Cited by 29Labor Movements and UnionsLegal and Labor StudiesManagement and Organizational Studies

Strategic or Silencing? Line Managers’ Repurposing of Employee Voice Mechanisms for High Performance

Open access
Mowbray, Paula K., Wilkinson, Adrian, Tse, Herman H. M.·2022·British Journal of Management

Abstract

In this paper, we explore how the pressure to deliver high performance influences line managers in their shaping and repurposing of employee voice mechanisms to encourage improvement‐oriented voice in organizations. Using qualitative data (50 semi‐structured interviews) from two case studies, including a manufacturing organization and a university, we find line managers were proactive in the (re)shaping and repurposing of employee voice mechanisms in response to the high‐performance strategy. Where there was less HR support given to line managers, we found line managers were more inclined to create their own voice mechanisms. However, we observed that a focus on improvement‐oriented voice associated with employer interests diverted employee‐interest voice away from collective and formal channels, into more informal channels. We indicate the dangers of prioritizing an employer‐interest, improvement‐oriented voice approach.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-8551.12469

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The private channeling cell is the least researched cell in Table 1 by repression researchers, but business scholarship readily advises companies on how to craft policies and practices that mitigate business risks through channeling.

    “Interestingly, this is the least researched cell in Table 1 by repression researchers, but business scholarship readily advises companies on how to craft policies and practices that mitigate business risks through channeling (89–92).”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [91]

  • Companies use internal discussion and complaint forums to control internal contestation through actual or apparent employee voice.

    “Companies also use internal discussion and complaint forums to control internal contestation through actual or apparent employee voice (91).”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [91]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mowbray, P. K., Wilkinson, A., & Tse, H. H. M.
Affiliations
  • Griffith University (AU)
  • Monash University (AU)
Corresponding author
Mowbray, Paula K.
Venue
British Journal of Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-01-21
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
1054-1070
ISSN
  • 1045-3172 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8551
OpenAlex
W3122773027
Cited by
29
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1
FWCI
6.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Management (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Labor Movements and Unions
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
employee voice, line managers, voice mechanisms, organizational silence, manufacturing companies, universities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review