recent study of 17 international union officials (Human Interaction Research
Institute, Note 6) found that the seven officials with considerable previous involvement
in joint QWL programs had very different responses from those with little or no direct
experience; they held more complex views of the issues; they had a better understanding
of the reasons for union cooperation in QWL programs; and they believed there was
compatibility between unionism and QWL, although they remained wary that it could
be used as an antiunion device.
Second, research has identified conditions for successful joint union-management
QWL projects. An interesting finding by Nadler (Note 7) is that third-party con-
sultants had played a very key role in 16 such projects by promoting collaborative
processes and by injecting their own energy and inspiration. The latter was required
because of the cautiousness of the two principal parties.
Third, on the basis of a field investigation of eight joint projects, Schlesinger and
Walton (Note 8) hypothesized that although a synthesis of work restructuring and
collective bargaining can be achieved, it will involve a trend toward "participatory
democracy" in the workplace; whereas the "collective bargaining" institution as
practiced in the United States has been a form of "representative democracy" where
workers' influence was exercised through representatives in a two-party (union-
management) forum. They conclude:

All of these interrelated trends toward direct participationsmaller units with greater autonomy, diversity
within units traditionally managed by principles of uniformity, more accommodation of individual differences
in preferences and capacitieswill require some revision of both the practices and theory of collective
bargaining, with their traditional emphasis on representational influence systems and two-party decision-
making, (p. 351)

Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 491

3. UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR:
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE-ACTIVITIES

Further research will determine if the authors' hypothesis is valid and if the synthesis
is occurring.

Conclusion

The field of QWL activity offers the professional psychologist an abundance of op-
portunities to use his or her professional skills or academic research tools. The article
has attempted to propose some of the more important opportunities.

REFERENCE NOTES

1. Elden, M. Three generations of work democracy experiments in Norway: Beyond classical

socio-technical analysis. Paper presented at the Institute for Industrial Social Research,
Technical University of Trondheim, Trondheim, Norway, June 1978.
2. Weil, R. Alternative forms of work organization in Europe. International Symposium
on Social Aspects of Work Organizations, Moscow, February 1977.
3. Bluestone, I. The next step toward industrial democracy. United Auto Workers paper.
Detroit, Michigan, March 1972.
4. Macy, B. A. A theoretical basis for an assessment of the Bolivar quality of work life experi-
ment, 1972-1977. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meeting, San Francisco,
August 1978.
5. Porras, J. I., & Harris, R. H. An empirical assessment of the process and outcome of an
organization change project aimed at improving the quality of work life. U.S. Department
of Labor, November 1977.
6. Human Interaction Research Institute. Viewpoints of labor leaders regarding QWL im-
provement programs. Los Angeles, April 1978.
7. Nadler, D. A. Consulting with labor and management: Some learnings from quality of
working life projects (Research Paper No. 64 A). Graduate School of Business, Columbia
University, February 1978.
8. Schlesinger, L. A., & Walton, R. E. Work restructuring in unionized organizations: Risks,
opportunities, and impact on collective bargaining. 29th annual Industrial Relations Re-
search Association proceedings, 1977, pp. 345-351.

REFERENCES

Bernstein, P. Workplace democratization: Its internal dynamics. Kent, Ohio: Kent State
University Press, 1976.
Cummins, T. G. Sociotechnical experimentation: A review of sixteen studies. In W. A.
Pasmore & J. J. Sherwood, (Eds.), Sociotechnical systems: A sourcebook. Lajolla, Calif.:
University Associates, 1978.
Drexler, J. A., & Lawler, E. E., III. A union-management cooperative project to improve
the quality of work life. Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 1977, 3, 373-386.
Flanagan, R. J., Strauss, G., & Ulman, L. Worker discontent and workplace behavior. In-
dustrial Relations, 1974, 13, 101-123.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. Work redesign. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley,
1980.
Herrick, N. Q., & Maccoby, M. Humanizing work: Priority goal in the 1970's. In L. E.
Davis & A. B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life (Vol. 1). New York: Free Press,
1975.
Lawler, E. E., & Olsen, R. N. Designing reward systems for new organizations. Personnel,
Sept.-Oct. 1977, pp. 48-61.

492 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980

Myrseth, O. K. Intrafirm diffusion of organizational innovations: An exploratory study.
Doctoral dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration, 1977.
Peterson, R. B. Practical and methodological problems in job design. Journal of Contemporary
Business, Spring 1977, pp. 67-84.
Quinn, R. P., Staines, C. L., & McCullough, M. R. Job satisfaction: Is there a trend? (U.S.
Department of Labor, Manpower Research Monograph No. 3). Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1974.
Srivastva, S., et al. Job satisfaction and productivity. Cleveland, Ohio: Department of Or-
ganization Behavior, Case Western Reserve University, 1975.
Trist, E. L., Susman, G. I., & Brown, G. R. An experiment in autonomous working in an
American underground coal mine. Human Relations, 1977, 3, 201-236.
Walton, R. E. Quality of working life: What is it? Sloan Management Review, Fall 1973,
pp. 11-21.
Walton, R. E. Successful strategies for diffusing work innovations. Journal of Contemporary
Business, Spring 1977, pp. 1-22. (a)
Walton, R. E. Work innovations at Topeka: After six years. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Sciences, 1977, 3, 422, 433. (b)
White, B. J. Innovations in job design: The union perspective. Journal of Contemporary
Business, Spring 1977, pp. 23-35.
Whyte, W. F. The emergence of employee-owned firms in the U.S. Executive, Spring 1977,
pp. 22-24.
Zwerdling, D. Democracy at work. Washington, D.C.: Association for Self-Management,
1978.

Received January 18, 1979

Vol. 11, No. 3 June 1980 PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 493