To read this content please select one of the options below:

Democracy, accountability and participation

Brian Parkyn (Principal of the Glacier Institute of Management and was formerly for many years an Executive Director of Scott Bader Company Limited. He was also MP for Bedford 1966–70)

Industrial and Commercial Training

ISSN: 0019-7858

Article publication date: 1 August 1978

112

Abstract

The public debate on Industrial Democracy following the publication of the Bullock Report led me to make two observations. Firstly, it became abundantly clear that there is very widespread support for some kind of movement towards democracy and participation in industry. This appeared to stretch over a wide political spectrum, including Labour, Liberal and Conservative politicians, though excluding the extreme Left and Right. Support was forthcoming from leading trade unionists and the CBI. Various academics and others whose interests concerned industrial relations also seemed anxious to move in the same direction. There were, of course, a few who developed arguments totally opposed to any step towards industrial democracy, but those were clearly very much in a minority, though it should be stated that their reasoning was often difficult to fault. In short, therefore, it appeared that almost all informed opinion was in favour and considered that industrial democracy and participation is A GOOD THING.

Citation

Parkyn, B. (1978), "Democracy, accountability and participation", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 10 No. 8, pp. 318-321. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb003686

Publisher

:

MCB UP Ltd

Copyright © 1978, MCB UP Limited

Related articles