The Relationships among Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender: A Study in the Private Sector in El Salvador

全文

(1)The Relationships among Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender: A Study in the Private Sector in El Salvador by Barbara Marcela Mendez Diaz. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of. MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION. Major: International Human Resource Development. Advisor: Cheng-Chieh Lu, Ph. D.. National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan. July 2019.

(2) ACKNOWLEDGMENT Like all the great things, my journey as a student at NTNU in Taiwan must come to an end. Before coming here I wouldn’t have never imagined studying all the way across the Pacific Ocean. This experience helped me realize the importance of family and friends, to not take them for granted, and how important it is to follow your dreams no matter how big they are, and that it is okay to make mistakes as long as you learn from them. I left behind my family in El Salvador, but I’m grateful I gained a new group of friends that became my family and I will always consider part of it. I learned a lot from them and felt their support whenever I needed. In regards to this study, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Lu for his help and dedication throughout this two years of my master’s experience. For always being so willing and happy to guide me so that I could complete my thesis. I would also like to thank all my professors in the IHRD department, thank you for all the knowledge shared. Thank you to my committee members, Dr. Pai-Po Lee and Dr. Chang. Also, I would like to express my gratitude to my ICDF family, thank you for making my time in Taiwan so much easier and fun. Lastly, I would like to thank my amazing parents for being my strongest pillars, always supporting me in every decision I make, and for giving me the best advices. I love you mom and dad. Thank God for this experience..

(3) ABSTRACT An organization in which employees are actively engaged in Employee Voice Behavior provides a competitive advantage for organizations in today’s highly competitive business world. The purpose of this study was to examine how high-quality interactions between leaders an employee’s affects how much employees are willing to engage in Employee Voice Behavior, whether Psychological Safety serves as a mediator in the relationship, and whether Gender serves as a moderator in said relationship. Extending from the well-known Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX), this study presents the hypothesis that supervisors who engage in high-level LMX practices have an effect on subordinates’ use of Employee Voice Behavior in which Psychological Safety mediates the relationship, and Gender moderates the relationship. This research study adopted a quantitative approach using an on-line survey questionnaire to collect data. The collected sample data was of 200 Salvadorian employees working in Finance, Customer Service and/or Sales department in the private sector from six different organizations. IBM SPSS 23.0 was used to run descriptive analysis, Pearson’s correlation analysis and hierarchical regression analysis. The results showed that Leader-Member Exchange is related to Employee Voice Behavior, that Psychological Safety partially mediates the relationship between LMX and Employee Voice Behavior, and that Gender does not moderate the relationship between LMX and Employee Voice Behavior.. Keywords: Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, Gender. I.

(4) TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... II LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 Background of the Study ..........................................................................................................1 Problem Statement....................................................................................................................5 Purpose of the Study.................................................................................................................6 Questions of the Study..............................................................................................................6 Significance of the Study..........................................................................................................7 Definition of Terms ..................................................................................................................8. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW..............................................................................9 El Salvador and the Private Sector ...........................................................................................9 Employee Voice Behavior ......................................................................................................10 Leader-Member Exchange .....................................................................................................13 Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior ...................................................15 The Role of Psychological Safety as Mediator ......................................................................16 The Role of Gender as Moderator ..........................................................................................19. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................21 Research Framework ..............................................................................................................21 Research Hypotheses ..............................................................................................................22 Research Sample ....................................................................................................................22 Data Collection .......................................................................................................................23 Research Procedure ................................................................................................................24 Questionnaire Design .............................................................................................................25 Measurement ..........................................................................................................................25 Pilot Test.................................................................................................................................27 Data Analysis..........................................................................................................................30. II.

(5) CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..............................................................31 Descriptive Statistics ..............................................................................................................31 Pearson’s Correlation Analysis .............................................................................................32 Confirmatory Factor Analysis ................................................................................................33 Hierarchical Regression Analysis...........................................................................................36 Findings Summary and Discussion ........................................................................................41. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ..............................................43 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................43 Research Limitation................................................................................................................44 Implication of the Study .........................................................................................................44 Suggestions and Recommendations .......................................................................................46. REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................47 APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH VERSION) ......................................57 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE (SPANISH VERSION) .......................................63. III.

(6) LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Descriptive Statistics for Pilot Test (N=40)……………….………......................……29 Table 3.2 Mean, Standard Deviation, Correlation and Reliability for Pilot Test (N=40)................29 Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics (N=200)…………………………………………………........…32 Table 4.2 Mean, Standard Deviation, Correlation and Reliability (N=200)……………................33 Table 4.3 Summary of Fit Indexes………………………………………………………….…….34 Table 4.4 Factor Measurement Model Fit Summary (N=200)……………………........…..….….34 Table 4.5 Effect of Leader-Member Exchange on Employee Voice Behavior……………..….…37 Table 4.6 Mediating effect of Psychological Safety on the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior (N=200)………………………………………...….…39 Table 4.7 Effect of Leader-Member Exchange on Psychological Safety…….……………..….…39 Table 4.8 Results for Regression Analysis for Moderating Effect of Gender (N=200)……...……40 Table 4.9 Research Hypotheses Results……………………………………………………..…...41. IV.

(7) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1 Research Framework…………………………………………….……………………21 Figure 3.2 Research Procedure...…………………………………………….…………………...24 Figure 4.1. Research CFA Measurement Model…………………………………….……………35. V.

(8) CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 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. 1.

(9) 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 2.

(10) 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 highLMX 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 highquality 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. 3.

(11) 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.. 4.

(12) 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. 5.

(13) Purposes of the Study This study had three primary objectives. Firstly, to discuss the relationship between LeaderMember 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?. 6.

(14) Significance of the Study Contribute to Research and Literature in the Field This study contributes to the available literature examining the relationship between LeaderMember 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.. 7.

(15) 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.. 8.

(16) CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter provides a brief overview of El Salvador and the private sector, it reviews the literature about Leader-Member Exchange (LMX), Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender. Also, the relationship among LMX, Employee Voice Behavior, and Psychological Safety, and the relationship among LMX, Employee Voice Behavior, and Gender. Later, hypotheses are derived.. El Salvador and the Private Sector El Salvador is a Spanish-speaking country located in Central America, bordering Guatemala, Honduras, and the Pacific Ocean. It has a total land area of 21,041 square kilometers with an estimated population of 6,377,853 by the end of the year 2017. El Salvador has been classified by The World Bank as a developing, low middle-income country. It has the third largest economy in Central America and by 2017 it had an estimated total labor force of 2,844,047 people and an unemployment rate of 7%, one of the highest in the Central American area (GlobalEDGE, 2017). The private sector is a key catalyst for growth in a country due to its massive influence in a country’s economy, especially for the creation of jobs. In El Salvador most of what it is produced and consumed comes from the private sector. El Salvador highly depends on the private sector for its economic development to improve; the state has proven to be less effective and efficient by itself as the private sector, there needs to be a coexistence of the two to complement each other. However, in the past decades the private sector has lost competitiveness, it’s not keeping up with trends and globalization which consequently greatly affects the economic growth of El Salvador (Silva, 2010). According to data collected by The World Bank, El Salvador has one of the lowest economic growth in Central America with a real GDP growth average of 2.6% between the years of 2010 and 2016. By 2017 real GDP growth reached 2.3%, mainly driven by private sector wages and remittances from abroad. El Salvador’s economy highly depends on agriculture, manufacturing and mining, forestry and fisheries, restaurants and hotels, livestock, and commerce as they are reported to be the main drivers of the economy, the private sector accounts as 60%. 9.

(17) Due to the country’s low growth, there still exist high levels of poverty rate and public debt. The poverty rate is estimated at 31% by 2016 and public debt accounts over 70% of GDP (WB, 2018). In addition, high levels of crime and violence are a significant impediment for economic growth and social development, affecting Salvadorans quality of life. Gangs and violence negatively impact investment decision and affect job creation (WB, 2018). By 2018, the president of the nation, Salvador Sanchez Ceren, announced that the total foreign direct investment had reached $413 million by the end of the first semester of the year, and that private investment accounted $1,705 million by the date. Proving to be one of the strongest drivers of the overall economy. Only by 2016, 23 new private organizations were opened in the country and 18 more expanded their investments (El Salvador’s Government, 2017).. Employee Voice Behavior For the last decades, the interest of scholars to study Employee Voice Behavior has increased significantly. Many articles and articles have been executed to identify those possible factors that may result in employees engaging in voice behavior. It is important to mention the name of Albert Hirschman, an influential German economist of the 20th century, considered to be the pioneer of Employee Voice Behavior studies. Hirschman described Employee Voice Behavior in his Exit, Voice, and Loyalty (1970): Any attempt at all to change, rather than to escape from, an objectionable state of affairs, whether through individual or collective petition to the management directly in charge, through appeal to a higher authority with the intention of forcing a change in management, or through various types of actions or protests, including those that are meant to mobilize public opinion. (p. 30) From Hirschman’s definition, Employee Voice Behavior has taken many shapes and forms, defined in multiple ways depending on the field of application. However, after 1994 the number of studies focused on Employee Voice Behavior increased significantly, most likely due to the influence of Van Dyne and LePine’s (1998) study. Both scholars developed a scale to measure the variable and worked on clarifying its definition. Also, they argued that Employee Voice Behavior has a positive impact on organizations because it provides new or improved ideas on how to run things more smoothly, it provides new opportunities of growth as managers can recognize critical issues that need to be solved (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). 10.

(18) According to Hirschman (1970), voice should not be limited to only verbal behaviors. Based on the literature, it also includes such actions as writing memos or sending emails (Withey & Cooper, 1989). Van Dyne, Ang, and Botero (2003) developed a list of requirements to take into consideration to consider behavior as voice. First, it has to be openly communicated. Second, it should be information relevant to the organization. Third, must be directly focused to influence the work environment. Lastly, the information communicated must be received by someone inside the organization. The use of voice behavior is beneficial for organizations because it aids management to identify and solve organizational problems. It is considered to be a constructive and active way of helping organizations (Burris, Detert, & Chiaburu, 2008; Rusbult, Farrell, Rogers, & Mainous, 1988; Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). The vast majority of studies carried on up to date focused on Employee Voice Behavior are based on the Social Exchange Theory (Ng & Feldman, 2012). Whenever leaders or superiors treat their employees with respect, it encourages employees to behave and reciprocate with the same type of respect. The Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964) is mainly characterized by the exchange of behaviors between two or more individuals nourishing a sense of trust and at the same time encouraging emotional engagement. Scholars who have studied this theory argue that satisfied employees or those who are emotionally committed to their superiors show more motivation to engage in Employee Voice Behavior and provide constructive ideas or suggestions. This behavior is caused as a result of the positive way in which employees have been treated by their employers or superiors in their daily work relationships, a response to reciprocating such positive treatment. (Burris, Detert, & Chiaburu, 2008; Fuller, Marler, & Hester, 2006; Withey & Cooper, 1989). Employees will engage in voice behavior whenever they feel they are in a relationship based on respect, trust, and satisfaction (Turnley & Feldman, 1999). Nevertheless, other scholars argue that it is important to take into consideration other reasons as triggers for Employee Voice Behavior. Van Dyne, Ang, and Botero (2003) argue that voice can be other‐directed or it can be self‐directed. When other-directed, a person chooses to do good deeds as a response to a similar-positive behavior. On the other side, when self-directed, people decide to engage in voice behavior seeking to get the most significant benefit for the own self. Most existing Employee Voice Behavior studies have used a between-individual approach to explore and understand the reasons why employees decide to engage or avoid such behavior (Morrison, 2011). The literature also argues that both employees’ personality traits (LePine & Van Dyne, 11.

(19) 1998) and leaders’ characteristics, as well as leadership styles (Detert & Burris, 2007; Tangirala & Ramanujam, 2012; Walumbwa & Schaubroeck, 2009), have proven to be significant predictors to Employee Voice Behavior. Walumbwa and Schaubroeck (2009) study, argues that perceived safety is an essential antecedent of Employee Voice Behavior. The fact that an employee feels that he or she faces no potential risk of losing anything when voicing their ideas or suggestions. On the other hand, leader trust is also a frequent topic related to Employee Voice Behavior, if an employee has a strong relationship with superiors it is more likely that such employee will not hesitate to raise his or her voice (Gao, Janssen, & Shi, 2011). At the same time, openness from leaders increases the chances of Employee Voice Behavior (Detert & Burris, 2007). Most importantly, this study focuses on the LMX relationship that leaders develop with employees and that will lead them to participate in Employee Voice Behavior (Botero & Van Dyne, 2009; Burris, Detert, & Chiaburu, 2008). Previous Human Resource Management/ Employment Relations studies suggest that most of the time top management are the ones in charge of designing Employee Voice Behavior systems with employees. Managers and superiors’ behaviors towards employees define whether employees will feel comfortable enough to speak up when they know their suggestions are taken into consideration and listen (Boxall & Purcell, 2011; Dundon & Rollinson, 2004). These relationships are established and maintained by supervisors and line managers (Marchington, Wilkinson, Ackers, & Goodman, 1993). Drawing from the literature previously discussed, the current study aimed to prove whether LMX influence employees to participate in Employee Voice Behavior.. 12.

(20) Leader-Member Exchange This theory is mainly based on two significant theories, The Role Theory (Graen & Cashman, 1975), and Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964). According to role theory, individuals have specific expectations about other individuals within organizations, expected roles to fulfill. Therefore, individuals act upon those expectations while doing their work. It also emphasizes the importance of the relationship between supervisor-subordinate when performing such expectations (Hofmann, Morgeson, & Gerras, 2003). Previous literature shows that Leader-Member Exchange theory aims to explain the core concept and the results of high and low LMX relationships developed between leaders and subordinate employees. It is argued that in high-LMX relationships leaders provide employees with more attention and support. As a result, employees are more willing to perform better during work by devoting more time and effort to the assigned job (Dienesch & Liden, 1986). These relationships are based on respect, mutual trust, liking, and loyalty (Liden & Maslyn, 1998). On the other hand, in low-LMX relationships, the relationship is seen as a contract-based exchange with rigid and limited interactions, defined roles, and a top to bottom hierarchy (Janssen &Van Yperen, 2004). Leader-Member Exchange had been traditionally studied as a single dimension construct (Graen & Cashman, 1975; Graen & Scandura, 1987). However, many theorists such as Liden, Saparrowe, and Wayne (1997) argue that it is more accurate to treat LMX as a multidimensional construct. This multidimensional approach allows for a better understanding of the relationship with individual, and organizational variables (Liden & Maslyn, 1998). Currently, there is a vast number of studies that provide evidence of the positive results associated with high-LMX relationships, benefiting not only subordinates, but also leaders and the organization itself (Gerstner & Day, 1997; Harris, Wheeler, & Kacmar, 2011; Ilies, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007). Besides building trust-based relationships, the literature shows several benefits as a result of the development of high Leader-Member Exchange. Including a greater sense of autonomy for subordinates, better job satisfaction for both parties. Also, the development of more challenging and exciting assignments, employees are promoted more frequently, and there is a higher potential for an increase in earnings (Culbertson, Huffman, & Alden-Anderson, 2010; Graen & Scandura, 1987; Schyns & Croon, 2006; Van Dam, Oreg, & Schyns, 2007). In addition, previous studies have shown that high-quality leader-member relationships are linked to the 13.

(21) improvement of positive organizational outcomes such as job commitment, increased performance, and job satisfaction (Gerstner & Day, 1997). Some research studies argue that one of the most relevant consequences of high-quality leader-member relationships is that subordinates have better performance ratings when in highquality relationships and lower ratings when involved in low leader-member relationships (Dunegan, Uhl-Bien, & Duchon, 2002; Kacmar, Zivnuska, Gully, & Witt, 2003). According to Social Exchange Theory and Leader-Member Exchange Theory, individuals involved in highquality LMX relationships tend to receive articulated expectations, orders, and role-related information from their supervisors (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Also, they receive feedback related to their performance (Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, & Ferris, 2012), which allows them to identify weaknesses to change their behavior enabling them to perform better than those involved in lowquality LMX relationships. Gathered information from different studies provides a guideline for the process and development of LMX relationships. This process begins as soon as an employee is hired in an organization (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975). In the first stage of development, the leader must provide the new employee with the opportunities to show his or her capabilities, knowledge, and skills that will define the expected roles, this preliminary stage serves as an early evaluation. During this stage, leaders can observe and identify how employees are able to communicate with others but also how well they receive information (Jablin, 2001). The next stage is defined as role making, in this stage leaders can negotiate and build trust with employees (Miller, Johnson, Hart, & Peterson, 2009). At this level both leaders and subordinates are involved in a two-way bargaining process, developing and shaping roles and positions and trying to adapt to them. They work together to shape the relationship into one that watches over the individual needs of both parties. It is essential to build trust with one another to create a relationship that will be accountable for both. At this stage, leaders assess and observe how the new employee assimilates and adapts to the new relationship which in the long run will determine the dynamics of the relationship, the level of LMX relationship (Graen, 1976). Accordingly, as leaders assign roles and tasks to subordinates, through this process of information exchange, it is possible that additional conversations may result that will aid subordinates to assimilate, develop professionally, and finally lay down the ground for a trusting interpersonal relationship with superiors. Thereby, communication is said to be the primary tool 14.

(22) to build and maintain fulfilling relationships; it may also be the key to fulfilling successful high Leader-Member Exchange relationships. However, studies argue that there must always be any communication at the heart of all workrelated relationships (Fairhurst, 2016; Fairhurst & Uhl-Bien, 2012; Uhl-Bien, 2006). Hence, a communicative view does not necessarily approve the division and classification of LMX into high and low context LMX relationships; instead, it suggests that relationships develop as people spend time together in the workplace reaching for common goals. After a systematic review on the previous literature, the study aimed to identify the direct relationship between LMX and Employee Voice Behavior.. Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior Leader-Member Exchange theory focuses on the two-way exchange of information between leaders and subordinates, and the quality of the resulting relationships (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975). Leaders built high-quality LMX relationships and low-quality relationships with different subordinates, depending on the interaction that they have and the strong base that they nurture since the beginning of the relationship. A high- quality LMX relationship is characterized by respect, loyalty, mutual trust, reciprocal influence, and a high sense of commitment between the two parties (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Literature suggests that depending on the quality of relationships that leaders achieve with their subordinates, the quality of information exchange and interaction it profoundly affects leader and subordinate behaviors and attitudes (Ilies, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007; Liden, Sparrowe, & Wayne, 1997). Previous studies argue that high-quality LMX relationships aid in the development of Employee Voice Behavior. In high-quality LMX relationships, both leaders and subordinates show a high level of respect, loyalty, and mutual liking encouraging reciprocity and mutual obligation (Gouldner, 1960; Liden, Sparrowe, & Wayne, 1997). Those employees who feel deeply involved and invested in the relationship put more effort and energy into it and will most likely work beyond their assigned job description. For instance, they may engage in Employee Voice Behavior to improve the work environment, to help other employees (Ilies, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007) or to trigger a change that will benefit both the company and its employees (Van Dyne, Kamdar, & Joireman, 2008).. 15.

(23) Also, employees who are in trustworthy relationships are more drawn to express their voice because they perceive less potential risk in doing so. Even when they think their ideas may not receive the acceptance that they expect, subordinates are comfortable enough to voice them because they know leaders will not criticize them, as their relationship is based on respect. Instead, leaders will take into consideration the suggestions that seemed beneficial. Botero and Van Dyne (2009) claim that high-quality LMX influence Employee Voice Behavior because of two reasons. First, employees have a greater chance to express their ideas due to the closeness and access between them and their supervisors. Second, since employees have greater trust in their leaders, they receive greater work support and responsiveness from them. Therefore, employees’ perception is that their opinions and thoughts will be heard and be taken into consideration (Botero &Van Dyne, 2009). Even though, many studies have indicated that leaders are capable of developing high and low-quality LMX relationships, it is critically emphasized by some scholars that leaders have the responsibility to establish such high-quality exchange relationships with each subordinate to avoid bias and discrimination, and to be as partial as possible when developing such work relationships (Dunegan, Uhl-Bien, & Duchon, 2002; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). When leaders can cultivate and nurture honest, two-way relationships with each subordinate, they manage to achieve a work environment of self-management, evolving from an I oriented behavior towards a more inclusive we behavior (Omilion-Hodges & Baker, 2013). Therefore, based on previous literature the following hypothesis was developed: Hypothesis 1. Leader-Member Exchange is related to Employee Voice Behavior.. The Role of Psychological Safety as Mediator 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. Psychological Safety happens whenever employees feel their work environment allows them to express themselves freely without facing the risk of being criticized or judged. Whenever an employee feels comfortable enough to voice opinions, engage in creative ideas, and so on, it is said to have a high level of Psychological Safety. 16.

(24) A critical factor that has been discussed as a relevant cause for the development of Psychological Safety is the level of reciprocal care in work relationships. According to the literature, there are some reasons why reciprocal care allows individuals to feel more psychologically safe. Referring to Kahn (1990), in caring relationships individuals demonstrate genuine care and concern for others in particular ways, people pay more attention to others’ emotions and feelings nurturing in individuals a greater sense of self-worth and strengthening the self within a group. In such environments, individuals feel a sense of belongingness in which they play an important role (Wrzesniewski, Dutton, & Debebe, 2003). An environment in which supervisors promote a culture of learning and experimentation, promoting healthy conflict and placing great importance on giving employees’ a voice. In a review of the literature on organizational creativity, George (2008) argued that Psychological Safety is one of the most important factors positively related to creativity. Also, West and Richter (2008) discussed that when individuals face psychological threats and have feelings of psychologically unsafety, they are more likely to avoid engaging in creative and innovative behaviors. Similarly, Psychological Safety should be a critical determinant of employees’ voice behavior as well, as voice behavior essentially involves challenging the current status of the organization by pointing out potential opportunities or problematic practices that managers are unable to identify. This implies the important role of LMX on employees’ Psychological Safety, which as a consequence might affect their voice behavior. A systematic review on the literature inferred Psychological Safety might be an important mediator in the relationship between LMX and Employee Voice Behavior. Previous literature has proven that any interpersonal relationship in the workplace has an enormous impact on employees’ behaviors (Dutton & Ragins, 2007; Kahn, 1990) and in the way, they communicate with others and their level of engagement to speak up (Choi, 2006). According to a study carried on by Dutton and Heaphy (2003), when employees are capable of developing high-quality relationships with great emotional carrying capacity, it proves to be easier and more acceptable to express a range of emotions in the two-way relationship which increases the chances of both parties to be understood. As employees become more comfortable expressing their emotions with others, they will perceive it is acceptable to speak up without having to worry about the risk of being embarrassed or criticized, contributing to employees’ Psychological Safety.. 17.

(25) Dutton and Heaphy (2003) argue that higher-quality relationships are characterized by having tensility, which allows relationships the ability to bear conflict and stress without breaking the bond. This characteristic shows how flexible, durable, and resistant high-quality relationships are. Tensility allows both parties to understand that extreme caution is not essential regarding their interactions. Therefore, if people are involved in relationships with high tensility they will not stop themselves and overly think about displaying authentic behaviors, they will be more likely to speak whatever is in their minds because they will not be scared of being judged or criticized. Hence, high-quality relationships with high levels of tensility contribute to people’s sense of Psychological Safety. Other studies also emphasize connectivity. High-quality relationships connectivity refers to the degree of openness between both parties to exchange new information (Losada, 1999; Losada & Heaphy, 2004). When individuals perceive a high level of connectivity in a relationship, they will feel more comfortable to open up to new ideas and thoughts without judging the other party and without thinking they will be judged. G. Quinn and R. Quinn (2002) research suggested that people in high-quality relationships have a high sense of deep contact, they believe the other person involved in the relationship respects and knows them in a deep level (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003). As a result, when leaders and subordinates treat one another respectfully, they create a relationship that is positive and valued. Both, develop a sense of social dignity, their sense of self-competence increases as well as their sense of self-worth (Dutton, 2003). Consequently, as people feel appreciated and value, they are more likely to feel psychologically safe to raise their voices without fearing negative consequences. Lastly, Dutton and Heaphy (2003) emphasized on mutuality in interpersonal relationships. Mutuality refers to the state where people involved in a relationship actively participates and their level of engagement. Jordan (1991) argues that mutuality in high-quality relationships increase the willingness of people to self-disclose. Walsh, Gillespie, Greer, and Eanes (2002) study provided support evidence that a feeling of mutuality was the most relevant factor influencing how much trainees would open up and disclose mistakes to their supervisors. High-quality relationships between supervisor and employee will create a sense of trust, a sense of Psychological Safety that will allow employees to feel more comfortable speaking up without the risk of being judged or punished. According to the literature reviewed, the following hypothesis was developed:. 18.

(26) Hypothesis 2. Psychological Safety mediates the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior.. The Role of Gender as Moderator For the last decades it has been a topic of debate whether or not women and men use different strategies in communication. Literature shows that even though people learn to communicate through social learning, family, school, peers, media, and their surrounding environment, the way men and women socialize since an early stage in life differs from each other (Jablin & Krone, 1994). For instance, Pearson (1981), pointed out that masculine communication style “is popularly viewed as decisive, direct, rational, authoritative, logical, aggressive, and impersonal” (p.56). Whereas, female communication style “is popularly judged to be cautious, receptive, indirect, emotional, conciliatory, subjective, and polite” (p.58). According to Borisoff and Merrill (1985), female communication style is characterized as being soft-spoken, full of emotions, compliant, and self-effacing. On the other hand, male communication style is portrayed as being less effective at listening, slightly expressive, dominant and straightforward, and assertive. This gender difference can be best explained and reduced to a two-pronged dichotomy: instrumental strategy mainly used by men and affiliative strategy mostly used by women. Most of the time, women use communication to emphasize their interaction and relationship with other people, differently, men focus their communication on completing tasks. One reason why females use affiliative strategies more often may be because they consider that organizations do not care about their needs as much as they care about men’s needs (Wood & Conrad, 1983), motivating them to engage in communication behaviors that look for emotional caring responses. Among these special needs for women include Employee Voice Behavior, help with family matters, and role models (Gorden, Andersori, & Bruning, 1992; Schwartz, 1992). Baker (1991) argued that men and women differ in communication styles in the workplace, in professional settings. For instance, when managing conflict women show less competitiveness than males coworkers (Gayle, 1991). Rossi and Todd-Mancillas (1987) argued that men make use of power strategies more often than women. Another study shows that females usually engage more in informal relationships, especially with their same gender (Brass, 1985). Literature based on organization dynamics argues that females tend to participate less than men when dealing with group activities (Johnson & Schulman, 1989). However, only when related to tasks behaviors; 19.

(27) When related to socio-emotional behaviors women participate more in this activities (Piliavian & Martin, 1978). Strodtbeck and Mann (1956) suggest men are more likely to start communication and provide their ideas, unlike women who are more careful, think more before giving an opinion and ask for suggestions from other peers. Female workers tend to take the role as mediators in the work place, they would rather keep silent than to disrupt other coworkers or supervisors by engaging in Employee Voice Behavior that might result in further discussion or conflict among colleagues. Women who decide to speak their minds and speak up are generally seen as aggressive, too assertive, or too straightforward. Therefore, as women tend to be more sensitive to the risks associated with raising their voice, they more likely choose to keep silent (Farrell & Finkelstein, 2007). After reviewing the literature, the following hypothesis was developed. Hypothesis 3. Gender moderates the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior such that this relationship is stronger when employees are men than when they are female.. 20.

(28) CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY In this section, the research framework, hypotheses, sample, data collection, measurement and questionnaire design will be introduced.. Research Framework The present study proposed Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) as the independent variable, while Employee Voice Behavior acted as the dependent variable. Psychological Safety acted as the mediator on the relationship between LMX and employee behavior, and Gender served as moderator on the relationship between LMX and Employee Voice Behavior. The research framework is shown in Figure 3.1.. Psychological Safety. H1. Leader-Member Exchange. Employee Voice Behavior H3. Control Variables Gender.   . Figure 3.1 Research framework. 21. Age Level of Education Job Tenure.

(29) Research Hypotheses Based on the objective of this study, the following hypotheses were proposed: Hypothesis 1. Leader-Member Exchange is related to Employee Voice Behavior. Hypothesis 2. Psychological Safety mediates the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior. Hypothesis 3. Gender moderates the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange and Employee Voice Behavior such that this relationship is stronger when employees are male than when they are female.. Research Sample The target sample for this study were private organization employees in the areas of Finance, Customer Service, and Sales in different organizations in El Salvador, with the only requirements of holding a position in any of those areas previously mentioned and being employees in a private organization in which they have to report to another employee in a higher position. One of the key factors that influence an organization’s success depends on how much employees are willing to perform Employee Voice Behavior. Many studies have shown that Employee Voice Behavior is positively related to innovation (LePine & Van Dyne, 1998; Scott & Bruce, 1994), employee commitment (Hirschman, 1970), collective learning (Detert & Burris, 2007; Morrison & Milliken, 2000), higher employee retention (Spencer, 1986), among many others that will benefit for the organization’s overall success. This study focused on the private sector only, taking as a sample at least 6 private organizations in the service area, this organizations were selected to provide a representation of the private sector in El Salvador. This population was chosen because of the interest in examining how this sample engaged in Employee Voice Behavior depending on the quality of relationships with leaders in a developing country.. 22.

(30) Data Collection For this study data was collected by supplying an online self-administered questionnaire. Such questionnaire consisted of selected items from scales that measure the four selected variables: Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, and Psychological Safety. The sample was comprised from at least 6 private enterprises in El Salvador, Salvadorans working in the private sector in the areas of finance, customer service, and/or sales were surveyed. The sampling approaches for this study were snowball and convenience sampling. After the final revision of the questionnaire, the researcher developed an online-based questionnaire using Google Forms. Later, the researcher contacted through email a list of managers from different organizations and asked them to distribute the link of the questionnaire through the intranet in each of their organizations. Participants received an email with the link of the questionnaire asking for their collaboration with the study. Also, included in the email there was a note that asked participants to share the questionnaire’s link with their own contacts. In addition, social media was used to reach more participants. The researcher used Facebook private messages to send the link to more employees who met the required criteria to participate in the study. As well, participants were asked to pass down the link to more people that they had in their list of contacts. The responses from the questionnaire were received by the researcher through the Google Form document and then directly transferred to SPSS 23.0 to be analyzed. This study obtained a total of 200 valid responses, divided as follows: 100 female employees’ responses and 100 male employees’ responses. The responses were collected between March 11th and April 27th, 2019.. 23.

(31) Research Procedure Figure 3.2. Research Framework provides a general description of the process that this study went through. Research Topic Development Research Background, Purpose, and Question Development Literature Review Measurement Selection Conduct Pilot Test Collect and Analyze Data Main Study Collection and Data Analysis Present Findings, Conclusion, and Future Suggestions Figure 3.2. Research procedure After a series of brainstorming sessions, review of several past studies, and discussions with assigned advisor, a research topic was developed. After reviewing the most important literature on the chosen topic, the research background, purpose, and questions were developed. Researcher kept continuously reading articles related to the chosen variables to gain more background knowledge and drawn the respective hypotheses to be studied. Later, it was ensured that the generalizability and validation of the measurement scales chosen were a perfect fit for the current study. To guarantee the internal reliability of the data, it was essential to conduct a pilot test prior to the main study. Applicable for both pilot test and main study. Researcher conducted a quantitative study. An online self-administered questionnaire was developed. After finalizing the data collection process, in both cases: pilot and main study, the statistical software SPSS 23.0 was used to analyze the collected data; descriptive data, correlation and hierarchical regression analysis were carried out.. 24.

(32) Lastly, the results and the literature review were discussed with the main goal of reporting the findings, finally conclude the study and provide future suggestions.. Questionnaire Design This questionnaire used scales originally developed in English with stablished validity and reliability; it comprised five parts measuring three variables of research interest: Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, and Psychological Safety. Part one consisted of two screening questions that read as follow: Do you work in a private organization? and, Do you work in the Finance/ Customer Service/ Sales department? Part two asks questions regarding demographic information (age, gender, level of education, and job tenure). Part three consisted of 7 questions measuring the independent variable, Leader-Member Exchange. Part four consisted of 7 questions measuring the dependent variable, Employee Voice Behavior. Lastly part five, consisted of 21 item questions measuring Psychological Safety. In total, the questionnaire consisted of 35 items to measure the three variables. Since the targeted population came from employees in El Salvador, all the questions were translated into Spanish. Spanish is the official language spoken in El Salvador. For this process, two professionals were asked to review the questionnaire. First, a native Spanish speaker professional with an English degree translated all the questions from English to Spanish. Later, a Finance professional with advanced English knowledge reviewed the questions to guarantee all items were adequate to measure what it was intended and were coordinated with the initial meaning of the questions in English. Lastly, the researcher reviewed all the questions before sending out the questionnaire to be filled.. Measurement The following measurement scales were selected for each variable.. Leader-Member Exchange The instrument that was used to measure subordinates’ perception of Leader-Member Exchange is the 5-point Likert scale LMX-7 developed by Graen and Uhl-Bien in 1995. This scale consists of 7 items that measure 3 different dimensions: respect, trust, and obligation. Internal 25.

(33) consistency reliability alpha for this measurement is 0.92. Participants responded according to each question. For instance, when the participant was asked “How well does your leader understand your job problems and needs?” the participant’s answer ranged from “Not a bit (1)” to “A great deal (5)”. Other sample questions were, “How well does your leader recognize your potential?”, and “How would you characterize your working relationship with your leader?”. Employee Voice Behavior Employee Voice Behavior was measured by Vakola and Bouradas (2005) 7-item scale. It is a 5-point Likert Scale in which participants responded from 1 = never to 5 = always. Participants were ask how often and how easily they express their disagreements concerning “company issues, department’s issues, their job, issues related to job satisfaction such as salary, working conditions, etc”. Cronbach Alpha value of this measurement is 0.87. Although this instrument is originally meant to measure silence behavior, Nikolaou, Vakola and Bouradas (2008) used it to measure Employee Voice Behavior.. Psychological Safety The instrument that was used to measure Psychological Safety is based on Brown and Leigh (1996) scale. This scale has a total of 21 items and it consist of 6 subscales: supportive management, role-clarity, contribution, recognition, and self-expression, and challenge. Some sample items were: “management makes it perfectly clear how my job is to be done”, and “doing my job well really makes a difference”. This scale has a 0.84 reliability.. Gender Individuals have different motives to communicate with others. Regarding Gender, demographic questions distinguished employees into group 1 = male and group 2 = female, for better analysis.. 26.

(34) Control Variables Taking into consideration previous studies on Employee Voice Behavior, this study included three demographic variables as control variables: level of education, age, and job tenure. Level of education may influence employees’ willingness to engage in Employee Voice Behavior (Janssen & Gao, 2015). Ng and Feldman (2009) indicated that age should also be taken into consideration; older individuals may behave differently than younger individuals. Lastly, Stamper and Van Dyne (2011) argued that employees that have been working for a longer time in an organization may feel more comfortable engaging in Employee Voice Behavior. Therefore, this study considered the period each employee has been working in the current organization, job tenure.. Pilot Test The main objectives of conducting a pilot test are to have a better understanding of the sample population’s characteristics, to make sure the measurement being used is reliable, and to analyze the relationship among variables. For this pilot test, the data collected came from Salvadoran employees working in the private sector, with job positions in the areas of either finance, customer service, or sales. The sample size consisted of 40 employees and the data collection period lasted for one week using convenience and snowball sampling approach by distributing an online questionnaire consisting of 35 questions, demographic questions, plus screening questions. Table 3.1 presents the demographic information of the sample population. For this study, 20 participants were male (50%) and the other 20 were female employees (50%). 19 respondents fell into the category of 25-34 years of age (47.5%) and 7 fell on the category of 18-24 years of age (17.5%), being the two highest percentages of the total population. In regards to level of education, 29 participants (72.5%) reported to have a bachelor’s degree as their highest level of education, and 9 participants (22.5%) reported to have a master’s degree as their highest level of education. Lastly, 15 of the 20 participants (37.5%) reported to have been working at the same organization for 5 or more than 5 years, and 10 participants (25%) reported to have between 1-2 years of job tenure in the same organization.. 27.

(35) Table 3.2 indicates the means, standard deviations, the correlations among variables, and the Cronbach’s Alpha values of each variable. Pearson’s Correlation Analysis and Reliability Analysis were carried out to have a better understanding of the correlations among variables and to confirm the reliability of the instrument being used to measure the mentioned variables. After conducting the reliability analysis, the Cronbach’s Alpha value for each variable were as follows: LeaderMember Exchange with .90, Employee Voice Behavior with .93, and Psychological Safety with .92. A Cronbach’s Alpha above .70 is considered acceptable. Lastly, after conducting Pearson’s Correlation Analysis, it was found that all the variables had a positive significant correlation to each other. Leader-Member Exchange was positively correlated to Employee Voice Behavior (r= .64, p< .01), and Psychological Safety (r= .62, p< .01). Employee Voice Behavior was positively correlated to Psychological Safety (r= .76, p< .01).. 28.

(36) Table 3.1 Descriptive Statistics for Pilot Test (N=40) Item. Frequency. Percentage. 1. Gender Male Female Total. 20 20 40. 50% 50% 100%. 2. Age 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-56 More than 54 Total. 7 19 5 6 3 40. 17.5% 47.5% 12.5% 15% 7.5% 100%. 3. Level of Education High School Diploma Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Doctorate’s Degree Total. 1 29 9 1 40. 2.5% 72.5% 22.5% 2.5% 100%. 4. Job Tenure Less than 1 year 1-2 years 3-4 years 5 or more than 5 years Total. 8 10 7 15 40. 20% 25% 17.5% 37.5% 100%. Table 3.2 Mean, Standard Deviation, Correlation and Reliability for Pilot Test (N=40) Variable. Mean. S.D.. 1. 2. 1.. Leader-Member Exchange. 3.98. 0.69. (0.90). 2.. Employee Voice Behavior. 3.65. 0.86. .64**. (0.93). 3.. Psychological Safety. 5.45. 0.88. .62**. .76**. Note. N= 40; **p <.01.; Number in parentheses represents Cronbach’s alpha value. 29. 3. (0.92).

(37) Data Analysis IBM SPSS 23.0 was utilized to perform data analysis. Other statistical techniques such as Descriptive Analysis, Pearson’s Correlation Analysis, and Hierarchical Regression Analysis were utilized to test hypotheses.. Descriptive Analysis This technique provided an overview regarding the percentage and frequency of the participant's demographic data. The descriptive statistics in this study included demographic information such as gender, age, education level, and job tenure of the employee in a private organization. The mean and standard deviation were used to investigate all the variables in this study including: Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender.. Pearson’s Correlation Analysis To have a better understanding of the linear relationship between two continuous variables (correlation) a Pearson’s Correlation Analysis was carried out. To display the degree of the correlation researchers adopted coefficient of correlation, Pearson’s r. In this study, correlation analysis was used to study the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender.. Hierarchical Regression Analysis Hierarchical Regression Analysis was carried out following three steps to determine the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender. Baron and Kenny’s (1986) three-step approach was adopted to test the mediating effect of Psychological Safety. Regarding the moderating effect of Gender, the following procedure of hierarchical regression analysis was carried out. For the first model control variables were included, and then Leader-Member Exchange and Gender individually were entered in the second model. Lastly, the interaction term of Leader-Member Exchange and Gender was added in the third model.. 30.

(38) CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This chapter presents the findings obtained after the analysis of the data collected to study the relationship between the variables: Leader-Member Exchange, Employee Voice Behavior, Psychological Safety, and Gender. This chapter is divided into four sections. The first section includes the results of the Descriptive Analysis carried out, the second section presents the results of the Pearson’s Correlation Analysis, the third section shows the validity of the study presenting the results from the Confirmatory Factor Analysis, and the fourth section presents the findings from the Hierarchical Regression Analysis focused on hypotheses testing.. Descriptive Statistics The demographic information included were gender, age, level of education, and job tenure. The sample of this study consisted of 100 male participants (50%) and 100 female participants (50%). The majority of participants fell in the categories of 18-24 years of age (67%) and 25-34 years of age (80%). 160 of the respondents (80%) reported to have a bachelor’s degree as their highest level of education and 29 respondents (14.5%) reported to have a master’s degree as their highest level of education. Regarding their job tenure in their current organization, 72 participants (36%) reported to have a job tenure of between 1-2 years and 60 participants (30%) reported to have a job tenure of 5 or more than 5 years. The frequency and percentage of the demographic information are presented in Table 4.1.. 31.