Content area
Full Text
This study examined the cross-level effects of procedural justice climate on employee silence-that is, the intentional withholding of critical work-related information by employees from their workgroup members. In a survey-based study of 606 nurses nested within 30 workgroups, we found that procedural justice climate moderated the effects of individual-level antecedents of employee silence. Specifically, when procedural justice climate was higher, the effects of antecedents that inhibit employee silence (e.g., workgroup identification, professional commitment) were stronger. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
Employees frequently choose to remain silent about important issues at work. Their silence spans issues such as conflicts with coworkers, disagreements with organizational decisions, personal knowledge of potential weaknesses in work processes, concerns about illegal behaviors, and individual grievances (Morrison & Milliken, 2000). A recent study reports that over 85% of the managers and professionals interviewed admitted to remaining silent about at least some of their work concerns (Milliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Employee silence can be beneficial as it can help decrease managerial information overload, reduce interpersonal conflicts, and increase informational privacy of coworkers (Van Dyne, Ang, & Botero, 2003). More often, however, it is seen as a detrimental phenomenon (Morrison & Milliken, 2000).
The adverse effects of employee silence can be direct as well as indirect. Employee silence directly affects work by reducing managerial access to critical information. For instance, continuous process improvement requires the ongoing identification of operational problems that can provide clues about weaknesses in current work processes (Sitkin, 1992). Employee silence prevents the surfacing of such problems and reduces innovation at the workplace (Argyris & Schön, 1978). The unwillingness of employees to speak up about early warning signs can also contribute to negative outcomes such as corruption (e.g., Enron; Ashforth & Anand, 2003), patient deaths due to medication errors in hospitals (IOM, 2000), and accidents (e.g., Columbia shuttle disaster; Schwartz & Wald, 2003). Employee silence indirectly affects work by influencing employee well-being. For instance, employees who intentionally suppress critical communication go through increased stress and experience psychological and physiological problems (Morrison & Milliken, 2000). They also tend to be less engaged in organizational change efforts and find it harder to adapt to organizational change (Ryan & Oestreich, 1991).
Despite its significance, employee silence has emerged as a...