A suggestion to improve a day keeps your depletion away: Examining promotive and prohibitive voice behaviors within a regulatory focus and ego depletion framework.

Abstract

One way that employees contribute to organizational effectiveness is by expressing voice. They may offer suggestions for how to improve the organization (promotive voice behavior), or express concerns to prevent harmful events from occurring (prohibitive voice behavior). Although promotive and prohibitive voices are thought to be distinct types of behavior, very little is known about their unique antecedents and consequences. In this study we draw on regulatory focus and ego depletion theories to derive a theoretical model that outlines a dynamic process of the antecedents and consequences of voice behavior. Results from 2 multiwave field studies revealed that promotion and prevention foci have unique ties to promotive and prohibitive voice, respectively. Promotive and prohibitive voice, in turn, were associated with decreases and increases, respectively, in depletion. Consistent with the dynamic nature of self-control, depletion was associated with reductions in employees' subsequent voice behavior, regardless of the type of voice (promotive or prohibitive). Results were consistent across 2 studies and remained even after controlling for other established antecedents of voice and alternative mediating mechanisms beside depletion.

Leveraging the employee voice: a multi-level social learning perspective of ethical leadership

“…In this way, employees exercising prohibitive voice may be concerned that their supervisor will view the prohibitive voice as disruptive to task progress (Burris, 2012). Riskaverse people will use this communication type with caution or never use it (Lin & Johnson, 2015). This risk-avoidance tendency might be more aggravated in the Chinese context of this study which values harmony and relationships (Bai, Han, & Harms, 2016;Bai, Harms, Han, & Cheng, 2015;Bai, Li, & Xi, 2012).…”

“…The motivation behind prohibitive voice is to pull organizations away from feared states (Lin & Johnson, 2015). In spite of its potential and intended benefits, compared to promotive voice behavior, prohibitive voice carries high interpersonal risks (Liang et al, 2012).…”

“…promotive voice behavior), there is scant evidence for the link to prohibitive voice behavior. Speakers of promotive voice focus on communicating ideal future states for the organization (Lin & Johnson, 2015). They concentrate their efforts on moving the organization closer toward desirable goals (i.e.…”

Consequences of regulatory fit for leader–follower relationship quality and commitment

“…To date, research on regulatory fit has mostly examined consequences in achievement domains, such as its effects on individual effort and task performance (Spiegel, Grant‐Pillow, & Higgins, ; Venus, Stam, & van Knippenberg, ) as well as company performance and acquisitions (Gamache, McNamara, Mannor, & Johnson, ; Wallace, Little, Hill, & Ridge, ). Organizational research in particular has emphasized the achievement‐based consequences of regulatory focus and fit, such as productivity (Wallace & Chen, ), safety performance (Kark, Katz‐Navon, & Delgatch, ), voice behaviour (Lin & Johnson, ) and reactions to task feedback (Van Dijk & Kluger, , ). However, the effects of regulatory focus likely extend to other domains as well.…”

An Introduction of Regulatory Focus Theory and Its Recently Related Researches

“…Prevention focus has positive prediction of the deviant behavior and promotion focus has positive prediction of helping behavior. Lin and Johnson (2015) studied and examined the relationship between promotion focus and verbal advice behavior of employee through the longitudinal, which found that employee's promotion focus can enhance their increase both promotional and prohibitive verbal advice behavior of employee, while prevention focus can only enhance the worker's prohibitive verbal advice behavior.…”