John Lewis and school reform

New Labour could learn something from Mrs Norm and Janice Turner. They both endorse the survey of Verdict research – that John Lewis is the nation’s favourite shop.

Now, the important thing here is that John Lewis is a worker co-op. And it’s no coincidence that this form of ownership should be good for customers – because workers who have a stake in a firm regard customers not as an interruption to their indolence, but as the source of their livelihood. Economic research confirms commonsense – that workers who own part of a firm are more productive than workers who don’t.

What could New Labour learn from this?

Simple, it could encourage the spread of worker co-ops. One place to start might be school reform.

Put it this way. In many businesses where professional standards and skilled employees are the key to success, employee ownership is the norm; law firms, accountants, hedge funds, vet and medical practices are routinely partnerships of professionals.

Why shouldn’t this model be extended to teachers? Why shouldn’t schools be co-operatives/partnerships of teachers who compete against each other?

This would have several merits:

1. The combination of co-operative ownership and competition would raise standards.

2. It would give teachers more genuine professional autonomy.

3. Groups of like-minded teachers (say, according to their views on different educational theories) would bind together. The resulting difference in teaching methods would let us see what works and what doesn’t.

4. It accords with the economic theory of property rights – that employees should own organizations where human capital is the key asset.

Now, I want to be vague about the precise blueprint here; there are loads of possibilities. All I’m saying is that teacher-controlled schools should appeal to both “left” – because it puts workers/teachers in charge – and “right”, because it introduces competition. It’s also consistent with economic theory. So why not at least think about it?

Comments

[John East]

You make a lot of good points which I agree with, but the reason reform along the lines you discussed probably will not happen in the foreseeable future can be seen on the Nulabour back benches in the House of Commons. The left is deeply suspicious to the point of paranoia of any proposed reform, especially that which would take power from the LEA's. It sees selection lurking behind any proposal for change.

Reform can only happen if the left becomes more pragmatic. I am not holding my breath.

[Laurent GUERBY]

There are many co-operatives, but I've not seen that many economic studies of what part of the global market do they have, are they more productive when they compete with traditional firms, is the max pay/min pay ratio pertinent, do they live longer, etc...

I guess traditional firms give more money to economists so economists talk about these only :).

[dearieme]

If vouchers were introduced, presumably such co-ops would flourish. They'd each need to think about how they would raise capital, of course.

[jafrag]

one can work without having a stake in a firm and not "regard customers as an interruption to
their indolence".. It depends for exemple of the skilful and the ethic of staff's management.
Does it responsabilize the salaries? or does it treat them like children by keeping them under close surveillance?
I saw in my life some examples of good and fair management, it works..

we must be careful on the principle of having stake in firm : even if it is a seducing idea (and which
sounds fair) it can be on detriment of wages.. who take the decisions? who manage the firm?
what is the incidence of accounting management on dividends, etc
there are several shareholding modalities

stimulate competition between individuals is not necessarily the best solution for entreprise :
promoting of fair, adulte and responsably co-operation between workers can have better results.
(and is better ethically)

[Shuggy]

I have to say I like the idea of a school worker's co-operative where the Head Teacher was elected - that'd be cool.

[Patrick Crozier]

But if the John Lewis model is so good why hasn't it come to dominate? The other high-street co-operative (aptly named the Co-Op) seems to have disappeared.

If there are barriers hear what they are and remove them. But if there aren't then I suppose we have see JLP as an anomaly.

Anyway, is being a John Lewis Partner so very different from holding shares?

[ian]

is being a John Lewis Partner so very different from holding shares?

Does it matter?