Search results

Warehouses are under pressure to operate as efficiently as possible. In pursuit of attaining high efficiency in the order picking process, the warehouse manager must take several planning decisions, typically supported by a central planning system. However, highly centralised work erodes the autonomy of warehouse workers, interfering with worker well-being and productivity. This study holistically explores the impact of a work system with more decision autonomy for order pickers.

We conduct a unique field experiment in a real-world warehouse and use a within-subjects design to compare two work systems, one with worker autonomy and one without. 18 permanent employees participate in our study, in which we measure both psychosocial and physical well-being as well as productivity. Post-experimental interviews are conducted to delve deeper into the observed effects.

Our study illustrates that involving order pickers in operational decisions can benefit their job satisfaction and motivation without compromising productivity. Although we fail to find significance at the conventional level (α = 0.05), we do find marginally significant effects of our treatment on physical well-being aspects. Furthermore, our intervention invoked a highly positive user experience.

We show that slightly loosening tight process control results in organisational and individual benefits without endangering smooth operational flows. The warehouse in this paper acknowledged this and decided to permanently work according to this philosophy.

This study is the first to holistically explore the effects of a participatory work setting in a real-world warehouse.

We aim to elucidate the relationship between fixed-term employment and firm productivity by examining workers’ skills and considering how firm-level conversion rates influence this relationship.

We use longitudinal employer-employee data between 2011 and 2017 in the Netherlands to estimate a nonlinear regression derived from a production function proposed by Addessi (2014) and Castellani et al. (2020).

The contribution of fixed-term contracts to firm-level productivity is less than that of permanent contracts. However, this contribution is greater when firms exhibit a high conversion rate from fixed-term to permanent positions. The effect of the conversion rate is more substantial for high-skilled fixed-term workers than for low-skilled ones.

Our results suggest the extent to which firms benefit from fixed-term contracts when these are used for screening high-skilled workers for permanent employment.