Open or Closed? A Social Interaction Perspective on Line Managers’ Reactions to Employee Voice

Abstract

Few studies have explored how line managers respond to employees’ use of voice in interaction and the challenges facing the line managers in relation to voice. While some scholars have argued that managers’ reactions to voice are generally shaped by personal dispositions, such as the managers’ degree of “openness,” this study draws on the approach of discursive psychology to demonstrate that line managers’ responses are closely fitted to the organizational context and the unfolding interactional context. Through detailed analysis of a single episode from a voice activity in an industrial setting, the study exemplifies various rhetorical strategies used by the line managers and how these strategies may change as discussions proceed. The study also shows that psychological concepts such as openness should not be seen only as stable features of managers, but also as actively enacted in interaction. Various practical steps are suggested for improving both line managers’ and employees’ experiences with participating in formal voice activities.

Influence at work is a key factor for mental health – but what do contemporary employees in knowledge and relational work mean by “influence at work”?

“…As a consequence the individual employee influence is embedded in “multiple social and organizational relationships” (Väänänen & Toivanen, 2018 ). Another recent study argues that influence is created, increased or decreased through collaboration with other employees in the organization, and suggests that the measurement of influence at work primarily at the individual level limits our understanding of the phenomenon (Wåhlin-Jacobsen, 2018 ).…”

You Raise Me Up: Employee Voice Elevates Leader Managerial Self-Efficacy Through Leader Self-Expansion

“…Motivated by the gap in the research on the influence of employee voice on high-level constructs (Sessions et al, 2020; Wåhlin-Jacobsen, 2020) and enlightened by the active role of subordinates in shaping the leadership process (Uhl-Bien et al, 2014), we theoretically proposed and empirically validated that employee voice can elevate leaders’ psychological responses (i.e., self-expansion) and further increase their self-confidence in meeting job responsibilities (i.e., managerial self-efficacy).…”

“…Previous studies have established that, at the individual level, it affects in-role and extra-role performance and career progress (Bolino et al, 2017; Chamberlin et al, 2017; Morrison, 2014), and at the unit level, it affects team/organization performance, quality of decisions, and employee turnover (Bolino et al, 2017; Guzman & Espejo, 2019; Morrison, 2014; Sessions et al, 2020). Although scholars have explored the consequences of voice extensively at both the individual and team levels, its effect on leaders, who are usually the targets (i.e., recipients or listeners) of employee voice, has not received much attention (Sessions et al, 2020; Wåhlin-Jacobsen, 2020).…”

“…For example, when leaders perceive a voicer as supportive, they tend to perceive the employee as a loyal and better performer (Burris, 2012; Whiting et al, 2008). Some studies have examined other aspects such as the perception and attribution of employee voice (Burris et al, 2017; Carsten et al, 2018; Howell et al, 2015; Huang et al, 2018), motivational and emotional experience (Burris, 2012; Carsten et al, 2018; Sessions et al, 2020), and solicitation and endorsement (Duan et al, 2021; Guzman & Espejo, 2019; Wåhlin-Jacobsen, 2020), showing that scholars pay much attention to leaders’ responses toward voicers. However, as an external stimulus, voice can also activate leaders’ attitudes toward themselves.…”

A Story About Speaking Up: Mediation Effects of Narrative Persuasion on Organizational Voice Intentions

“…From an employee’s perspective, the potential outcomes on the downside of this equation far outnumber those on the upside. As Wåhlin-Jacobsen (2020) has noted, “some line managers may reject employees’ concerns and suggestions on the basis that they conflict with the obligations tied to the line managers’ supervisory role” (p. 33). When employees’ assessments of whether their verbal input “serves to improve the status quo” (Burris et al, 2013, p. 23) differs from their managers’, the employees’ performance ratings suffer.…”