Abbi Yudha Mahendra 041314353015Praditya Aryatama 041314353025

Ibrahim Kariadi 041314353012

The Risk and Rewards of Speaking UpManagerial Responses to Employee Voice

Ethan R. BurrisUniversity of

Texas

IntroductionWhy do we speak upWhat do we risk speaking up

Respon to VoiceManagers receive voice when their

employees want to initiate The manager’s evaluation of the

employees who speak up with those ideas

Types of Improvement Oriented VoiceManagers view employees who more frequently

engage in chalenging voiceAs being worse performers than those

engaging in supportive voiceVoice less than they endorse the ideas of

those engaging in supportive voiceVoice as being less loyal than those engaging

in supportive voiceMore threatening than those engaging in

supportive voice

Hypothesis1. Managers view employees who more frequently

engage in challenging voice as being worse performers than those engaging in supportive voice

2. Managers endorse the ideas of employees who more frequently engage in challenging forms of voice less than they endorse the ideas of those engaging in supportive voice

3. Managers view employees who more frequently engage in challenging forms of voice as being less loyal than those engaging in supportive voice

4. Manages view employees who more frequently engage in challenging forms of voice as being more threatening than those engaging in supportive voice

Hypothesis5. a. The more employees are seen as loyal, the more strongly managers

endorse their ideas b. The more employees are seen as loyal, the better managers rate

their performance c. Managerial perceptions of loyalty partially mediate the

relationship between the type of voice and managerial performance evaluations d. Managerial perceptions of loyalty partially mediate the relationship

between the type of voice and the level of endorsement given by managers

6. a. The more employees are seen as thretening, the less managers endorse their ideas

b. The more employees are seen as thretening, the poorer managers rate their performance

c. Managerial perceptions of threat partially mediate the relationship between the type of voice

and managerial performance evaluations d. Managerial perceptions of threat partially mediate the relationship

between the type of voice and the level of endorsement given by managers

OVERVIEWTo test the hypothesis, researcher use a full

circle research approach, which suggest studying the naturally occuring phenomenon of interest in the field first and then “traveling back and forth between observation and manipulation-based research settings” by using a series of one filed study and two experiments

Study 1Used cross-sectional survey data to

examine the outcomes of engaging in challenging versus supportive voice, to test hypothesis 1.

Measure, adapting Van dyne & LePine’s :1) Item concerning verbal communication2) Item concerning specific challenges or

improvement to the satus quo

Study 2Study 2

Manipulation-based research setting, to assess the response of managers, about challenging and supportive voice

Study 3Business simulation task, to assess the

responses to challenging versus supportive voice

GENERAL DISCUSSION The type of voice, speaking up in challenging ways elicits

unfavorable reactions from managers, and in contrast, engaging in supportive voice does not generate negative outcomes

These findings extend scholarly understanding of the psychological processes underlying managerial responses to voice. In particular, findings also show that loyalty consistently mediates the relationship between the type of voice displayed and overall employee performance, and threat mediates the relationship between voice and the levels of endorsement given by managers

This research provide evidence that manager be more receptive to forms of voice that are less proactive, voice that is supportive be being more incremental and less change-oriented.

Suggest : that the psychological mechanism of loyalty and threat drive managerial reaction to voice in different ways: loyalty reflect broad prosocial values that intend to benefit an organization and influences overall performance evaluation, wherean the extent to which the ideas voiced threaten managers personal standing in the organization influence managerial endorsement