Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

How Leaders Inspire Voice: The Role of Voice Climate and Team Implicit Voice Theories

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

That individuals hold personal, implicit beliefs about the consequences of voice (i.e., implicit voice theories (IVTs)), and thus are inherently reluctant to speak up, is one of the most ubiquitous concepts in the voice literature. An extensive body of research also shows how situational factors (e.g., voice climate) profoundly affect voice. Unfortunately, few studies explore how dispositional beliefs combine with situational factors to influence voicing in teams; thus, the literature is unclear about whether and how leaders can encourage voice when their team members implicitly believe that voice is unsafe and inappropriate (i.e., high IVTs). We address this question by proposing a moderated-mediation model linking leaders’ prior reactions to voice (i.e., voice acceptance versus rejection) to team voice intentions via voice climate, such that encouraging leader behaviors (acceptance), unlike discouraging leader behaviors (rejection), creates positive voice climates that increase team voice intentions. Furthermore, drawing from the trait activation theory, we propose that team IVTs composition (i.e., the average IVTs held by each team member) moderates the mediated effect of voice climate on team voice intentions, such that this relationship is strongest for teams with high IVTs because, for these teams, positive voice climates are both highly salient to, and disconfirming of, implicit voice beliefs. Results of a multi-task team experiment support this model. We discuss the theoretical implications of considering person and situation factors in tandem, the potential influence of team IVTs composition, and practical implications for how leaders can inspire voice in teams.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to Google Scholar, Milliken et al. (2003) has been cited 2,108 times, and Detert and Edmondson (2011) has been cited 843 times, at the time of manuscript re-submission.

  2. We conceptualize team voice as intentions because our experimental methodology does not permit future assessments of voice. We focus on intentions based on theoretical and meta-analytical evidence that intentions are strongly related to behaviors (e.g., Ajzen, 1991; Webb & Sheeran, 2006) as well as experimental research that has measured behavioral intentions as an indicator of future behavior (e.g., van Kleef et al., 2021), including voice intentions specifically (e.g., King et al., 2019; Turner et al., 2020). We return to this matter in our limitations.

  3. Our perspective is that IVTs can also be conceptualized as a shared construct (e.g., Knoll et al., 2021) that emerges over time via shared experiences, which aligns with Kozlowski and Klein’s (2000) notion that collective constructs can emerge in different ways in different contexts. Much like the emergence of team knowledge structures (Kozlowski & Chao, 2012), we believe it is plausible for team members’ IVTs to converge and become similar over time through repeated interactions and shared experiences. However, given that research and theory on IVTs describes such beliefs as relatively immutable and consistent across contexts, we expect that many teams—particularly those at early stages of formation or that are only together for a finite period of time (which describes teams in the present research)—do not reach a point at which shared experiences regarding voice expectations start to create permanent changes to team members’ IVTs. That is, even if team members come to view voice as safe in their shared context, this does not mean that they would alter their implicit beliefs regarding voice safety across other contexts (Detert & Edmondson, 2011). Moreover, from a methodological perspective, we measured IVTs before our study, at which point there would not have been any grounds to expect convergence because the team members had not yet interacted.

  4. At the conclusion of each experimental session, we debriefed participants on the true nature of the study, including the role of the confederate leader. As this manipulation could have disproportionately affected team ideation results, we explained that we would randomly select four participants for the $50 gift card as opposed to gifting the top teams. At the conclusion of the study, we emailed these four participants a $50 gift card redeemable at the Campus Bookstore.

  5. Given the dispositional nature of IVTs, it is possible that team IVT composition could have also moderated the relationship between leader reactions and voice climate. We conducted a post hoc analysis to test this possibility in which we allowed for team IVT composition to simultaneously moderate both the first and second stages of our mediation model. To do so, we used Model 58 in Hayes’ (2013) PROCESS macro for SPSS and bootstrapped confidence intervals calculated with 5,000 iterations. The results of this analysis indicated a nonsignificant interaction effect of leader reactions to voice and team IVT composition on voice climate (B =  − .74, 95% [− 1.55, .08]) and a significant interaction effect of voice climate and team IVT composition on team voice intentions (B = 1.58, 95% [.13, 3.05]). The results, therefore, suggest that team IVT composition is best modeled strictly as a moderator of the relationship between voice climate and team voice intentions.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2018 annual conference of the Academy of Management. We would like to thank Jana Raver, Julian Barling, and Matthias Spitzmuller for their constructive comments and insightful feedback on this research.

Funding

This research was supported by funding provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Odette School of Business. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Academy of Management 2018 annual conference.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyle M. Brykman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Table 4

Table 4 Details on the experimental task

Appendix 2

Table 5

Table 5 Experimental session order

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brykman, K.M., Maerz, A.D. How Leaders Inspire Voice: The Role of Voice Climate and Team Implicit Voice Theories. J Bus Psychol 38, 327–345 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09827-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09827-x

Keywords

Navigation