METHODOLOGY OF STUDYING LABOR INTERESTS OF EMPLOYEES OF MODERN ORGANIZATIONS

The relevance of this work is associated with the lack in labor psychology of a sufficient number of tools that facilitate the study and assessment of the labor interests of workers. Objective. The goal is to develop and validate a new methodology for researching the labor interests of workers in modern organizations. Methods and sampling. A survey toolkit was proposed, the results of which were compared with individual scales of the methods “Studying the motivational profile of a person” (S. Richie and P. Martin), the methodology of F. Herzberg “Monitoring of labor motives” and the method “Motyp” V. Gerchikov. The sample for standardization purposes included workers in modern industries associated with industry 4.0 from 21 to 50 years with a work experience of 0 to 30 years (N=210). Results. The author’s methodology “Labor interests of workers” has been developed, which includes 35 statements. The content of the statements reflects the theoretical classification of 7 groups of workers’ interests: economic; professional; career; group; corporate; territorial and general civil. In assessing these scales, a 5-point gradation is used (from 1 point — not at all important to 5 — very important). The author’s interpretation of the data obtained includes: the degree of expression of the labor interests of workers, the structure of labor interests in accordance with the above classification, the analysis of priority types of interests based on the ratings given by the respondents. Statistically significant correlations were obtained between the respondents’ answers to individual statements of the methodology and the final result. Numerous direct correlations between indicators of motivation and labor interests were revealed. The reliability factor of the method is 0.662, which corresponds to the average bond strength. Conclusions. The presented methodology is internally consistent, adequate to the research goal and reliable. The results indicate a high construct validity of this diagnostic tool.

An analysis of the corporate governance practices of smaller listed Australian companies

We examine the corporate governance environment of smaller listed Australian firms to investigate the factors that determine how firms respond to recommendations contained in corporate governance codes. We group corporate governance recommendations into three distinct categories and argue that differences in adoption costs between categories, together with firm specific factors, determine a firm’s decision to conform with the recommendation or to explain the reasons for non-conformance. Analysis of the conformance by smaller firms with governance recommendations highlights substantial differences in adoption rates between categories of recommendations. Our results also reveal that the cost of adopting specific recommendations, together with profitability, external audit quality, and ownership dispersion, jointly explain a firm’s decision to ‘comply or explain’. This study provides insights for policy makers and regulators regarding the appropriateness of corporate governance recommendations for smaller firms