Hearing voice and silence during stressful economic times

Purpose - It is ironic that in stressful economic times, when new ideas and positive behaviors could be most valuable, employees may not speak up, leading to reduced employee participation, less organizational learning, less innovation and less receptiveness to change. The supervisor is the organization’s first line of defense against a culture of silence and towards a culture of openness. This research asks what helps supervisors to hear prosocial voice and notice defensive silence. Design/methodology/approach - We conducted a cross-sectional field study of 142 supervisors. Findings - Our results indicate that prosocial voice is increased by supervisor tension and trust in employees, while defensive silence is increased by supervisor tension but reduced by unionization of employees and trust in employees. This indicates that, as hypothesized by others, voice and silence are orthogonal and not opposites of the same construct. Research limitations/implications - The data is measured at one point in time, and further longitudinal study would be helpful to further understand the phenomena. Practical implications - This research highlights the potential for supervisors in stressful situations to selectively hear voice and silence from employees. Originality/value - This study adds to our knowledge of prosocial voice and defensive silence by testing supervisors’ perceptions of these constructs during difficult times. It provides valuable empirical insights to a literature dominated by conceptual non-empirical papers. Limited research on silence might reflect how difficult it is to study such an ambiguous and passive construct as silence (often simply viewed as a lack of speech). also contribute to trust literature by identifying its role in increasing supervisor’s perceptions of prosocial voice and reducing perceptions of defensive silence.

Asking for it? Practices and structures that perpetuate employee silence in pursuing customised work arrangements

A component of broader scholarship addressing the social context in which individuals work, has focused on the role of ‘employee voice’ in determining flexible-work outcomes (Donnelly et al., 2012). Employee voice incorporates a spectrum of practices designed to give employees a say in organisational decisions (Dundon et al., 2004). This paper extends work on voice and workplace flexibility in two ways. First, it focuses not simply on ‘voice’ but on its antithesis, employee silence, which is defined (following Van Dyne et al., 2003) as the intentional withholding of ideas and opinions. We utilise an alternative reading of silence to the majority of literature which interprets it as a product of employee motivation, by focusing on the role of management and by adopting a framework which considers silence as a control dialectic (Donaghey et al., 2011). Second, the study examines silence with respect to preferences for customising the terms/conditions of employment beyond narrowly defined notions of ‘flexible work’ (e.g., reduced hours; home-working). The study utilises 30 telephone interviews with employees who had been previously identified as ‘discontent non-requesters’ (Skinner and Pocock, 2011: 75), that is they had expressed a desire to request flexible working provisions, but had not done so. Interviewees were asked to articulate the reasons for, and consequences of, their silence. The findings reveal nuanced workplace practices and structures that close down possibilities for employee voice and perpetuate silence on matters relating to customising work. They also illustrate a disjuncture between espoused organizational goals and everyday practices and norms encountered in workplaces.

Building an organizational change communication theory

The difficulty of communicating during organizational change has intensified with the prevalence of continuously changing organizations (Buchanan, Claydon & Doyle, 1999). The difficulty faced by managers is compounded by the lack of studies examining organizational communication within a context of organizational change (Eisenberg, Andrews, Murphy, & Laine-Timmerman, 1999; Lewis & Seibold, 1996). Not surprisingly then, is there a paucity of organizational change theory to guide further research and practitioners. This paper addresses the lack of organizational change communication research and contributes to theoretical development of communication during organizational change. A model of change communication during continuous change is presented from the analysis of two longitudinal empirical studies. Central constructs of the model are the monologic change communication, the dialogic change communication and the background talk of change. Further Van de Ven and Poole's (1995) Process Theories of Change are extended to consider the sequencing of the three constructs. The findings suggest that the sequencing of the dominant change communication approaches is informed by an alignment of individual communication competences and organizational change communication expectations.

Organizational ambidexterity and corporate entrepreneurship : the differential effects on venturing, innovation and renewal processes

Most corporate entrepreneurship studies have focused on either innovation, venturing or strategic renewal making comparison between the antecedents of all three aspects of corporate entrepreneurship difficult. Moreover, studies on corporate entrepreneurship hardly address organizational antecedents, while simultaneously managing and organizing CE and mainstream activities has been seen as a major challenge for incumbent firms. Our findings show that organizational ambidexterity has strong and differential effects on venturing, innovation and renewal. We find, for example, that innovation is affected by horizontal integration, while strategic renewal is significantly influenced by integration on top management team level.

The critical competences needed for innovative organizational inter-firm and intra-firm integration

In today's highly challenging business environment, an innovative and systemic approach is imperative to survival and growth. Organisational integration and technological integration, are often seen as a catalyst of change that could lead to significant improvements in organisations. The levels of improvement in inter and intra firm integration should arise from a detailed understanding and development of competences within and between organisations. Preliminary findings suggest that lack of trust across organisational cultures within the firms has a negative influence on the development of the capabilities to integrate and align technological innovations and hinders implementation and the effectiveness of the operations. Additionally, poor communication and conflict effects customer satisfaction. Firms need to transfer the competences that support cooperative integration, developed through interaction with supply chain partners, to their relationship arrangements with other supply chain partners, as these are key to ensuring low operational costs.

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition in development projects

New product development projects are experiencing increasing internal and external project complexity. Complexity leadership theory proposes that external complexity requires adaptive and enabling leadership, which facilitates opportunity recognition (OR). We ask whether internal complexity also requires OR for increased adaptability. We extend a model of EO and OR to conclude that internal complexity may require more careful OR. This means that leaders of technically or structurally complex projects need to evaluate opportunities more carefully than those in projects with external or technological complexity.

Psychosocial predictors of intentions to engage in change supportive behaviors in an organizational context

This study utilized the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to understand employee change readiness. The extent to which attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control predicted employees’ intentions to carry out activities that were supportive of a change event were investigated. The impact of group norm was examined as a further predictor of change-related intentions. The context of the research was a sample of 82 employees in the early stages of a re-brand. Results indicated that direct measures of attitude and subjective norm, as well as group norm, emerged as significant predictors of employees’ intentions to perform re-brand behaviors. To capture the indirect beliefs underlying attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control, participants also provided an assessment of their behavioral, normative, and control beliefs in regards to the change event, respectively. A series of MANOVAs revealed significant differences between moderate and high intenders on a range of underlying beliefs. Findings are discussed in terms of the application of the TPB for effective change management.

The differential effects of organizational antecedents on dimensions of corporate entrepreneurship

This study seeks to further delineate how organizational antecedents differentially influence the three components of corporate entrepreneurship: innovation, venturing or strategic renewal. We argue that structural differentiation may help organizations to maintain multiple and often conflicting demands of entrepreneurial and mainstream activities. Taking a social capital perspective, our study further examines two contingencies in the form of informal integration mechanisms (i.e. connectedness and TMT social integration). Our findings show structural differentiation has a positive effect on all three components of corporate entrepreneurship, yet the effect is moderated by integration mechanisms. Interunit connectedness has a positive moderation effect regarding innovation and venturing, and TMT social integration has a negative moderation effect regarding strategic renewal. This reveals that innovation is influenced by informal integration mechanisms on the organizational level, strategic renewal on top management team level, while venturing is influenced by integration mechanisms on both levels.