When Employees Stop Talking and Start Fighting: The Detrimental Effects of Pseudo Voice in Organizations

Abstract

Many organizations offer their employees the opportunity to voice their opinions about work-related issues because of the positive consequences associated with offering such an opportunity. However, little attention has been given to the possibility that offering voice may have negative effects as well. We propose that negative consequences are particularly likely to occur when employees perceive the opportunity to voice opinions to be ''pseudo voice''-voice opportunity given by managers who do not have the intention to actually consider employee input (i.e., managerial disregard). The effects of this kind of deception were examined by means of a survey among employees (N = 137) and managers (N = 14) of a Dutch healthcare organization. We hypothesized and found that perceived pseudo voice led to reduced voice behavior and, as a result, increased intragroup conflict. These results imply that while offering voice opportunity is mostly seen as an effective management strategy, negative effects are likely to occur when a manager is perceived to try to deceive employees by pretending to be interested in their points of view.

Employee silence and the authoritarian personality

“…A commitment to pluralism, which values different perspectives and opinions, is likely to be very important in promoting the expression of voice . However, in addition to perceptions of negative consequences, employees may also perceive that their input will simply not make a difference (Ryan and Oestreich, 1998) in reference to pseudo-voice opportunities (Pateman, 1970) where employee opinions are not taken seriously (Vries et al, 2012).…”

Dynamics of Resistance to Change: A Sequential Analysis of Change Agents in Action

“…For example, if a change agent shows active listening but also MI-inconsistent behaviours, change recipients may get the impression that their concerns are not taken seriously (i.e. pseudo-voice effect; de Vries, Jehn, & Terwel, 2012). Pseudo-voice is present when employees get the impression that the management gives them the opportunity to talk about their concerns but that, in fact, their opinion is never considered.…”

It's not only about safety: Beliefs and attitudes of 811 local residents regarding a CCS project in Barendrecht

“…So, they may have perceived consultations with the public as a form of 'pseudo voice' (i.e., authorities that offer the opportunity to voice opinions and concerns, but never intend to actually consider the input; cf. De Vries et al, 2012). Furthermore, the lack of trust in the national government may have been caused by the introduction of the national coordination regulation (NCR) and the crisis and recovery act (CRA), which increased the formal decisionmaking power of the national government relative to the power of the local government and made it impossible for the Barendrecht town council to take legal action against the proposed CCS project.…”