IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/ijmpps/v34y2013i3p271-287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Flexibility and crisis resistance: quantitative evidence for German establishments

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Zagelmeyer
  • Markus Heckmann

Abstract

Purpose - The research question which this paper aims to address is: To what extent does (labour) flexibility contribute to crisis resistance at establishment level? More specifically, the authors seek to analyse the determinants of variation in the extent to which establishments showed resistance to the global financial crisis (GFC), i.e. the extent to which they were affected by the crisis, focusing on an available secondary dataset related to organizational, industry‐level, and (numerical) labour flexibility. Design/methodology/approach - Based on a unique cross‐sectional dataset of 8,000 establishments in Germany, the authors use binary logistic regression to assess the link between organizational characteristics, industry‐specific factors and workforce characteristics, and the fact that some establishments were affected by the GFC while others were not affected. Findings - Establishment size, being located in western Germany and business problems before the crisis were positively associated with being affected by the crisis. The sector of economic activity also played a significant role. Contrary to predictions relating to the strategies employed by flexible firms, the extent to which they made use of temporary agency workers or of fixed‐term employees showed no significant association with crisis resistance. Practical implications - The dependent variable measures the management respondent's (subjective) perception of being affected by the crisis, although it does not specify the ways in which a company has been affected, for example by a drop in demand or by difficulty in extending credit. The set of independent variables permits several tentative conclusions regarding numerical and functional flexibility, but it does not take alternative forms of flexibility into account. Originality/value - Using a unique and representative dataset, the findings suggest a less important role for numerical flexibility in establishment performance and crisis resistance when compared to other variables, at least within the authors’ research framework and its exceptional external economic circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Zagelmeyer & Markus Heckmann, 2013. "Flexibility and crisis resistance: quantitative evidence for German establishments," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 34(3), pages 271-287, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:34:y:2013:i:3:p:271-287
    DOI: 10.1108/IJM-04-2013-0082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJM-04-2013-0082/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJM-04-2013-0082/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/IJM-04-2013-0082?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Susanne Durst, 2021. "Human Resource Management in Crisis Situations: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Hatice Şengül & Dilem Marşan & Tuğçe Gün, 2019. "Survey assessment of organizational resiliency potential of a group of Seveso organizations in Turkey," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(3), pages 470-486, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:34:y:2013:i:3:p:271-287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.