A Meta-Analysis of Voice and Its Promotive and Prohibitive Forms

Identification of Key Associations, Distinctions, and Future Research Directions

Melissa Chamberlin, Daniel W. Newton, Jeffery LePine

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article reports meta-analyses intended to clarify and enhance our understanding of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms. We find that undifferentiated constructive voice is associated with a wide range of antecedents that fit in Morrison's (2014) five categories: (a) dispositions, (b) job and organizational attitudes and perceptions, (c) emotions, beliefs, and schemas, (d) supervisor and leader behavior, and (e) contextual factors. However, relative weight analyses reveal a highly dominant variable within each category (personal initiative, felt responsibility, engagement, leader-member exchange, and positive workplace climate). We also find that undifferentiated constructive voice has a moderate zero-order association with job performance that is nonsignificant when task performance and organizational citizenship behavior are also considered. Finally, we explore how associations vary as a function of whether voice is promotive or prohibitive. First, there are significant differences in associations with over a third of the antecedents (core self-evaluations, felt responsibility, organizational commitment, detachment, psychological safety, ethical leadership, and leader openness). Second, although promotive voice has a positive association with job performance, the opposite is true for prohibitive voice. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of voice, especially with respect to efforts needed to clarify and distinguish promotive and prohibitive voice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPersonnel Psychology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis
Diagnostic Self Evaluation
Direction compound
Meta-analysis
Research directions
Task Performance and Analysis
Climate
Workplace
Emotions
Psychology
Safety
Weights and Measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Cite this

@article{875b6b37c0bc4125b964bd302affc77a,
title = "A Meta-Analysis of Voice and Its Promotive and Prohibitive Forms: Identification of Key Associations, Distinctions, and Future Research Directions",
abstract = "This article reports meta-analyses intended to clarify and enhance our understanding of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms. We find that undifferentiated constructive voice is associated with a wide range of antecedents that fit in Morrison's (2014) five categories: (a) dispositions, (b) job and organizational attitudes and perceptions, (c) emotions, beliefs, and schemas, (d) supervisor and leader behavior, and (e) contextual factors. However, relative weight analyses reveal a highly dominant variable within each category (personal initiative, felt responsibility, engagement, leader-member exchange, and positive workplace climate). We also find that undifferentiated constructive voice has a moderate zero-order association with job performance that is nonsignificant when task performance and organizational citizenship behavior are also considered. Finally, we explore how associations vary as a function of whether voice is promotive or prohibitive. First, there are significant differences in associations with over a third of the antecedents (core self-evaluations, felt responsibility, organizational commitment, detachment, psychological safety, ethical leadership, and leader openness). Second, although promotive voice has a positive association with job performance, the opposite is true for prohibitive voice. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of voice, especially with respect to efforts needed to clarify and distinguish promotive and prohibitive voice.",
author = "Melissa Chamberlin and Newton, {Daniel W.} and Jeffery LePine",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1111/peps.12185",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Personnel Psychology",
issn = "0031-5826",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Meta-Analysis of Voice and Its Promotive and Prohibitive Forms

T2 - Identification of Key Associations, Distinctions, and Future Research Directions

AU - Chamberlin, Melissa

AU - Newton, Daniel W.

AU - LePine, Jeffery

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - This article reports meta-analyses intended to clarify and enhance our understanding of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms. We find that undifferentiated constructive voice is associated with a wide range of antecedents that fit in Morrison's (2014) five categories: (a) dispositions, (b) job and organizational attitudes and perceptions, (c) emotions, beliefs, and schemas, (d) supervisor and leader behavior, and (e) contextual factors. However, relative weight analyses reveal a highly dominant variable within each category (personal initiative, felt responsibility, engagement, leader-member exchange, and positive workplace climate). We also find that undifferentiated constructive voice has a moderate zero-order association with job performance that is nonsignificant when task performance and organizational citizenship behavior are also considered. Finally, we explore how associations vary as a function of whether voice is promotive or prohibitive. First, there are significant differences in associations with over a third of the antecedents (core self-evaluations, felt responsibility, organizational commitment, detachment, psychological safety, ethical leadership, and leader openness). Second, although promotive voice has a positive association with job performance, the opposite is true for prohibitive voice. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of voice, especially with respect to efforts needed to clarify and distinguish promotive and prohibitive voice.

AB - This article reports meta-analyses intended to clarify and enhance our understanding of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms. We find that undifferentiated constructive voice is associated with a wide range of antecedents that fit in Morrison's (2014) five categories: (a) dispositions, (b) job and organizational attitudes and perceptions, (c) emotions, beliefs, and schemas, (d) supervisor and leader behavior, and (e) contextual factors. However, relative weight analyses reveal a highly dominant variable within each category (personal initiative, felt responsibility, engagement, leader-member exchange, and positive workplace climate). We also find that undifferentiated constructive voice has a moderate zero-order association with job performance that is nonsignificant when task performance and organizational citizenship behavior are also considered. Finally, we explore how associations vary as a function of whether voice is promotive or prohibitive. First, there are significant differences in associations with over a third of the antecedents (core self-evaluations, felt responsibility, organizational commitment, detachment, psychological safety, ethical leadership, and leader openness). Second, although promotive voice has a positive association with job performance, the opposite is true for prohibitive voice. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of voice, especially with respect to efforts needed to clarify and distinguish promotive and prohibitive voice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85000916369&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85000916369&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/peps.12185

DO - 10.1111/peps.12185

M3 - Article

JO - Personnel Psychology

JF - Personnel Psychology

SN - 0031-5826

ER -