| Abstract: |
Previous research indicates that employees often believe that it is too risky
to voice their concerns about organizational problems; however, prospect
theory suggests that people are more willing to take risks when problems are
framed in terms of potential losses rather than potential gains. To reconcile
these perspectives, we draw on prospect theory and the principle of loss
aversion to explain why loss framing (compared to gain framing) will increase
employees’ willingness to engage in voice behavior. In Study 1, we used a
scenario experiment and found that participants who considered potential
losses (compared to gains) after writing about a problem at work were more
willing to speak up. Further, integrating prospect theory with the research on
other orientation, we extended these findings in Study 2, by hypothesizing an
interaction between loss (compared to gain) framing and collective (compared
to self) framing. Using experimental vignette methodology, we found the most
voice behavior with framing that highlights potential for collective losses.
In Study 3, we conducted a multi-wave, multi-source survey study using three
organizational samples from different industries – healthcare, consulting, and
auditing – and again found that employees were more willing to engage in voice
when framing made collective losses salient. Altogether, our three studies
integrate prospect theory and research on other orientation to show that
framing, particularly in terms of losses and collective outcomes, is an
important tool for eliciting employee voice. Theoretical and practical
implications of our work, as well as ideas for future research, are also
discussed |