Worker voice is not an "add-on" tool. It's a Performance Driver.

Listening to Workers Isn’t Optional — It’s a Supply Chain Strategy 

New research by Dylan Nelson and Nathan Wilmers at MIT offers something rare in the labor space: causal evidence that worker voice pays off.

Their study, Earnings Effects of Direct Worker Voice in Production (May 2025), finds that when manufacturers actively use worker input in production decisions, three things move in the right direction:

• Productivity increases

• Earnings increase

• Turnover decreases

For brands facing HRDD and CSDDD expectations, this isn’t a niche social outcome.It’s a core supply chain capability.

Worker Voice Creates Performance Gains You Can Feel Downstream 

Source: Mandiri Abadi, 2022

Nelson & Wilmers show that moving from low to high use of worker input is associated with productivity gains of up to 15% 

(Table 3, pp. 19–20).

That’s not symbolic. In practice, higher productivity means:

• Fewer last-minute production crises

• More stable output and fewer quality dips

• Better ability to manage bottlenecks and shifts in demand

When factories operate more smoothly, downstream partners feel it: Fewer surprises, fewer fire drills, more predictable supply.

Worker voice doesn’t just improve the shop floor — it improves the flow.

Worker Voice Is Now Evidence — Not Just Engagement 

From “Engagement” to Evidence

Under HRDD and CSDDD, the question is no longer:

“Do you have a grievance mechanism?”

It is:

“Do workers trust it, use it, and does it change outcomes?”

Audits can’t answer that. Worker-generated data can.

In the Nelson & Wilmers study, workplaces that integrate worker input into decision-making show:

• Higher earnings (Table 2, p. 18)

• Lower turnover (p. 13)

• Stronger operational performance (Table 3)

These are exactly the signals regulators, investors, and brands look for when they ask whether worker voice is real or just on paper.

Worker voice becomes not only a practice — but proof.

A Functioning Voice System Shifts Power, and That’s the Point 

One of the most important findings is that wage gains persist even after controlling for productivity (pp. 19–20).

That means the earnings effect is not just “workers produce more, so they earn more.”It reflects a shift in bargaining power:

• When workers’ knowledge becomes indispensable,

• Their ability to influence outcomes increases.

This is precisely the kind of structural change that many due-diligence frameworks aim for: workers who can assert rights, shape outcomes, and negotiate remedy because the mechanism works, not because an audit checked a box.

Voice Without Use Is Noise. Use Is What Matters. 

Channels Don’t Matter If They’re Not Used. Nelson & Wilmers make a critical distinction:

It’s not the existence of a mechanism that matters — it’s whether worker input is actually used in decisions.

Many systems collect data but never close the loop.Workers speak. Management listens (sometimes). Nothing changes.

The study shows that when worker voice becomes:

• An operational tool, not a performative channel

• A regular input into planning and problem-solving

…both productivity and earnings rise.

For brands evaluating supplier maturity, this is the key question:

Are workers’ insights shaping decisions — or just filling reports?

Workers See What Audits Can't. Worker Voice Is Your Earliest Warning System

Audits see the past.Workers see the present.

Frontline workers are usually the first to notice:

• Deteriorating conditions

• Abusive supervision

• Wage inconsistencies

• Safety shortcuts

• Bottlenecks and inefficiencies

When factories rely on structured worker feedback to make operational decisions, these signals are:

1. Captured early

2. Interpreted in context

3. Acted on before they become non-compliances

That is real-time risk mitigation — and often the most cost-effective kind.

High-Voice Factories Are High-Value Partners 

Taken together, the study describes a particular kind of workplace:

• More productive

• More stable

• With higher retention and higher wages

For brands, these are the facilities that tend to:

• Deliver more consistently

• Manage volatility better

• Absorb shocks more effectively

• Require fewer corrective action plans

In other words: worker voice is not a social add-on. It’s a management competency.

And in global value chains, good management cascades.

The Strategic Takeaway: Worker Voice Is a Capability, Not a Program 

Nelson & Wilmers give empirical backing to what many practitioners have seen in practice:When worker voice is real, factories perform better and workers do better.

For brands, that means worker voice should live in:

• Sourcing strategy

• Risk management

• HRDD and CSDDD reporting

• Supplier selection and performance criteria

This is exactly where Labor Solutions works.

• WELL helps brands and suppliers measure worker experience and trust at scale.

• WOVO helps assess whether grievance mechanisms are trusted, used, and effective, not just in place.

• Improve turns worker feedback into structured action plans, so suppliers can own and demonstrate progress.

The study doesn’t just validate “listening to workers” as a principle.It validates it as a capability — one that can be designed, measured, and scaled.

Listening to workers isn’t good PR.It’s good operations — and the brands that require it will be the ones better positioned for resilience in the decade ahead.