Management and Leadership

Pery, Sarit; Doytch, Guy; Kluger, Avraham N.

doi:10.1002/9781119554189.ch10

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They promote an understanding of how and when action plays a role in subjective listening perceptions in the workplace. Given that the subjective perception of listening has strong documented impacts on employees' workplace attitudes and behaviors (Pery et al, 2020), our work has significant implications for both listening scholarship and managerial practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, as part of a multitrait-multimethod analysis, Bodie et al (2014) recorded a listener and speaker having a 5-min conversation, then asked the listener, speaker, and a trained coder each to rate the listener's behavior, finding only a moderate correlation (r = 0.30) between speaker and coder ratings of the same interaction, and a negative correlation (r = −0.06) between listener self-assessment and speaker ratings. Given that it is typically the speaker's reaction to the listener that drives important outcomes (Pery et al, 2020), such findings point toward the need to better understand what is encompassed within the speaker's subjective perception of a given listening interaction. Some form of conversational responsiveness is likely to be important to perceived listening.…”

Section: The Nature and Importance Of Listeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both scholarly research and practical wisdom now suggests that organizations benefit from high-quality listening. A recent review on the topic suggests that beyond impacts on willingness to speak up about critical issues, poor listening can result in other detrimental outcomes such as turnover, burnout, job dissatisfaction, and low commitment, whereas high-quality listening can strengthen relationships and lead to better outcomes for individuals and organizations (for review, see Pery et al, 2020 ). Accordingly, there is a strong practical imperative to improve the quality of listening efforts (Itzchakov and Kluger, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most appropriate perspective of listening to assess depends on the aims of a particular research study (Bodie et al, 2014 ; Worthington and Bodie, 2018 ). Within the realm of workplace listening research, scholars are often focused on the speaker's perception of dyadic listening due to the importance of this perspective in driving key workplace outcomes (see review by Pery et al, 2020 ). For example, Brownell ( 1990 , p. 403) argued that “the perception [emphasis in original] of effective listening is vital.… When employees say their manager ‘doesn't listen’ it is essential to know what this means.” Yet most workplace research, rather than starting from the perspective of employees' lived experiences on listening, has used either experimental listening manipulations or survey methodology, each typically based on researcher-derived conceptions of good listening.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Feeling Heard: Experiences of Listening (or Not) at Work

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Listening has been identified as a key workplace skill, important for ensuring high-quality communication, building relationships, and motivating employees. However, recent research has increasingly suggested that speaker perceptions of good listening do not necessarily align with researcher or listener conceptions of good listening. While many of the benefits of workplace listening rely on employees feeling heard, little is known about what constitutes this subjective perception. To better understand what leaves employees feeling heard or unheard, we conducted 41 interviews with bank employees, who collectively provided 81 stories about listening interactions they had experienced at work. Whereas, prior research has typically characterized listening as something that is perceived through responsive behaviors within conversation, our findings suggest conversational behaviors alone are often insufficient to distinguish between stories of feeling heard vs. feeling unheard. Instead, our interviewees felt heard or unheard only when listeners met their subjective needs and expectations. Sometimes their needs and expectations could be fulfilled through conversation alone, and other times action was required. Notably, what would be categorized objectively as good listening during an initial conversation could be later counteracted by a failure to follow-through in ways expected by the speaker. In concert, these findings contribute to both theory and practice by clarifying how listening behaviors take on meaning from the speakers' perspective and the circumstances under which action is integral to feeling heard. Moreover, they point toward the various ways listeners can engage to help speakers feel heard in critical conversations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Nature and Importance Of Listeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Feeling Heard: Experiences of Listening (or Not) at Work

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Listening for Transformation: Discovering Third Space and Connection Using a Listening Protocol

Sathe

Zakrzewski

Longmore

et al. 2022

The Palgrave Handbook of Learning for Transformation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Meta-analytic Systematic Review and Theory of the Effects of Perceived Listening on Work Outcomes

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of listening in interpersonal contexts was hypothesized to improve a variety of work outcomes. However, research of this general hypothesis is dispersed across multiple disciplines and mostly atheoretical. We propose that perceived listening improves job performance through its effects on affect, cognition, and relationship quality. To test our theory, we conducted a registered systematic review and multiple meta-analyses, using three-level meta-analysis models, based on 664 effect sizes and 400,020 observations. Our results suggest a strong positive correlation between perceived listening and work outcomes, $$\overline{r}$$ r ¯ = .39, 95%CI = [.36, .43], $$\overline{\rho }$$ ρ ¯ = .44, with the effect on relationship quality, $$\overline{r}=$$ r ¯ = .51, being stronger than the effect on performance, $$\overline{r}=$$ r ¯ = .36. These findings partially support our theory, indicating that perceived listening may enhance job performance by improving relationship quality. However, 75% of the literature relied on self-reports raising concerns about discriminant validity. Despite this limitation, removing data solely based on self-reports still produced substantial estimates of the association between listening and work outcomes (e.g., listening and job performance, $$\overline{r}$$ r ¯ = .21, 95%CI = [.13, .29], $$\overline{\rho }$$ ρ ¯ = .23). Our meta-analyses suggest further research into (a) the relationship between listening and job knowledge, (b) measures assessing poor listening behaviors, (c) the incremental validity of listening in predicting listeners’ and speakers’ job performance, and (d) listening as a means to improve relationships at work.

show abstract

Management and Leadership

Cited by 5 publications

References 59 publications

Feeling Heard: Experiences of Listening (or Not) at Work

Feeling Heard: Experiences of Listening (or Not) at Work

Listening for Transformation: Discovering Third Space and Connection Using a Listening Protocol

A Meta-analytic Systematic Review and Theory of the Effects of Perceived Listening on Work Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About