Unitary practice or pluralist empowerment?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore management development in five trade unions. It investigates senior trade union managers' interpretations of management development, in particular, the extent to which they view management development as relevant to trade unions. The article also explores the link between managers' interpretations and the external environment for trade union activity. It considers the potential discord between the unitarist values and assumptions that arguably frame much management development literature and the democratic and pluralist values of trade unionism. Design/methodology/approach This research takes an interpretive qualitative approach. In‐depth interviews with nine key “elite” individuals representing five trade unions were carried out, in order to elicit their subjective interpretations of management development. Findings Trade union managers view management development as necessary in the context of environmental uncertainty. Moreover, although management development in trade unions retains some unitarist assumptions, it is also linked to core trade union values of fairness and justice. Research limitations/implications The in‐depth qualitative interview design allows for exploration of management development activities in a small number of unions and from a management perspective. Further research is needed to explore the issues in a wider context. Practical implications The paper begins to highlight and theorise management development in trade unions. Social implications The article has implications in relation to the role of trade unions as employers. Originality/value The article explores and theorises management development in relation to trade union management practices. It explores trade union education from the management development perspective rather than from an industrial relations or political education paradigm.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.