d) The differences in the level of political-ad­ministrative professionalism are also serious. Only in a few countries do we find trade unions with a consolidated and efficient work­ing apparatus. Such unions are able to make and implement strategic decisions with the assistance of a qualified political and scien­tific staff. In Germany, for example, the unions have a professional group of full-time func­tionaries who increasingly serve their organiz­ations like modem service enterprises. e) Of paramount importance for trade union policy is representation at plant level. The ex­treme cases can best be compared with the shape of a triangle: In Germany, the works council is an inde­pendent body enjoying many information and co-determination rights with which the trade unions carry out a unified programme of worker representation according to a specific division of labour; from the micro- to the meso- to the macro-economic levels. In other countries, such as Great Britain and Italy, the representative organs at factory level are the basic units of the trade unions and they have negotiation and strike authority. These are not institutions whose existence is guaranteed by national law, nor do they have legally recognized co-determination rights; they rely exclusively on trade union resources. As a result their effectiveness is extremely dependent on the shifting power relations which change with the general political cli­mate and overall economic situation. In a third group of countries.with mostly weak trade unions(France and Spain) one can find mixtures of relatively undeveloped forms of both the works council model and the dele­gate model. f) In the area of collective bargaining the spectrum of agreements ranges from those which are overwhelmingly concluded at the company level(as in Great Britain),. to the sec­toral contracts signed with one or another em­ployers' association representing the enter­prises in a particular branch of industry(as in Germany), to the countries(such as Italy) in which the main trade union organizations are dominant and the governments are heavily in­volved in the bargaining process. g) That there is just as much variety in terms of the trade unions' right to strike and the em­ployers' lock-out rights as there is with arbitra­tion procedures need only be mentioned in passing. To summarize this section, it can be seen that there is signficant variation concerning the degree of institutionalization and legal rights as well as the degree of centralization, rep­resentation and professionalism. We find both protected and unprotected systems of rep­resentation, flexible and rigid rules and regu­lations, robust and temperamental structures, coordinated and fragmented representation, innovative and conservative trade unions. These relationships make it clear that all ef­forts to harmonize the nationally distinctive trade union and social cultures with a leveling model of uniformity can only be counter-pro­ductive. The trade unions will have to learn how to forge an intelligent combination of fea­tures that can both compensate for weak­nesses and exploit strengths. Such a process of reciprocal learning will be promoted by the fact that there is no national trade union and bargaining system which is superior to all others in all matters of importance. With re­spect to institutionally supported stability, there are indeed a number of structural ad­vantages to be found in the West and North European model. On the other hand, features of equal value can be found in other countries when one focuses on political innovativeness and connections with the rank and file. In establishing a capable policy suitable for all of Europe, the trade unions face essentially the same problems as all other participants: how to prevent the diversity of structures and interests from leading to chaotic and highly competitive fragmentation? And the reverse: how can diversity be transformed into cooper­ative gains which benefit all through the com­bination of complementary qualities?