This chapter provides an overview of the study. It introduces the background, problem statement, purposes, questions, the significance and research limitations of the study, and the definition of the essential terminology.
Background of the Study
The working environment is continuously changing and becoming more complex. As a result, management of employees has begun to gradually face an increase in challenges in the way they process and communicate information, influencing decision-making and problem-solving. It is paramount for organizations to take into consideration employees’ thoughts, suggestions, and ideas to achieve innovation and match goals between employees and organization to enhance the effectiveness of the organizations’ overall performance. (Morrison & Milliken 2000; Tangirala &
Ramanujam, 2008). Additionally, it is important to acknowledge that Employee Voice Behavior does not only benefit a specific group of organizations in a specific location but should also be encouraged in developed and developing countries’ organizations uniformly.
In this study, Salvadoran private organizations constituted the target research population.
Likewise, El Salvador’ private organizations should focus and give great importance to employee’s thoughts, ideas, and suggestions. This information will be useful in decision-making processes for the best interest and growth of the company. Employee Voice Behavior should be promoted and implemented in all areas that make up an organization, and also in all types of industries.
Nevertheless, the main focus of this study was the areas of Finance, Customer Service, and Sales in private organizations.
This type of behavior has many positive effects on all kinds of organizations and can be considered a crucial factor to reach overall success. It benefits not only employers but also employees. Among the many benefits of encouraging this behavior is an increase in employee commitment (Hirschman, 1970). Whenever employees feel involved in the organization’s decisions, when objectives are clear and concerns and opinions are taken into consideration, then employees’ sense of fitting in increases which leads to a greater commitment to the organization.
It is said that employees developed a greater sense of belonging. In regards to the benefits for the company, committed employees bring in added value to the organization, they are less likely to
2
leave the job, have a more positive attitude towards the organization, and display a more proactive and effective performance.
Also, this behavior can as well lead to greater employee retention. The greater the extent to which organizations allow employees to voice dissatisfaction over any aspect of their work, the greater the chance that these employees will remain working in such organization. If employees are allowed to express their dissatisfaction there will be a greater chance that such problems may be resolved effectively (Spencer, 1986). To organizations, this means holding employees with greater experience and knowledge about the organization and its processes and the development of a broader employee’s professional network within and outside of the organization.
In addition, Employee Voice Behavior leads to higher collective learning. When managers encourage voice behaviors in teams, employees feel safe to express their concerns or opinions and are more willing to actively participate in making decisions, improving the dynamics of the group.
Since teams have a better dynamic, clear roles and objectives, and more involvement, collective learning also allows organizations to improve their operational readiness, a key factor to adapt and succeed in the current changing markets (Detert & Burris, 2007; Morrison & Milliken, 2000).
Consequently, Employee Voice Behavior may also improve organizational adaptation processes.
Cohesion and overall quality of relationships within a group can be improved by those employees who are willing to raise their voice and express their opinions and concerns and are also willing to listen and respect others opinions (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998).
Furthermore, whenever employees voice their opinions and provide constructive suggestions, they may encourage innovation in other co-workers. Innovation is sparked by recognition and generation of new ideas. However, when employees are not willing to communicate and voice those innovative thoughts then the process of innovation is interrupted and not carried out (LePine
& VanDyne, 1998; Scott & Bruce, 1994). Those organizations that emphasize on the importance and development of Employee Voice Behaviors have better opportunities to use those employees’
inputs for the organization’s own benefit, creating solutions to different organizational obstacles (Zhou & George, 2001).
Various studies have examined and found a significant influence of leadership behavior and management styles on Employee Voice Behavior (Edmondson, 2003; Morrison & Phelps, 1999).
Among these studies, Detert and Burris (2007) and Liu et al. (2010) showed that there is a significant positive relationship between transformational leadership and Employee Voice
3
Behavior. Walumbwa and Schaubroeck (2009) revealed a positive correlation between ethical leadership and Employee Voice Behavior; they also found that voice behaviors have a positive relationship with a sense of Psychological Safety.
Although these studies have proven to be relevant to the understanding of the role of leadership and management on Employee Voice Behavior in developed countries, a research gap in literature still exists due to the lack of studies carried out in developing countries, especially in El Salvador’s literature. El Salvador’s real GDP only reached 2.3% growth in 2017, making it one of the lowest economic growth in Central America (The World Bank [WB], 2018). Therefore, it is important to study how Leader-Member Exchange influences Employee Voice Behavior which in the long run will contribute to the overall country’s economy.
Most of the research studies carried out up to date have as the primary focus the theory of social exchange (Blau, 1964). This theory suggests that as long as employees feel a positive work environment, they are most drawn to return this positive feeling as a way of Employee Voice Behavior, by not keeping silent. (Ng & Feldman, 2012). There exists a large number of articles focused on manager-employee interactions. The way managers interact and communicate with their subordinates is significant as evidence for such studies (Furst & Cable, 2008; Tangirala &
Ramanujam, 2012).
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory propose that employees develop two types of interactions with managers or supervisors depending on the quality of such relationships. In high-LMX relationships, employees are given more autonomy, freedom, and responsibility by their supervisors. Their relationships are based on trust and respect, and there is more interaction between both parties regarding decision making and essential subjects about the job. Unlike high-quality LMX relationships, low LMX relationships lack of this freedom and sense of trust.
(Scandura & Graen, 1984). Nevertheless, the specific way in which LMX affects Employee Voice Behavior is still not precise.
Previous studies found that High-quality Leader-Member Relationships might encourage Employee Voice Behavior for different reasons. According to Botero and Van Dyne (2009) employees in high- quality LMX relationships have better communication with supervisors;
supervisors are more accessible to them which allows them more opportunities to perform Employee Voice Behavior. Also, in high-quality LMX relationships, employees are better trusted by supervisors, they have stronger work support and more immediate response from supervisors.
4
Such positive qualities create in employees a sense of safety, they feel that there is no potential risk when speaking out and believe their suggestions will be taken into consideration. (Botero &
Van Dyne, 2009; Hsiung, 2012). Another reason that high-quality LMX relationships can encourage Employee Voice Behavior is that employees feel the urge to return the favorable treatment by trying to help the organization through sharing new ideas, thoughts, or suggestions (Burris, Detert, & Chiaburu, 2008; Van Dyne, Kamdar, & Joireman, 2008).
Another variable worthy to study is Psychological Safety and its role in the interaction between LMX and Employee Voice Behavior. Psychological Safety refers to the state in which people feel safe enough to speak freely and do not limit themselves despite the probability of other’
criticism or disapproval (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006). Kahn (1990) mentioned, “Interpersonal relationships promoted Psychological Safety when they were supportive and trusting” (p.708).
Walumbwa and Schaubroeck (2009) found that personality trait agreeableness in leaders helps improve the sense of Psychological Safety in employees. According to Edmondson (2004) employees have a greater sense of Psychological Safety when their supervisors show openness, availability, and accessibility. The more autonomy and interaction employees have with their supervisors; the more psychologically safe they feel because they feel it is acceptable to approach them to share their ideas.
Some interactions with LMX and Employee Voice Behavior can be influenced by Gender;
however little attention has been given to this variable. Previous studies have provided results on how Gender has an impact on Employee Voice Behavior (Morrison, 2011). Research has shown that depending on Gender, employees communicate in different ways while at work (Baker, 1991).
Some studies provide evidence that male employees engage more in Employee Voice Behavior than female employees (Detert & Burris, 2007; LePine & Van Dyne, 1998) yet, other studies claim that women employees communicate more with their supervisors and co-workers than men employees do (e.g., Anderson & Martin, 1995).
Therefore, this study included Gender as a potential variable that might affect the strength in the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior.
5
Problem Statement
Employment relations are crucial in Human Resource Management; it is essential that employees take part in decision-making processes so that better organizational outcomes and improvement can be achieved. Also, as a result, employees’ satisfaction and commitment towards the organization also improves. (Farndale, Van Ruiten, Kelliher, & Hope‐Hailey, 2011; Pohler &
Luchak, 2014). It is imperative for organizations to encourage employees to speak up and raise their voices so that innovation, effectiveness, and efficiency are achieved. Organizations will have better results from such constructive behavior. (Morrison & Milliken, 2000).
Many previous studies have found an important significance on the way manager and supervisors build good-quality relationships with employees to promote Employee Voice Behavior (Edmondson, 2003; Morrison & Phelps, 1999). However, there are limited studies that explain the specific way in which LMX affects Employee Voice Behavior. Also, the majority of the previous literature’s data has taken out from developed countries’ population samples, leaving a considerable gap in the study of developing ones.
A study carried out in El Salvador reflects that the private sector is struggling with communication issues between employees and leaders. Private organizations follow vertical communication systems which weaken the flow of communication and the good functioning of the organization itself. Communication patterns are mainly influence by hierarchy which impedes employees to develop good relationships with leaders (Rivas, Hidalgo, & Ramirez, 2010).
In addition, most developing countries that shared similar cultures as El Salvador show high levels of power distance, which relates to how power is distributed and concentrated in a specific region. El Salvador shows intermediate to high levels of power distance, meaning that in Salvadoran organizations hierarchy is more rigid, communication is more formal, and there is a centralization in decision-making (Hofstede, 2019). As a consequence, relationships between leader-employee are more rigid and with limited communication.
Regarding the role of Psychological Safety, Walumbwa and Schaubroeck (2009) argue that voice behaviors are positively related with Psychological Safety. Nonetheless, only Detert and Burris (2007) study links leadership with Psychological Safety. Lastly, previous studies have only provided mixed results on how Gender has an impact on Employee Voice Behavior (Morrison, 2011). No specific study has been carried out linking LMX with Gender influencing Employee Voice Behavior.
6
Purposes of the Study
This study had three primary objectives. Firstly, to discuss the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior using private organization employees in the Central American country of El Salvador. By 2018, El Salvador was registered as the most violent country in Latin America, also it has been reported of having one of the lowest economic growth rates in the area and a high unemployment rate (Diaz, 2019). Therefore, it is paramount to look for a way in which the country can improve its situation, improving the private sector is one of the most promising ideas.
Secondly, this study aimed to investigate whether Psychological Safety mediates the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior. Lastly, to examine how Gender acts as a moderator in the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior.
The primary goal of this study aimed to examine how employees in the private sector in El Salvador are more drawn to perform Employee Voice Behavior depending on the quality of relationships that they form with their supervisors. Also, consider how Psychological Safety affects such relationship. Lastly, examine how Gender affect the strength of the latter.
To fill these gaps and better understand how LMX influences Employee Voice Behavior.
This research study aimed to examine not only such relationship but also examine the mediating role of Psychological Safety and the moderating role of Gender in the relationship.
Questions of the Study
Following the purpose of the research, this study was designed to answer the following questions:
Is there a relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior?
Does Psychological Safety mediate the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior?
Does Gender moderate the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior?
7
Significance of the Study Contribute to Research and Literature in the Field
This study contributes to the available literature examining the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and Employee Voice Behavior. Many scholars have proposed that Leader-Member Exchange encourages employees to speak up, performing Employee Voice Behavior. However, the majority of these studies are focused on how Employee Voice Behavior is grounded on the influence of Social Exchange Theory. Also, few studies have examined the mediating effect of Psychological Safety per se (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003; G. Quinn & R. Quinn, 2002), psychological empowerment and psychological attachment have been the variables more discussed during the past years.
As well, no existing study examines the moderating effect of Gender playing on LMX and Employee Voice Behavior taking as research sample private organization employees in El Salvador. Furthermore, most studies have taken place in developed countries. There is no existing literature regarding the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior. Therefore, this study aims to contribute theoretically to the current literature of LMX, Psychological Safety, Gender, and Employee Voice Behavior in developing countries with similar cultures as El Salvador.
Contribute to Practice
In practice, regarding managing employees and building strong supervisor-employee relationships. HR practitioners can take more focused measurements and develop action plans, workshops, or even provide training to encourage high-quality LMX relationships that will improve trust, respect, liking, loyalty, among other positive attributes enhancing the willingness of employees to speak up, also dependent on Gender. During the last years, Employee Voice Behavior has become a topic for discussion for researchers because of its importance to organizations to avoid miscommunication issues, misalignments between employees and organizations’ goals, to achieve sustainable growth, and so on. Therefore, this study could be a helpful tool for organizations to have a better understanding of the reasons why employees perform Employee Voice Behavior and under what conditions.
8
Definition of Terms Leader-Member Exchange
The definition explained Leader-Member Exchange as a theory based on a two-way relationship between employee and manager and their communication processes (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975). These exchanges lead to the creation of various relationships between supervisor and employee. In this study, Leader-Member Exchange will be measured using the LMX-7 scale (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). According to Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995), effective leadership-subordinate communication results in high-quality LMX relationships that can be measured as three dimensional relationships based on respect, trust, and obligation.
Employee Voice Behavior
Employee Voice Behavior is explained as the tendency to raise the voice and speak up as a way of response, to express one’s ideas, opinions, and thoughts. This study was carried out based on the definition: sharing of constructive ideas, comments, or suggestions with the main purpose to improve current systems, processes, behaviors, etc (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). Employee Voice Behavior will be measured by using the seven-item scale by Vakola and Bouradas (2005).
Psychological Safety
Brown and Leigh (1996) defined Psychological Safety in the organization as the perception employees have about their organizational environment characteristics, taking into consideration how much support they have from supervisors, how clear job roles and expectations are transmitted to them, and how much autonomy and self-expression they get in the workplace.
9