Search results

The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual model drawing together and integrating research from employment relations (ER), human resource management (HRM) and organizational behaviour (OB) to identify how high-performance work systems (HPWS) encourage voice behaviour.

The authors identify shortcomings in research on the relationship between HPWS practices and employee voice behaviour, attributable to the disparate conceptualization of voice across management disciplines. The authors then present a conceptual model using the ability, motivation and opportunity (AMO) framework to theorize how the ER climate influences the design of the HPWS and subsequently how the HPWS encourages voice behaviour. Practical implications and recommendations for future studies are provided.

The mutual gains ER climate will influence the design of the HPWS; in turn the HPWS' practices will influence line manager AMO to manage voice and the employees' AMO to engage in voice behaviour, resulting in the encouragement of both employer and employee interest forms of voice.

The HPWS-voice behaviour interaction model sheds light on the types of HR practices organisations can implement to optimize employee voice behaviour.

The conceptual model demonstrates how ER, HRM and OB factors influence voice behaviour within a HPWS, which has not previously been considered by voice scholars. The integrated conceptual model encourages a multidisciplinary approach to studying employee voice in future research.

The purpose of this paper is to explore employee voice and silence in the mobile telecommunication industry in Nigeria.

An exploratory qualitative case study methodology was employed in this study. Participant selection was done through a purposeful intensity sampling technique, which resulted in 30 employees from two different multinational organizations and an indigenous organization taking part in in-depth interviews.

Findings show the presence of fear of victimization in the Nigerian workplace embellished by the Sub-Saharan culture and the state of the labor market, which resulted in employee silence. The study revealed that the implementation of culturally adapted employee voice mechanisms within organizations in the mobile telecommunication industry in Nigeria promotes employee voice and organizational performance, whereas a lack thereof results in organizational failure.

A limitation is that the purposive sample of employees from three organizations in the mobile telecommunications industry only permits theoretical and analytic generalization.

A focus on the co-creation of a high-performance work environment and the development of a powerful employee value proposition would foster employee voice.

It will enable multinationals operating in Nigeria understand better how to operate employee voice in order to obtain optimal performance from workers in Sub-Sahara Africa.

This paper contributes to the literature on employee/industrial relations by showing that a high-power-distance national culture and a high unemployment rate affect employee voice and silence, which brings to the fore the importance of adequate employee voice mechanisms through which employees express their voice in order to arrive at beneficial individual and organizational outcomes.

This study examines the yin (promotive) and yang (prohibitive) of employee voice based on employee preference for voice channel attributes. Employee inputs may be disregarded, requiring employees to maneuver for unheeded voice and adopt alternate voice tactics. The authors emphasize the ubiquity of lurking employee silence and its affective effects on subsequent cycles of voice or silence.

Qualitative design involving semi-structured interviews of employees from service sector firms in India assisted the inquiry.

Employees prefer voice channel attributes that ensure visibility and data substance for promotive voice and anonymity and confidentiality for prohibitive voice. Voice target switching and message reframing were common employee strategies. Silence on both sharing views/opinions (promotive) and voicing issues/concerns (prohibitive) weakens employee future voice incidents, besides suppressing the affect. Post-silence cognitive reappraisal increases voice incidences.

Findings may have limited generalizability given the qualitative design of the study. Moving beyond extant episodic voice research, the authors demonstrate the recurrent nature of employee voice and silence. The study broadens perspectives on how varied voice types necessitate nuanced voice channel attributes.

Present work brings together organizational behavior (OB) perspective on discretionary voice through human resource (HR)-based channels, helping bridge the gap between previously disparate stands.

In a complex, ever-changing, and turbulent business world, encouraging employees to express their improvement-oriented novel ideas through voice behavior is crucial for organizations to survive and thrive. Understanding how to foster employee promotive voice at work is a significant issue for both researchers and managers. This study explores how to foster employee promotive voice through specific HRM practices and positive employee attitudes. It also examines the effect of employee promotive voice on perceived organizational performance.

This study employed a time-lagged multisource survey design. Data were collected from 215 executives, 790 supervisors, and 1,004 employees in 113 firms, and analyzed utilizing a multilevel moderated serial mediation model.

The findings of this study revealed that promotive voice was significantly related to perceived organizational performance. Innovation-enhancing HRM was positively associated with employee promotive voice. The HRM-voice relationship was partially mediated by employee job satisfaction. Power distance orientation was found to significantly moderate the relationship between innovation-enhancing HRM and employee job satisfaction at the firm level. Our findings showed that innovation-enhancing HRM policies may fail to foster promotive voice if they do not enhance employee job satisfaction.

This study challenges some taken-for-granted assumptions in the literature such as any high performance HRM bundles (e.g. HPWS) can foster employee promotive voice, and the effects of HRM are direct and even unconditional on organizational outcomes. It emphasizes the need to avoid potential unintended effects of HRM on employee voice and the importance of contextualizing voice research.

Integrating individual and relational centric voice literature, the authors draw on self-presentation theory to analyse the role of status pursuit in employee voice. Status pursuit is believed to be ubiquitous as it is linked to access to scarce resources and social order pecking.

The authors present a cross-level conceptual model outlining relational nuances of employee status pursuit that drive upward voice.

The model integrates status pursuit with peer- and leader-related facets, focusing on three targets of voice: immediate leader (supervisor), diagonal leader (supervisor of another team/unit) and co-workers. The model highlights how employee voice can be directed to diverse targets, and depending on interpersonal attributes, how it serves as underlying links for upward voice.

While employee voice can help to address important workplace concerns, it can also be used to advance employees' self-interest. Though there is a wealth of research on the importance of employee voice to organisational performance and individual wellbeing, especially through collective representation such as trade unions, there is a lack of literature on how employees navigate the social-relational work setting to promote their interests and develop status.

In this article “Japanisation” is used as a shorthand term for the diffusion of Japanese management systems and practices, whether this be via Japanese direct investment overseas or the emulation of such systems and practices in non‐Japanese organisations. Based on the philosophies of total quality control (TQC) and just‐in‐time (JIT) produc‐tion, the Japanese organisational form has been held up as a new “paradigm” which challenges the logic of tradi‐tional Western production regimes (Aoki 1987; Oliver and Wilkinson 1988a) and has crucial implications for both intra‐ and inter‐organisational structures and relations of power and control (Wilkinson and Oliver 1989).

In recent years, in research and policy circles, there is growing interest in the subject of speaking up (and silence) within the health sector, and there is a consensus that it is a major issue that needs to be addressed. However, there remain gaps in our knowledge and while scholars talk of a voice system – that is the existence of complementary voice channels designed to allow employees to speak up – empirical evidence is limited. We seek to explore the notion of a voice system in a healthcare organisation as comprising structures and cultures as seen from different stakeholder perspectives. What do they see and how do they behave and why? To what extent do the users see a voice system they can access and easily navigate?

Interviews and focus groups were conducted with a voice stakeholder group (e.g. designers of the system from senior management and HR, which comprised 23 staff members) as well as those who have to use the system, with 13 managers and 26 employees from three units within a metropolitan hospital: an oncology department, an intensive care unit and a community health service. Overall, a total of 62 staff members participated and the data were analysed using grounded theory to identify key themes.

This study revealed that although a plethora of formal voice structures existed, these were not always visible or accessible to staff, leading to confusion as to who to speak up to about which issues. Equally other avenues which were not designated voice platforms were used by employees to get their voices heard.

This papers looks at the voice system across the organisation rather than examining a specific scheme. In doing so it enables us to see the lived perceptions and experiences of potential users of these schemes and their awareness of the system as a whole.

The purpose of this paper is to take a serious look at the relationship between joint consultation systems at the workplace and employee satisfaction, while at the same time accounting for the (possible) interactions with similar union and management-led high commitment strategies.

Using new, rich data on a representative sample of British workers, the authors identify workplace institutions that are positively associated with employee perceptions of work and relations with management, what in combination the authors call a measure of the “good workplace.” In particular, the authors focus on non-union employee representation at the workplace, in the form of joint consultative committees (JCCs), and the potential moderating effects of union representation and high-involvement human resource (HIHR) practices.

The authors’ findings suggest a re-evaluation of the role that JCCs play in the subjective well-being of workers even after controlling for unions and progressive HR policies. There is no evidence in the authors’ estimates of negative interaction effects (i.e. that unions or HIHR negatively influence the functioning of JCCs with respect to employee satisfaction) or substitution (i.e. that unions or HIHR are substitutes for JCCs when it comes to improving self-reported worker well-being). If anything, there is a significant and positive three-way moderating effect when JCCs are interacted with union representation and high-involvement management.

This is the first time – to the authors’ knowledge – that comprehensive measures of subjective employee well-being are being estimated with respect to the presence of a JCC at the workplace, while controlling for workplace institutions (e.g. union representation and human resource policies) that are themselves designed to involve and communicate with workers.

This paper aims to help workplace ethnographers navigate and reflect on primary access negotiations by scrutinising two of the concepts mentioned in the call for papers on this special issue: workplace relations and tensions. We introduce the frames of reference (FoRs) concept as used in the field of employment relations to the ethnographic community. We propose that the implicit frames of gatekeeper and researcher influence what they deem interesting for research, thus influencing the content of access negotiations. Moreover, we propose that tensions typically emerge when gatekeepers and ethnographers do not share the same frame of the employment relationship (ER).

We explore the ER through Fox’s (1966, 1974) framework, taking inspiration from Budd et al. (2022), who applied FoRs to employer–employee relations. We adapt the framework to the relationships between workplace ethnographers and gatekeepers by theorising the characteristics of ideal types of gatekeepers and workplace ethnographers and exploring possible implications for when they meet in access negotiations. We distil lessons learnt from previous research by drawing on illustrative examples from the literature to suggest strategies for interacting with gatekeepers when tensions emerge, providing a pragmatic application of our contribution.

Assuming that their FoR of the ER contributes to what they find to be of practical relevance/academic interest, we suggest that a (mis)match of gatekeepers’ and workplace ethnographers’ FoRs can lead to tensions between workplace ethnographers and gatekeepers, either remaining latent or becoming salient. We propose three possible strategies as to how to navigate these tensions during primary access negotiations.

Whilst previous research has mainly focused on the ethnographer as an individual who needs to give gatekeepers a reassuring and enticing impression, we discuss how an important structural factor, an organisation’s ER setup, may influence access. We thus bring an important yet hitherto neglected aspect of organisational life into the debate on the pragmatic realities of ethnography, contributing to the discussion of how to navigate the tension between the “practical” need to convince gatekeepers and the need to fulfil one’s own standards of rigorous research and ethics.