HOW much do you trust your colleagues: a) enough to leave an umbrella by your desk over the weekend; b) enough to eat their suspiciously green home-made cookies; or c) enough to allow them to elect the boss?

The Guardian leans towards c).

The leftwing newspaper appointed a new editor this month after allowing staff an indicative vote on the candidates. There were manifestos, hustings and vaguely menacing sideswipes in media interviews.

At times, the ballot was a case of corporate life imitating, and even foreshadowing, British politics. One candidate said he agreed with Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg, echoing one of the catchphrases of the last general election, when Mr Clegg was seen as someone to court. Another promised not to serve a third five-year term, just before prime minister David Cameron did the same. Neither won.

Other organisations to give employees a voice include Goretex manufacturer WL Gore, an ‘innovation democracy’, where staff elected their current chief executive in 2005. At sandwich chain Pret A Manger, employees can vote on new team members — deciding whether or not to keep them at the end of day one.

Is such corporate democracy a good idea? “You could think of it as higher risk, higher return,” says Dan Cable, a professor at London Business School. “It works, but it’s extremely rare because it takes a really different company culture.”

Even at WL Gore, CEO Terri Kelly says her authority depends on the strength of her ideas, rather than the staff vote that gave her the role

First, the pros. Employees can usually vote with their union (to go on strike) or with their feet (to go elsewhere). Voting for one’s boss represents a high form of engagement. It probably inspires more warm feelings than endless jars of free biscuits, town hall meetings, or group trips to plant trees near the M25 motorway.

Manifestos also make public the battle for ideas within an organisation. “We can be more confident about our sense of humour,” wrote one Guardian candidate. “Bonuses need to be re-evaluated,” said another. We may need to publish fewer stories and scrap the weekday print newspaper, wrote a third. Staff can hear from their own executives what is at stake, and respond to them directly.

But the cons are significant. A vote creates a huge bias against external candidates, who will lack an in-house fan club and who — unless they want to antagonise their existing employer — will not be able to campaign. Because Pret A Manger’s UK employees are often foreign, some argue that British applicants are disadvantaged by its voting system.

Staff votes also warp internally, giving the most say to the biggest part of an organisation. Senior executives who have contact with only a limited number of staff will lose out.

In fact, the process may prioritise the wrong skills and strategies. Brilliance can take a back seat to affability. Turkeys do not vote for Christmas so staff would appear unlikely to vote for restructuring. Given that the first task of many bosses is to clear the decks, this could be a problem. However, research from the manufacturing industry suggests that employees can be trusted to think of an organisation’s best interests, says Richard Saundry, who teaches employee relations at Plymouth University.

The Guardian’s vote was non-binding. But the result was clear: deputy editor Katharine Viner won 53pc of the more than 800 votes cast. That was a mandate with which the Scott Trust, the newspaper’s owner, could hardly disagree. So Ms Viner was duly appointed ahead of other candidates, including the bookmakers’ favourite.

It is ‘highly unlikely’ that other organisations will follow the Guardian’s lead, says Mr Saundry. The decline of trade unions means that conventional employee engagement is on the wane, he adds.

However, in every organisation, there are informal processes through which staff can influence how decisions are taken. “Roles of leadership are handed out,” says Prof Cable. “It doesn’t necessarily mean that people are going to follow.” Even at WL Gore, CEO Terri Kelly says her authority depends on the strength of her ideas, rather than the staff vote that gave her the role.

Published in Dawn, Economic & Business, March 30th , 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play