scholarly journals The dispositional antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice.

2016 ◽  
Vol 101 (9) ◽  
pp. 1342-1351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hemant Kakkar ◽  
Subrahmaniam Tangirala ◽  
Nalin K. Srivastava ◽  
Dishan Kamdar
Keyword(s):  
Prohibitive Voice ◽  
Dispositional Antecedents

Who Speaks Up?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming Yi ◽  
Shenghui Wang ◽  
Irene E. De Pater ◽  
Jinlian Luo
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Service Industry ◽  
Qualitative Comparative Analysis ◽  
Work Behavior ◽  
Employee Voice ◽  
Big Five Traits ◽  
Main Effects ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Prohibitive Voice

Abstract. Research on the relationship between personality traits and employee voice has predominantly focused on main effects of one or more traits and has shown equivocal results. In this study, we explore relationships between configurations (i.e., all logically possible combinations) of the Big Five traits and promotive and prohibitive voice using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Survey data from 171 employees from 10 organizations in the service industry revealed that none of the traits alone could induce promotive or prohibitive voice. Yet, we found three trait configurations that relate to promotive voice and four configurations that relate to prohibitive voice. We use the theory of purposeful work behavior to explain the different trait configurations for promotive and prohibitive voice.

Understanding managerial response to employee voice: a social persuasion perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-288
Author(s):  
Zhenzhen Zhang ◽  
Qiaozhuan Liang ◽  
Jie Li
Keyword(s):  
Authentic Leadership ◽  
Employee Voice ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Source Characteristics ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Social Persuasion ◽  
Promotive Voice ◽  
Prohibitive Voice ◽  
Managerial Response

Purpose Research about the benefit of voice to organizations generally assumes that leaders acknowledge or act upon employees’ ideas when they are voiced, but is it always the case? Drawing on social persuasion theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore what factors shape the effectiveness of employee voice by integrating message, receiver and source characteristics of employee voice into one theoretical model. Specifically, this paper investigates the influence of different types of voice on leader receptivity, and further examines whether the effectiveness of employee voice might be contingent on authentic leadership and employee expertise. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 353 matched employee–supervisor pairs in a two-phase field study. Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationships among the study variables. Findings Results indicate that leaders respond more receptively to promotive voice than prohibitive voice. Furthermore, leader receptivity is contingent on authentic leadership and employee expertise. The relationship between promotive voice and leader receptivity is more pronounced when employee expertise or authentic leadership is high rather than low; the relationship between prohibitive voice and leader receptivity is significant only when authentic leadership or employee expertise is high. Originality/value This research offers a more holistic explanation for understanding the effectiveness of voice behavior. Specifically, these findings emphasize the important role of voice content in determining managerial response, and underscore the value of receiver and source characteristics in shaping the relationship between voice and leader receptivity.

Efficacy beliefs and employee voice: the role of perceived influence and manager openness

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Prince ◽  
M.K. Rao
Keyword(s):  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Cognitive Theory ◽  
Employee Voice ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Voice Behavior ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Influence At Work ◽  
Managerial Openness ◽  
Prohibitive Voice

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore how and when an employee's belief in their voice self-efficacy leads to promotive and prohibitive voice behavior. By banking on social cognitive theory, this study examines perceived influence at work as a mediator and managerial openness as a moderator in the link between voice self-efficacy and the two forms of voice.Design/methodology/approachThis study's data come from 285 Indian information technology (IT) employees by adopting a cross-sectional survey design. The effect of moderator and mediator is examined by employing structural equation modeling in AMOS 22.FindingsThe results reveal that perceived influence at work partially mediates the positive link between voice self-efficacy and the two forms of voice behaviors. The test of moderation also exposes that prohibitive voice is more contingent on managerial openness as compared to promotive voice.Originality/valueThis is one of the initial studies to explore perceived influence at work as a mediator in the association between voice self-efficacy and employee voice behavior. The treatment of voice as a bidimensional construct in this study discloses the difference between the two forms, contributing to the voice literature and inviting further research.

Employee work experience, locomotion, and voice behavior

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 1851-1862
Author(s):  
Fangjun Li ◽  
Aimei Li ◽  
Yu Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Hierarchical Linear Modeling ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
East China ◽  
Employee Voice ◽  
Voice Behavior ◽  
Linear Modeling ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Promotive Voice ◽  
Prohibitive Voice

Experienced employees are a crucial asset and intelligent resource for organizations. In this study, we examined the effect of employee work experience on employee voice behavior. We also proposed employee locomotion as a factor that would affect voice behavior jointly with their work experience and we further proposed that work experience would interact with locomotion to influence voice behavior. Data from subordinates (n = 170) and their immediate supervisors (n = 46) were collected from employees working for companies in East China. Results of hierarchical linear modeling revealed that (a) high locomotion was positively related to promotive voice but not to prohibitive voice; and (b) high locomotion strengthened the association between both work experience and prohibitive voice and work experience and promotive voice. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Are we really better together? A bottom-up aggregation of communal orientation and its effect on interdependent decision-making

2020 ◽  
pp. 136843022093041
Author(s):  
Bret Sanner ◽  
Hassan Ziauddin ◽  
Eileen Chou
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Decision Performance ◽  
Relationship Orientation ◽  
Interdependence Theory ◽  
Communal Orientation ◽  
Positive Effect ◽  
Prohibitive Voice

Though communal orientation impacts how people interact, and members’ interactions influence interdependent decision-making, communal orientation’s impact on interdependent decision-making has received little attention. We address this by applying interdependence theory to take a bottom-up approach across three studies. We find that individuals who are higher on communal orientation are less likely to use prohibitive voice. We also show that dyadic communal orientation harms interdependent decision performance by lowering the amount of prohibitive voice used. At the team level, we find that team communal orientation is negatively related to interdependent decision performance unless the team is also high on relationship orientation diversity, which has a positive effect on interdependent decision performance. Combined, these studies contribute to the communal orientation literature by extending it to an important context—interdependent decision-making—and helping it be more balanced by demonstrating communal orientation’s downside.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document