Amplifying Voice in Organizations

REFERENCES

• Aguinis, H., & Bradley, K. J. 2014. Best practice recommendations for designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Organizational Research Methods, 17: 351–371. Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. 2015. Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141: 574–601. Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. 2001. Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81: 116–132. Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. 2009. Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96: 491–503. Google Scholar
• Anderson, C., & Willer, R. (2014). Do status hierarchies benefit groups? A bounded functionalist account. In J. ChengJ. L. TracyC. Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status: 47–70. New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar
• Azoulay, P., Stuart, T. E., & Wang, Y. 2014. Matthew: Effect or fable? Management Science, 60: 92–109. Google Scholar
• Báles, R. F., Strodtbeck, F. L., Mills, T. M., & Roseborough, M. E. 1951. Channels of communication in small groups. American Sociological Review, 16: 461–468. Google Scholar
• Banks, G. C., Field, J. G., Oswald, F. L., O‘Boyle, E. H., Landis, R. S., Rupp, D. E., & Rogelberg, S. G. 2019. Answers to 18 questions about open science practices. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34: 257–270. Google Scholar
• Bashshur, M. R., & Oc, B. 2015. When voice matters: A multilevel review of the impact of voice in organizations. Journal of Management, 41: 1530–1554. Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67: 1–48. Google Scholar
• Bazerman, M. H., Moore, D. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., Wade-Benzoni, K. A., & Blount, S. 1999. Explaining how preferences change across joint versus separate evaluation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 39: 41–58. Google Scholar
• Bendersky, C., & Hays, N. A. 2012. Status conflict in groups. Organization Science, 23: 323–340. Google Scholar
• Bendersky, C., & Pai, J. 2018. Status dynamics. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5: 183–199. Google Scholar
• Berger, C. J., & Cummings, L. L. 1979. Organizational structure, attitudes and behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1: 169–208. Google Scholar
• Berger, J. C., Cohen, B. P., & Zelditch, M., Jr. 1972. Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37: 241–255. Google Scholar
• Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. 1997. Gender- and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72: 544–557. Google Scholar
• Blader, S. L., & Chen, Y. R. (2014). What’s in a name? Status, power, and other forms of social hierarchy. In J. T. ChengJ. L. TracyC. Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status: 71–95. New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar
• Brescoll, V. L. 2012. Who takes the floor and why: Gender, power, and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56: 622–641. Google Scholar
• Bunderson, J. S. 2003. Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 557–591. Google Scholar
• Burris, E. R. 2012. The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 851–875.Link , Google Scholar
• Burris, E. R., Detert, J. R., & Romney, A. C. 2013. Speaking up vs. being heard: The disagreement around and outcomes of Employee Voice. Organization Science, 24: 22–38. Google Scholar
• Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. 1963. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Google Scholar
• Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. 2007. Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1217–1234.Link , Google Scholar
• Case, C. R., & Maner, J. K. 2014. Divide and conquer: When and why leaders undermine the cohesive fabric of their group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107: 1033–1050. Google Scholar
• Chamberlin, M., Newton, D. W., & LePine, J. A. 2017. A meta-analysis of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms: Identification of key associations, distinctions, and future research directions. Personnel Psychology, 70: 11–71. Google Scholar
• Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. 2013. Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104: 103–125. Google Scholar
• Cialdini, R. B. 2006. Influence: The psychology of persuasion, vol. 3. New York, NY: William Morrow. Google Scholar
• Correll, S. J., & Ridgeway, C. L. 2006. Expectation states theory. In J. Delamater (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology: 29–51. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Google Scholar
• Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Beninger, A. 2011. The dynamics of warmth and competence judgments, and their outcomes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31: 73–98. Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. 2001. Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 1191–1201. Google Scholar
• Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. 2011. Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted rules of self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal, 54: 461–488.Link , Google Scholar
• Detert, J. R., & Trevino, L. K. 2010. Speaking up to higher ups: How supervisor and skip-level leaders influence employee voice. Organization Science, 21: 241–270. Google Scholar
• Dooley, R. S., & Fryxell, G. E. 1999. Attaining decision quality and commitment from dissent: The moderating effects of loyalty and competence in strategic decision-making teams. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 389–402.Link , Google Scholar
• Driskell, J. E., Olmstead, B., & Salas, E. 1993. Task cues, dominance cues, and influence in task groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 51–60. Google Scholar
• Dutton, J. E., & Heaphy, E. D. 2003. The power of high-quality connections. In K. S. CameronJ. E. DuttonR. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline: 263–278. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler. Google Scholar
• Edmondson, A. C. 2003. Speaking up in the operating room: How team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams. Journal of Management Studies, 40: 1419–1452. Google Scholar
• Elangovan, A. R., & Shapiro, D. L. 1989. Betrayal of trust in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 23: 547–566. Google Scholar
• Elsayed-Elkhouly, S. M., Lazarus, H., & Forsythe, V. 1997. Why is a third of your time wasted in meetings? Journal of Management, 16: 672–676. Google Scholar
• Farh, C. I. C., Oh, J. K., Hollenbeck, J. R., Yu, A., Lee, S. M., & King, D. D. 2020. Token female voice enactment in traditionally male-dominated teams: Facilitating conditions and consequences for performance. Academy of Management Journal, 63: 832–856.Link , Google Scholar
• Fişek, M. H., Berger, J., & Norman, R. Z. 1991. Participation in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups: A theoretical integration. American Journal of Sociology, 97: 114–142. Google Scholar
• Fiske, S. T. 1993. Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotying. American Psychologist, 48: 621–628. Google Scholar
• Flynn, F. J. 2003. How much should I give and how often? The effects of generosity and frequency of favor exchange on social status and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 539–553. Google Scholar
• Flynn, F. J., Reagans, R. E., Amanatullah, E. T., & Ames, D. R. 2006. Helping one’s way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91: 1123–1137. Google Scholar
• Fragale, A. R., Sumanth, J. J., Tiedens, L. Z., & Northcraft, G. B. 2012. Appeasing equals: Lateral deference in organizational communication. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57: 373–406. Google Scholar
• Grant, A. M. 2007. Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32: 393–417.Link , Google Scholar
• Greer, L. L., & Dannals, J. 2017. Conflict in teams. In R. RicoE. SalasN. Ashkanasy (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of team dynamics, teamwork, and collaborative working: 317–344. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar
• Groysberg, B., Polzer, J. T., & Elfenbein, H. A. 2011. Too many cooks spoil the broth: How high-status individuals decrease group effectiveness. Organization Science, 22: 722–737. Google Scholar
• Hardy, C. L., & Van Vugt, M. 2006. Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32: 1402–1413. Google Scholar
• Harlos, K. P. 2001. When organizational voice systems fail: More on the deaf-ear syndrome and frustration effects. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37: 324–342. Google Scholar
• Hartog, D. N., De Hoogh, A. H., & Belachak, F. D. 2020. Toot your own horn? Leader narcissism and the effectiveness of employee self-promotion. Journal of Management, 46: 261–286. Google Scholar
• Harvey, S., & Kou, C. Y. 2013. Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58: 346–386. Google Scholar
• Heidegren, C. G. 2004. Review essay. Recognition and social theory. Acta Sociologica, 47: 365–373. Google Scholar
• Heilman, M. E., & Haynes, M. C. 2005. No credit where credit is due: Attributional rationalization of women’s success in male-female teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 905–916. Google Scholar
• Helgesen, S., & Goldsmith, M. (2018). Failing at the art of self-promotion can cost you throughout your career. Retrieved from https://finance.yahoo.com/news/failing-art-self-promotion-cost-154346286.html Google Scholar
• Hirschman, A. O. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
• Howell, T. M., Harrison, D. A., Burris, E. R., & Detert, J. R. 2015. Who gets credit for input? Demographic and structural status cues in voice recognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100: 1765–1784. Google Scholar
• Hsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. H. 1999. Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125: 576–590. Google Scholar
• Hurwitz, A., & Kluger, A. N. (2017, August). The power of listeners: How listeners transforms status and co-create power. 77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA. Google Scholar
• Isaakyan, S., Sherf, E. N., Tangirala, S., & Guenter, H. 2020. Keeping it between us: Managerial endorsement of public versus private voice. Journal of Applied Psychology. doi: 10.1037/apl0000816 Google Scholar
• Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. S. 1982. Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self, vol. 1: 231–262. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
• Kilduff, G. J., & Galinsky, A. D. 2013. From the ephemeral to the enduring: How approach-oriented mindsets lead to greater status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105: 816–831. Google Scholar
• Kilduff, G. J., Willer, R., & Anderson, C. 2016. Hierarchy and its discontents: Status disagreement leads to withdrawal of contribution and lower group performance. Organization Science, 27: 373–390. Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. 2017. lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82: 1–26. Google Scholar
• Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. 1998. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23: 325–340.Link , Google Scholar
• Lee, S. M., & Farh, C. I. C. 2019. Dynamic leadership emergence: Differential impact of members’ and peers’ contributions in the idea generation and idea enactment phases of innovation project teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104: 411–432. Google Scholar
• LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. 1998. Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 853–868. Google Scholar
• Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. 2007. What do laboratory experiments measuring social prefences reveal about the real world? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21: 153–174. Google Scholar
• Li, A. N., Liao, H., Tangirala, S., & Firth, B. M. 2017. The content of the message matters: The differential effects of promotive and prohibitive team voice on team productivity and safety performance gains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102: 1259–1270. Google Scholar
• Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J.-L. 2012. Psychologial antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 71–92.Link , Google Scholar
• Liang, J., Shu, R., & Farh, C. I. C. 2019. Differential implications of team member promotive and prohibitive voice on innovation performance in research and development project teams: A dialectic perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40: 91–104. Google Scholar
• Lüdecke, D. (2019). sjstats: Statistical functions for regression models (0.17.4). Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=sjstats. Google Scholar
• Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. 2006. When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 777–785. Google Scholar
• Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. 2008. Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2: 351–398.Link , Google Scholar
• Malmström, M., Johansson, J., & Wincent, J. 2017. Gender stereotypes and venture support decisions: How governmental venture capitalists socially construct entrepreneurs’ potential. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41: 1–28. Google Scholar
• Maner, J. K. 2017. Dominance and prestige: A tale of two hierarchies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26: 526–531. Google Scholar
• Maner, J. K., & Mead, N. L. 2010. The essential tension between leadership and power: When leaders sacrifice group goals for the sake of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99: 482–497. Google Scholar
• Maynes, T. D., & Podsakoff, P. M. 2014. Speaking more broadly: An examination of the nature, antecedents, and consequences of an expanded set of employee voice behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99: 87–112. Google Scholar
• McClean, E. J., Martin, S. R., Emich, K. J., & Woodruff, T. 2018. The social consequences of voice: An examination of voice type and gender on status and subsequent leader emergence. Academy of Management Journal, 61: 1869–1891.Link , Google Scholar
• Morrison, E. W. 2011. Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5: 373–412.Link , Google Scholar
• Morrison, E. W. 2014. Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1: 173–197. Google Scholar
• Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. 2000. Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25: 706–725.Link , Google Scholar
• Nijstad, B. A., Berger-Selman, F., & De Dreu, C. K. W. 2014. Innovation in top management teams: Minority dissent, transformational leadership, and radical innovations. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23: 310–322. Google Scholar
• Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., & Breckler, S. J. 2015. Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348: 1422–1425. Google Scholar
• Pata, K., Santos, P., & Burchert, J. 2015. Social recognition provision patterns in professional Q&A forums in healthcare and construction. Computers in Human Behavior, 55: 571–583. Google Scholar
• Porath, C. L., Overbeck, J. R., & Pearson, C. M. 2008. Picking up the gauntlet: How individuals respond to status challenges. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38: 1945–1980. Google Scholar
• Ridgeway, C. L. 1978. Conformity, group-oriented motivation, and status attainment in small groups. Social Psychology, 41: 175–188. Google Scholar
• Ridgeway, C. L. 1987. Nonverbal behavior, dominance, and the basis of status in task groups. American Sociological Review, 52: 683–694. Google Scholar
• Ridgeway, C. L. 2011. Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• Ridgeway, C. L., & Berger, J. 1986. Expectation, legitimation, and dominance behavior in task groups. American Sociological Review, 51: 603–617. Google Scholar
• Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. 2006. Consensus and the creation of status beliefs. Social Forces, 85: 431–453. Google Scholar
• Ridgeway, C. L., & Erickson, K. G. 2000. Creating and spreading status beliefs. American Journal of Sociology, 106: 579–615. Google Scholar
• Royer, S., Waterhouse, J., Brown, K., & Festing, M. 2008. Employee voice and strategic competitive advantage in international modern public corporations—An economic perspective. European Management Journal, 26: 234–246. Google Scholar
• Rudman, L. A. 1998. Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74: 629–645. Google Scholar
• Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224–253. Google Scholar
• Sandberg, S., & Scovell, N. 2013. Lean-in: Women, work and the will to lead. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf. Google Scholar
• Satterstrom, P., Kerrissey, M., & DiBenigno, J. 2020. The voice cultivation process: How team members can help upward voice live on to implementation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66: 380–425. Google Scholar
• Scopelliti, I., Lowenstein, G., & Vosgerau, J. 2015. You call it “self-exuberance”; I call it “bragging”: Miscalibrated predictions of emotional responses to self-promotion. Psychological Science, 26: 903–914. Google Scholar
• Seiber, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Crant, J. M. 2001. What do proactive people do? A longitudinal model linking proactive personality and career success. Personnel Psychology, 54: 845–874. Google Scholar
• Sherf, E. N., Parke, M. R., & Isaakyan, S. 2021. Distinguishing voice and silence at work: Unique relationships with perceived impact, psychological safety, and burnout. Academy of Management Journal, 64: 114–148.Link , Google Scholar
• Sherf, E. N., Sinha, R., Tangirala, S., & Awasty, N. 2018. Centralization of member voice in teams: Its effects on expertise utilization and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103: 813–827. Google Scholar
• Singleton, R. A., & Straits, B. C. 2010. Approaches to social research (5th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. 2008. Exploring nonlinearity in employee voice: The effects of personal control and organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 1189–1203.Link , Google Scholar
• Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. 2012. Ask and you shall hear (but not always): An examination of the relationship between manager consultation and employee voice. Personnel Psychology, 65: 251–282. Google Scholar
• Tenney, E. R., Cleary, H. M. D., & Spellman, B. A. 2009. Unpacking the doubt in “beyond a reasonable doubt”: Plausible alternative stories increase not guilty verdicts. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31: 1–8. Google Scholar
• Tenney, E. R., Costa, E., Allard, A., & Vazire, S. 2021. Open science and reform practices in organizational behavior research over time (2011 to 2019). Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 162: 218–223. Google Scholar
• Tenney, E. R., Meikle, N. L., Hunsaker, D., Moore, D. A., & Anderson, C. 2019. Is overconfidence a social liability? The effect of verbal versus nonverbal expressions of confidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116: 396–415. Google Scholar
• Troyer, L., & Younts, C. W. 1997. Whose expectations matter? The relative power of first-order and second-order expectations in determining social influence. American Journal of Sociology, 103: 692–732. Google Scholar
• Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. 2003. Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40: 1359–1392. Google Scholar
• Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L., & Parks, J. M. 1995. Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over muddied waters). In L. L. CummingsB. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 17: 215–285. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar
• Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. 1998. Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41: 108–119.Link , Google Scholar
• Wei, X., Zhang, Z. X., & Chen, X. P. 2015. I will speak up if my voice is socially desirable: A moderated mediating process of promotive versus prohibitive voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100: 1641–1652. Google Scholar
• Weiss, M., & Morrison, E. W. 2018. Speaking up and moving up: How voice can enhance employees’ social status. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40: 5–19. Google Scholar
• Whiting, S. W., Maynes, T. D., Podsakoff, N. P., & Podsakoff, P. M. 2012. Effects of message, source, and context on evaluations of employee voice behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97: 159–182. Google Scholar
• Willer, R. 2009. Groups reward individual sacrifice: The status solution to the collective action problem. American Sociological Review, 74: 23–43. Google Scholar
• Wittrock, M. C. 1990. Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24: 345–376. Google Scholar