Speaking Up at Work: The Price for Rocking the Boat

"Speaking up looks more like sharing an opinion, questioning a decision, or countering an argument. Such disclosures, according to research, when thoughtfully received, help organizations course-correct and innovate, filling the knowledge void between management and staff. Yet despite the purported benefits, these types of conversations are often shut down before the ideas take flight."

"Consciously or unconsciously, our actions are influenced by implicit theories, or our established beliefs about people, places, and events. For example, two implicit theories that can mute conversations at work are that employees shouldn't voice concerns unless they have a solution and that challenging the boss will negatively impact career trajectory."

"Employees' level of self-confidence and self-efficacy also influence their willingness to share. Whereas self-confidence is a more universal construct, reflecting employees' perception of their capabilities and self-worth across domains, self-efficacy is situational and task-oriented."

Speaking up at work encompasses whistleblowing and more routine forms like sharing opinions, questioning decisions, and countering arguments. Research demonstrates that when organizations thoughtfully receive employee input, it enables course correction and innovation by filling knowledge gaps between management and staff. However, these conversations are frequently shut down before ideas develop. Multiple factors influence who speaks up and who remains silent, including implicit theories about workplace norms, such as beliefs that employees should only voice concerns if they have solutions or that challenging leadership damages careers. Employee self-confidence and self-efficacy also significantly impact willingness to share ideas. Self-efficacy, which is situational and task-specific, develops through performance tasks, vicarious experiences, and other influences identified by psychologist Albert Bandura.

Read at Psychology Today