Three approaches to coordinated bargaining: A case for power-based explanations

Christian Lyhne Ibsen
2014 European journal of industrial relations  
This article reviews and discusses three different theoretical approaches to the study of coordinated collective bargaining which posit three different causal mechanisms for coordination. Rational choice posits power relations based on resource-dependence; rationalist institutionalism posits rules of the game; and discursive institutionalism stresses shared meaning structures. It is argued that each approach is based on different views of coordination involving exercise of power where some
more » ... s make others do what they otherwise would not have done. Coordination could therefore have negative distributional consequences for coerced actors. The paper goes on to show examples of the three approaches from Sweden and Denmark which are regarded as crucial cases for 'Sinatra-inference': If theories of coordination stressing power and negative distributional consequences can make it in Sweden and Denmark, they can make it anywhere. The article accordingly rejects notions that coordination is purely cooperative and makes a case for placing power at the heart of coordination studies. This does not preclude elements of cooperation but it shows that cooperation is conditioned by power relations.
doi:10.1177/0959680114527032 fatcat:fkwdf7d5mncgbf6iocazf4uv7q