How and when managers reward employees' voice: The role of proactivity attributions.

Recent voice research has noted that providing adequate job rewards for speaking up can sustainably motivate voice from employees. We examine why managers who seek out voice at work might not always properly reward the behavior. Drawing on theories of dispositional attribution, we propose that, in general, managers tend to reward voice because it signals to them that employees possess a valued underlying trait: proactivity, which is characterized by change-orientation and foresight. However, we argue that when managers engage in more voice solicitation-that is, explicitly ask for voice and take a listening posture toward it-their tendency to infer proactivity from employees' voice weakens. Thus, we make a case that voice solicitation, a managerial behavior intended to set facilitating conditions for speaking up at work, inadvertently weakens the (indirect) relationship between employee voice and job rewards. We establish support for our theory in a set of two studies with complementary designs. Study 1 was a preregistered between-subjects experiment that used a realistic vignette design with an online panel of 592 working adults based in the United States. Study 2 was a multisource field survey with a sample of 385 employees and their managers working at the Indian branch of a global technology company in the oil and gas industry. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our results. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

How employees' voice helps teams remain resilient in the face of exogenous change.

Teams often confront exogenous events that induce discontinuous change and unsettle existing routines. In the immediate aftermath of such events (the disruption stage), teams experience a dip in their performance and only over time regain their previous performance levels (in the recovery stage). We argue that prohibitive voice that allows teams to manage errors better is instrumental for preventing performance losses in the disruption stage. Whereas, promotive voice that helps teams innovate or improve team processes, can facilitate steeper and more positive performance trajectories in the recovery stage. We also propose that voice is especially functional when teams confront higher change intensity and, thereby, highlight that voice is particularly important when change events cause greater discontinuity in the task environment. We found general support for our theory in a correlational field study involving 172 production teams in which we examined over time trajectories in objective team performance, and a field experiment involving 88 teams in a different production setting, where team members were trained, incentivized, and provided opportunities to engage in voice. We discuss the implications of our findings for literature on voice, team adaptation, and resilience. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

How employees learn to speak up from their leaders: Gender congruity effects in the development of voice self-efficacy.

Voice-or the expression of ideas, concerns, or opinions on work issues by employees-can help organizations thrive. However, we highlight that men and women differ in their voice self-efficacy, or the personal confidence in formulating and articulating work-related viewpoints. Such differences, we argue, can impede women's voice from emerging at work. Drawing on social cognitive theory (SCT), we propose that women tend to develop greater voice self-efficacy and thereby speak up more when they have the opportunity to observe female rather than male leaders speak up. Hence, we point to the potential absence of women leaders who can role model speaking up at work as a likely inhibiter of women's voice. Using data from a correlational field study involving 368 employees and their leaders from a variety of industries in India and an experimental study in an online panel of 546 US-based workers, we found support for our hypotheses. We discuss the implications of our research for theory and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Keeping it between us: Managerial endorsement of public versus private voice.

When employees use public settings such as team meetings to engage in voice-the expression of work ideas or concerns, they can spur useful discussions, action planning, and problem solving. However, we make the case that managers, whose support is essential for voice to have a functional impact, are averse to publicly expressed voice and prefer acting on voice that is privately brought up to them in one-on-one settings. Drawing on face management theory (Goffman, 1967), we argue that voice expressed in front of an audience, compared with that expressed one-on-one, is more threatening to the image that managers seek to portray as competent and unerring leaders, and that leads managers to respond more defensively to public voice and endorse it less. This, we propose, is especially true when the relationship quality between manager and employee is weak as public voice from relationally distant employees is perceived as a stronger challenge. Across five studies (correlational and experimental), we find support for our arguments and rule out alternative explanations such as that managers are aversive to public voice because it threatens their ego or that managers feel more accountable to act on publicly provided input. We discuss the implications of our findings for theory and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Creating organizational citizens: How and when supervisor- versus peer-led role interventions change organizational citizenship behavior.

We generate and test new theory on how organizations can use role interventions to increase employees' organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) such as helping and voice. In particular, we examine how interventions that employ supervisors and peers as change agents can independently and jointly motivate employees to engage in OCB by encouraging them to view their work roles more broadly. We propose that the effects of these interventions become apparent over two distinct temporal phases of change. In the early phase of the change process, when there is higher flux and uncertainty, supervisor-led interventions have relatively stronger positive influences on OCB change and peer-led interventions have limited effects. By contrast, during the later phase of the change process, as greater clarity about behavioral expectations emerges, peer-led interventions have a positive impact and work synergistically with supervisor-led interventions to increase OCB. Using a mixed methods approach, we found support for our theory in a longitudinal quasifield experiment-which tested when supervisor- and peer-led interventions induced changes in OCB-and we explored the processes and challenges underlying such changes in a qualitative follow-up investigation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Adverse Events and Burnout: The Moderating Effects of Workgroup Identification and Safety Climate.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has found that adverse events have significant negative consequences for the patients (first victim) and caregivers (second victim) involved such as burnout. However, research has yet to examine the consequences of adverse events on members of caregiving units. We also lack research on the effects of the personal and job resources that shape the context of how adverse events are experienced. OBJECTIVES: We test the relationship between job demands (the number of adverse events on a hospital nursing unit) and nurses' experience of burnout. We further explore the ways in which personal (workgroup identification) and job (safety climate) resources amplify or dampen this relationship. Specifically, we examine whether, and the conditions under which, adverse events affect nurse burnout. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analyses of survey data on nurse burnout linked to hospital incident reporting system data on adverse event rates for the year before survey administration and survey data on workgroup identification and safety climate. SUBJECTS: Six hundred three registered nurses from 30 nursing units in a large, urban hospital in the Midwest completed questionnaires. RESULTS: Multilevel regression analysis indicated that adverse events were positively associated with nurse burnout. The effects of adverse events on nurse burnout were amplified when nurses exhibited high levels of workgroup identification and attenuated when safety climate perceptions were higher. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events have broader negative consequences than previously thought, widely affecting nurse burnout on caregiving units, especially when nurses strongly identify with their workgroup. These effects are mitigated when leaders cultivate safety climate.

Centralization of member voice in teams: Its effects on expertise utilization and team performance.

Voice, or the expression of work-related suggestions or opinions, can help teams access and utilize members' privately held knowledge and skills and improve collective outcomes. However, recent research has suggested that sometimes, rather than encourage positive outcomes for teams, voice from members can have detrimental consequences. Extending this research, we highlight why it is important to consider voice centralization within teams, or the extent to which voice is predominantly emanating from only a few members rather than equally spread across all members. We argue that, under certain circumstances, voice centralization is harmful to the utilization of members' expertise in the team and, thereby, to team performance. Specifically, we propose that voice centralization is likely to have negative effects when it occurs around members who are more socially dominant or are less reflective. We find support for our arguments in a sample of 78 teams (319 team members) working on graduate student projects in a business school over a semester. Overall, through our theory and results, we showcase why it is important for future studies to examine the distribution of voice among team members. (PsycINFO Database Record

When daily planning improves employee performance: The importance of planning type, engagement, and interruptions.

Does planning for a particular workday help employees perform better than on other days they fail to plan? We investigate this question by identifying 2 distinct types of daily work planning to explain why and when planning improves employees' daily performance. The first type is time management planning (TMP)-creating task lists, prioritizing tasks, and determining how and when to perform them. We propose that TMP enhances employees' performance by increasing their work engagement, but that these positive effects are weakened when employees face many interruptions in their day. The second type is contingent planning (CP) in which employees anticipate possible interruptions in their work and plan for them. We propose that CP helps employees stay engaged and perform well despite frequent interruptions. We investigate these hypotheses using a 2-week experience-sampling study. Our findings indicate that TMP's positive effects are conditioned upon the amount of interruptions, but CP has positive effects that are not influenced by the level of interruptions. Through this study, we help inform workers of the different planning methods they can use to increase their daily motivation and performance in dynamic work environments. (PsycINFO Database Record

The content of the message matters: The differential effects of promotive and prohibitive team voice on team productivity and safety performance gains.

We propose that it is important to take the content of team voice into account when examining its impact on team processes and outcomes. Drawing on regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997), we argue that promotive team voice and prohibitive team voice help teams achieve distinct collective outcomes-that is, team productivity performance gains and team safety performance gains, respectively. Further, we identify mechanisms through which promotive and prohibitive team voices uniquely influence team outcomes as well as boundary conditions for such influences. In data collected from 88 production teams, we found that promotive team voice had a positive association with team productivity performance gains. By contrast, prohibitive team voice had a positive association with team safety performance gains. The relationship between promotive team voice and team productivity performance gains was mediated by team innovation, and the relationship between prohibitive team voice and team safety performance gains was mediated by team monitoring. In addition, the indirect effect of prohibitive team voice on team safety performance gains via team monitoring was stronger when prior team safety performance was lower. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings. (PsycINFO Database Record

The dispositional antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice.

We propose that promotive voice, or the expression of suggestions for improving work practices in the organization, and prohibitive voice, or the expression of warnings about factors that can harm the organization, are differentially influenced by employees' dispositional inclination to be approach and avoidance oriented. Drawing on multisource survey data from 291 employees and their managers, we found that approach orientation had positive relationship with promotive voice and negative relationship with prohibitive voice. By contrast, avoidance orientation had positive relationship with prohibitive voice and negative relationship with promotive voice. Further, voice role expectations, or employees' beliefs about the extent to which a particular form of voice is expected from them in their daily work, moderated the effects of approach and avoidance orientations. Highlighting the unique nature of voice as a behavior that is especially sensitive to situational cues, the effects of approach and avoidance orientations on promotive and prohibitive voice were stronger when role expectations for that form of voice were weaker. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

How and when peers' positive mood influences employees' voice.

Employees often assess whether the social context is favorable for them to speak out, yet little research has investigated how the target's mood might influence the actor's voice behavior. From an affect-as-social-information perspective, we explored such potential effects of the target's mood on the actor's promotive voice in 2 empirical studies. In a scenario-based study with 142 MBA students (Study 1), the target's positive mood was positively associated with the actor's intentions to engage in promotive voice toward that target, mediated by the actor's perceived psychological safety. This mediated relationship was stronger when (a) the quality of the relationship between the actor and the target was poor or (b) the actor had a lower social status than the target. We replicated these results in Study 2, a correlational field study with 572 dyads nested within 142 members of 30 teams, where the actor's promotive voice behaviors (rather than intentions) were measured.

Doing right versus getting ahead: the effects of duty and achievement orientations on employees' voice.

Using role theory as the overarching framework, we propose that employees' voice has contrasting relationships with the traits of duty orientation, or employees' dispositional sense of moral and ethical obligation at the workplace, and achievement orientation, or the extent of their ingrained personal ambition to get ahead professionally. Using data from 262 employees and their managers, we demonstrate that duty and achievement orientations are, respectively, positively and negatively related to voice through their impact on voice role conceptualization or the extent to which employees consider voice as part of their personal responsibility at work. Further, we delineate how employees' beliefs about their efficacy to engage in voice and judgments about psychological safety in the organization can moderate these relationships. We discuss the implications of these findings for theory and practice.

The relational antecedents of voice targeted at different leaders.

We investigated how employees can, simultaneously, speak up to leaders at different levels of the organizational hierarchy. In particular, we examined 2 targets of employees' upward voice on work-related issues: the direct leader (i.e., the supervisor) and the skip-level leader (i.e., supervisor's boss). Drawing on emerging research on the socially embedded nature of leader-member exchanges and using data from 237 employees and their direct and skip-level leaders, we found that the choice of a particular leader as a target was affected by the quality of the dyadic relationship between that leader and the employee. Further, the association between voice to the direct leader and the quality of the employee's relationship with the direct leader was more positive when the relationship between the direct leader and the skip-level leader was stronger. By contrast, the association between voice to the skip-level leader and the quality of the employee's relationship with the skip-level leader was more positive when the relationship between the direct leader and the skip-level leader was weaker. The implications of these findings are discussed.

When are transgressing leaders punitively judged? An empirical test.

Using Hollander's (1958) idiosyncrasy credit theory of leadership as the theoretical backdrop, we examined when and why organizational leaders escape punitive evaluation for their organizational transgressions. In a sample of 162 full-time employees, we found that leaders who were perceived to be more able and inspirationally motivating were less punitively evaluated by employees for leader transgressions. These effects were mediated by the leaders' LMX (leader-member exchange) with their employees. Moreover, the tendency of leaders with higher LMX to escape punitive evaluations for their transgressions was stronger when those leaders were more valued within the organization. Finally, employees who punitively evaluated their leaders were more likely to have turnover intentions and to psychologically withdraw from their organization. Theoretical and practical implications associated with relatively understudied leader-transgression dynamics are discussed.

When and why do central employees speak up? An examination of mediating and moderating variables.

We examined the proposition that employees' work-flow centrality (i.e., the extent to which they are critical to the task-related interaction networks of their work groups) enhances their personal influence within their work groups and, therefore, motivates them to engage in voice behaviors. In support of this proposition, in a study of 184 bank employees nested within 42 work groups, we found that employees' work-flow centrality was positively related to voice behaviors, with their personal influence mediating this relationship. Further, work-flow centrality was more strongly related to personal influence when employees had higher task performance, and personal influence was more strongly related to voice behaviors when employees had higher levels of work-group identification. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

In the shadow of the boss's boss: effects of supervisors' upward exchange relationships on employees.

Dyadic relationships in an organizational hierarchy are often nested within one another. For instance, the relationship between a supervisor and an employee is nested within the relationship between that supervisor and his or her boss. In that context, the authors propose that the supervisor's relationship with his or her boss (leader-leader exchange) moderates the effects of the supervisor's relationship with the employee (leader-member exchange). Specifically, the authors argue that leader-member exchange has a stronger positive effect on employees' attitudes toward the organization and its customers when leader-leader exchange is higher. Cross-level analysis of data from 581 frontline nurses and 29 supervisors in a midwestern hospital supports this contention. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Information privacy in organizations: empowering creative and extrarole performance.

This article examines the relationship of employee perceptions of information privacy in their work organizations and important psychological and behavioral outcomes. A model is presented in which information privacy predicts psychological empowerment, which in turn predicts discretionary behaviors on the job, including creative performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Results from 2 studies (Study 1: single organization, N=310; Study 2: multiple organizations, N=303) confirm that information privacy entails judgments of information gathering control, information handling control, and legitimacy. Moreover, a model linking information privacy to empowerment and empowerment to creative performance and OCBs was supported. Findings are discussed in light of organizational attempts to control employees through the gathering and handling of their personal information.