Towards an integration of employee voice and silence

Nechanska, Eva; Hughes, Emma; Dundon, Tony

doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2018.11.002

Cited by 95 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 83 publications

(119 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study has confirmed that employees' choice to not participate in available EV channels may have a detrimental implication in terms of organizational innovation, and suggests that such choice may be related to managerial practices that send employees contradictory messages. In this, our findings also contribute to the emerging theoretical effort to better understand the antecedents of EV and silence (e.g., Morrison, ; Nechanska, Hughes, & Dundon, in press).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Crowding‐out or crowding‐in? Direct voice, performance‐related pay, and organizational innovation in European firms

Torre

Salimi

Giangreco

2019

Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building on motivation crowding theory (MCT), this article contributes to the human resources management (HRM)‐innovation debate by examining the potential trade‐offs between HRM practices targeted to increase employees' intrinsic motivation, such as direct employee voice (EV), and the presence of extrinsic incentives in the form of individual and collective performance‐related pay (PRP). The results of the analysis on more than 22,000 European establishments show support for the positive relationship between EV and a firm's organizational innovation, and that this relationship is weaker in companies that adopted individual PRP schemes (piece‐rate plans). Moreover, while we found that collective PRP (profit‐sharing) does not moderate the relationship between EV and organizational innovation, a positive and significant moderation effect emerged when the combined presence of individual and collective PRP was considered. By advocating that the coexistence of multiple forms of PRP could overcome the crowding‐out effect of individual PRP on EV, the study contributes to the HRM debate by also calling for a better understanding of the potential contingencies between different HRM practices when innovation is focus of the analysis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Crowding‐out or crowding‐in? Direct voice, performance‐related pay, and organizational innovation in European firms

Torre

Salimi

Giangreco

2019

Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The TPB regards feeling trusted as an individual's belief that another party would be willing to accept vulnerability as a result of his or her risk-taking actions (McKnight et al, 1998;Lau et al, 2014). As pointed out above, voice behavior always challenges the current status quo and carries the risk of producing undesired outcomes (Morrison, 2014;Nechanska et al, 2020), including perceived bossiness (Tepper et al, 2004), penalties, or punishments (e.g., Detert and Burris, 2007;Grant, 2013). Therefore, voice upward intentions among individuals who regard their relationships with their supervisors as untrusting would be considered risk-taking behavior, and this perception would serve as a decisive obstacle to the enactment of voice.…”

Section: A Planned Behavior Perspective On Voicementioning

confidence: 99%

I Would Speak Up to Live Up to Your Trust: The Role of Psychological Safety and Regulatory Focus

Song

Peng

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Voicing upward refers to employee efforts to improve organizational functioning by making suggestions or expressing opinions and concerns. While extant studies have investigated how supervisors' behaviors or attitudes influence employee voice behaviors, researchers have paid little attention to the effects of employee perceptions on voice. Based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB), we developed and tested the effects of feeling trusted by supervisors on two dimensions of voice (promotive and prohibitive), focusing on the mediation role of psychological safety and the interaction effect of psychological safety and regulatory focus on voice. Using a sample of 244 participants and three waves of longitudinal data, we investigated whether feeling trusted would lead to both promotive and prohibitive voice through psychological safety. We also extensively examined the moderation effect of regulatory focus on psychological safety and the contingency dimension of voice. We found that promotion focus strengthens the positive relationship between psychological safety and voice (both promotive and prohibitive voice), whereas prevention focus strengthens the positive relationship between psychological safety and prohibitive voice. This paper concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

show abstract

“…Attempts to understand silence in organizations draw upon communication research (Kurzon, 2007), social and clinical psychology (Larson & Chastain, 1990; Rosen & Tesser, 1970), and research on factors that inhibit employee voice (i.e., the expression of work‐related ideas and concerns with the attempt to challenge the status quo; van Dyne et al, 1995). While voice and silence appear as opposing poles of a continuum, silence is more than the absence of voice (for detailed elaborations on the conceptual relationship between silence and voice, see Knoll, Wegge, Unterrainer, Silva, & Jønsson, 2016; Nechanska, Hughes, & Dundon, 2018). For instance, the absence of voice can have manifold meanings including that someone has nothing to say or that someone is actively withholding her or his views (Tannen, 1985; van Dyne et al, 2003).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multi‐Level Approach to Direct and Indirect Relationships between Organizational Voice Climate, Team Manager Openness, Implicit Voice Theories, and Silence

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Employee silence impedes sustainable organizational development, and it can conceal harm for internal and external stakeholders. Established approaches to overcoming silence in organizations draw on the assumption that employees withhold their views based on deliberate elaborations on the effectiveness and risks they associate with voice. Our research aims at complementing these approaches. Applying an information processing approach to culture and using implicit voice theories (IVTs; i.e., taken‐for‐granted beliefs about when and why speaking up at work is risky or inappropriate) as an example, we introduce a model proposing ways through which shared implicit knowledge structures emerge in teams and organizations, and how they affect motives to remain silent. We examine parts of the model with a sample of 696 employees nested in 129 teams and 67 organizations. Our findings show that IVTs can be shared at the team and organizational level, that shared IVTs explain variance in silence motives above and beyond perceptions of organizational climate and manager openness at the team and organization level, and that IVTs function as a mediator between team manager openness and silence motives. In sum, our findings point at shared IVTs as a way to conceptualize underlying basic assumptions of cultures of silence.

show abstract

Towards an integration of employee voice and silence

Cited by 95 publications

References 83 publications

Crowding‐out or crowding‐in? Direct voice, performance‐related pay, and organizational innovation in European firms

Crowding‐out or crowding‐in? Direct voice, performance‐related pay, and organizational innovation in European firms

I Would Speak Up to Live Up to Your Trust: The Role of Psychological Safety and Regulatory Focus

A Multi‐Level Approach to Direct and Indirect Relationships between Organizational Voice Climate, Team Manager Openness, Implicit Voice Theories, and Silence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About