What happened

Mixed outcomes. Workers participated in consequential production and team decisions while remaining subject to customer standards and pressure to fit their teams. Authority changed form rather than disappearing. Whether that change produced superior economic performance, and how its benefits and burdens were distributed among workers, remains uncertain.

What might explain it

Plausible

Closer contact with a customer may make priorities clearer without detailed instructions from a supervisor. Figures du client et management: un processus de structuration sous contrôle(s)

Alternative explanation: Stable contracts and customer-imposed standards may themselves provide much of the coordination.

Supported in case

Peer accountability may become coercive when fitting the group is necessary to remain employed. The liberated firm, a radical innovation or a mere avatar of participatory management?

Alternative explanation: Some peer expectations may protect reliability and shared work rather than enforce arbitrary conformity.

Understanding the outcome

Social and bureaucratic control in customer–supplier relations

Trust-based relationships coexist with standards and monitoring rather than replacing them completely. Figures du client et management: un processus de structuration sous contrôle(s)

A supplier’s bargaining power and production dependencies affect how much a trusting customer relationship leaves room for autonomy.

Questions to take into practice

  • Map customer and peer constraints alongside formal reporting lines.
  • Ask how a newcomer can challenge a team norm without losing their place in the organization.

What remains uncertain

  • How did workers’ experiences change over time, particularly when teams struggled or customer demands tightened?
  • Would similar suppliers under comparable commercial pressure achieve the same results through different forms of supervision?