THE CULTURAL IMPLICATIONS FOR MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO EMPLOYEE VOICE

THE CULTURAL IMPLICATIONS FOR MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO EMPLOYEE VOICE

Name:

Course:

Professor’s Name:

University:

City (State):

Date:

The Cultural Implications for Multinational Corporations of Different Approaches to Employee Voice

The work environment today is increasingly changing, and one of these transformations involves offering workers better chance to bring out their views regarding the running of the business. The study elaborates how today, businesses would either embrace direct or indirect forms of engaging the workers in business operations, especially decision-making based on the cultural views and perceptions. Workers in Western countries such as the UK and the U.S. prefer direct forms of employee voice because the cultures advocate for more liberal approaches as opposed to some Asian nations that are paternalistic in the leadership approaches and are likely to heed to the final decisions by the organisational managers. MNCs learn vital lessons from the report, especially with regard to knowing how different cultures impact on employees through the application of suitable analysis approaches. Depending on the approach the business takes, employee voice increases the chances of achieving employee satisfaction as well as provides the chance to make decisions that consider the interests and desires of everyone.  

Description of Employee Voice

The term employee voice refers to the influence workers have in matters of concern or interest to them at the place of work. The phrase describes a style of two-way dialogue that permits workers to influence operations at work and encompasses the processes of participation, upward communication, involvement and upward problem. Budd et al. (2010) refer to employee voice as a term that is utilized to describe a number of structures and processes which enable, and sometimes empower workers directly or indirectly, to add to making decisions at the place of work. Budd et al. (2010) view employee voice as a manner through which workers influence the actions and practices of the employer. The notion entails the issuance of opportunities for workers to express grievances, discontent, or complaints and influence the powers of organizational leaders. Scholars believe multinational companies need to be conversant with the issue of employee voice to be in a good position to operate in the different global markets where the culture has significant effects on business operations.

Different Approaches to Employee Voice

Employers seeking to promote employee voice need to understand the various approaches they could use to involve workers in decision-making at the organization. The employer can either engage the workers’ voice directly or indirectly. Direct voice encompasses the mechanisms which allow for direct worker participation with the management in making decisions influencing their work and the immediate work environment, including meetings between organizational leaders and employees, appraisal systems, problem solving teams, and formally formulated teams (Gilman et al. 2015). The leaders seeking to employ direct voice should consider putting their employees close, and should always notify them of upcoming plans early enough to give them time to think on how to react to the matter.

Indirect voice, on the other hand, entails the articulation of employee perceptions through some form of collective worker representation such as trade or workers’ union or non-union formations of collective representations such as work councils or consultative committees.  Even though scholars have varying perceptions on the matter, Budd et al. (2010) argue that trade unions provide the most suitable channel for employees to air their views and voice and fundamentally compare voice with union strength and impact. Such an approach is common in developed nations where worker voice has for many decades been aired through union representation and recognition. An outstanding exemption is the U.S., where worker opposition to unions as champion of voice is more intense causing companies to embrace other mechanisms, including welfare capitalism (Bowen & Blackmon 2003). Still, many of the nations where trade unions were evidently active have encountered significant drop in representation of employees’ interests through such an approach with some evaluators arguing that such a vital form for the expression of worker voice is being wiped out.  

Various investigators have carried out studies to inquire the effectiveness of unions in championing for the employees’ voice, and even though the findings might show some slight differences many agree that union members have little intentions to quit their work than workers who do not belong to any union. Kim et al. (2010), for example, performed a regression analysis using information from the country-wide 2001 Harris Poll to find out the factors influencing employee satisfaction. The survey showed substantial interactions between job satisfaction and union membership and between organisational commitment and union membership. Kim et al. (2010) from the study that dissatisfied employees who do not belong to any union have higher chances of quitting their work than workers who belong to a particular union. The study further showed how employees who are not part of any union, and have low commitment to their work are more likely to quit their job than members of a union.

It is vital to note, however, that the idea of employee voice has shifted from the traditional indirect approaches whereby unions represent the workers. Today, many businesses embrace more inclusive and direct mechanisms, which permit the worker to have a say over the employer and employee interests and to take part in decision-making at the organization. The advantages associated with the direct engagement approaches push most developed nations to embrace the method. Permitting direct employee voice makes it easy to achieve commitment and loyalty, and also provides the chance to record better performance and lower absenteeism (Wilkinson et al. 2018).

Other studies show how employing a variety of approaches works best in promoting good performance. Wilkinson et al. (2018) argue that even though many believe only formal structures promote employee voice, the recent years have experienced the expansion and essence of informal voice.  Wilkinson et al. (2018) give the example of non-programmed relationships between business leaders and workers, which offer chances for consultations and information-sharing. Actually, many workers happen to value the chance to have a say and add to the work-related issues that matter most to them, and they also need a range of voice optional rather than a single approach. Such findings create much contest in the literature, and bring to light the varying aspects of worker voice.

Cultural Implications

It happens that different countries have varying perceptions on the issue of employee voice with some preferring certain types of voice over others. Wilkinson et al. (2018) write that whereas extensive literature exist on employee voice in western nations, but rather less about the situation of worker voice the Asian Pacific region. Wilkinson et al. (2018) believe the distinctions exist due to both cultural and institutional factors such as laws and regulations, and how these may apply both to worker voice behaviour and worker voice arrangement. Representation and governance of employee voice are implanted in certain institutional situations that have deep cultural and historical roots, thus it is possible to find much variation not only between Asian Pacific states and the rest of the world, but also within the Asian Pacific nations themselves (Wilkinson et al. 2018). The UK is a good example of a country that could provide a suitable host environment for MNCs considering to operate in the region and promote employee voice as well. It happens that the UK is a large, globally open economy with ongoing, considerable flows of outward and inward foreign direct investment (Johnstone & Ackers 2015). The liberal market economy promotes a scenario where every worker has the right to give their perception about the work processes and the same happens in the U.S. which is experiencing more direct forms. Other than the rise in direct approaches of worker voice such countries experience significant reduction in union representation and presence.

The cultural variations create some differences in union arrangements across different states and in the extent to which the state and workers perceive such formations. An examination of bilateral project on labour between the U.S. and China revealed substantial variations between the American and Chinese environments, which influenced the application of employee-management committees across China (Wilkinson et al. 2018). Strong state participation in these committees facilitated the existence of better opportunities for employee voice and democracy at the place of work. Contrary, a survey carried out in Malaysia exposed that trade unions has issues with leadership and insignificant influence over employee voice because of intense restrictions from employers and the government. The situation is different in Korea where union members show much satisfaction with their union structures than those who do not belong to any union. The study revealed substantial structural weaknesses to non-union worker representation, which derails the attempts to promote direct engagement. An analysis later carried out in Korea by Kim et al. (2010) to examine the impact of unions in accordance with the implementation of high-performance work approaches discovered that much tension was involved with the job givers when more comprehensive high-performance work structures were utilized.

Many nations in the larger Asian continent appear to have significant challenges promoting employee voice because of their paternalistic leadership approach, even though some scholars find that the approach can either promote or hinder worker voice. It is clear authoritarian leaders affect employee voice by lowering their judgment. Benevolent paternalistic leaders, on the other hand, promote employee voice by promoting both status judgment and leader-employee interaction. Moral paternalistic leaders appear to build employee voice through active interaction between workers and organizational leaders. It is also common to witness humble leadership in Asia, which is linked to increased encouragement to employee voice. The study by Gollan et al. (2015) explains how the perception a culture has about voice could determine how immigrant workers are likely to behave differently in work contexts that do not embrace the approaches the person’s culture accepts or embraces. Whereas a worker from countries such as the UK or the U.S. may want to participate more in making decisions that determine how the organisation functions, Chinese migrant employees, for example, may remain silent when their rights are not respected (Gollan et al. 2015). Such findings indicate that employees who are more susceptible to job insecurity, family dependency, social networks and demographic elements are not likely to use their voice and would rather remain silent in such situations. Gollan et al. (2015) further find that the silence leads them to be slow in championing for their labor rights and social security benefits. Organizational leaders understand the need to overcome organisational factors that could promote silence because this could lead the disadvantaged to have no voice and remain silent in exchange for the job, but by doing so they stand a chance of experiencing unfair treatment.

Various organizations respond differently in offering voice to workers belonging to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community, and this would depend on the cultural provisions and norms. Gunawardana (2014) study organisational frameworks promoting LGBT voice, and utilize participant data from 15 LGBT workers as well as information from five international mobility business leaders to evaluate the functions of employee resource groups. The study in utilising the scope, depth, and measure of voice to set the survey in accordance with stereotype threat theory shows how stigmatisation and discrimination are major factors affecting employee voice. Gollan and Xu (2014) perform a similar study by exploring the isolation and separation from the workforce that LGBT workers encounter because of their sexual orientation, and how this can interfere with their voice at the place of work. Gollan and Xu (2014) respond to perceived risks and real encounter of stigmatisation in the place of work by highlighting the need for LGBT voice in businesses, while explaining the concerns and difficulties for such workers in openly talking about their sexual orientation at the workplace. The discrimination against members of the LGBT usually differ with the societal perception about such individuals with societies that do not allow same sex intimacy such as China and most Arabian nations experiencing more constrained working environments (Gunawardana 2014). Such forms of discrimination, however, are not as severe in some developed Western nations such as the UK and the U.S. where laws permitting same-sex relationship exist and the society does not show much discrimination against such people (Gunawardana 2014). A suitable way to overcome the voice issues LGBT employees experience is to promote LGBT worker networks to help mitigate isolation at the place of work, and to directly and indirectly offer them with voice in the business (Gunawardana 2014). Failing to address the voice issues facing LGBT workers may derail the attempts to achieve good worker performance in settings where workers from different cultures come together yet some permit either same-sex marriage or intimacy or both.

Examining employee voice in Arabic nations shows some countries are yet to give workers the complete right to partake in decision-making. The UAE, for example, knows that because each firm must have employees to work and build the business, so the workers require rights in their work. The knowledge drive several companies in the UAE to promote employee voice taking into account that basic human rights such as the freedom for expression are covered by the country’s constitution (Harlos 2001). Even as the UAE is perceived to be one of the liberal nations in the Gulf region, claims emerge that the cultural requirements deter some employees, especially female workers from bring forward their complaints or suggestions (Harlos 2001). The cultural dominance of men over female needs to end if all workers in the UAE and other Arabian nations are to witness increased employee voice.

Implications for MNCs

Multinational corporations witness a number of effects by taking the employee voice into account. MNCs by promoting employee voice can result in beneficial results for both workers and the organization. The provision permits workers to forward their problems and interact with the leadership, whilst for job providers it increases the chances of improving communication, productivity, and efficiency (Kaufman 2015). MNCs learn the essence of understanding the cultures they aspire to work in, as well as know how workers are likely to respond to certain leadership approaches to avoid issues that could affect the employees’ interest to perform their duties.

MNCs seeking to advance their employee voice should always know that overall, the concept is best known as an intricate and uneven set of purposes and meanings  with external regulations and internal management choices playing influential roles. Companies aspiring to build proper employee relationship should pay attention on external factors such as state regulations and the cultural effects on individuals and the entire society. Culture has immense effects on people’s decision and way of life as it appears in the Hofstede’s structure. Harlos (2001) inform about the need to consider cultural factors because today cultural intelligence acts as an precursor of voice behaviour. The results from an analysis by Harlos (2001) show that migrant workers with higher levels of cultural intelligence prefer work environments where the leader maintains constant interaction with workers to come up with suitable ways of running the business. The survey further reveals that migrant workers with higher cultural intelligence were more likely to embrace behaviours that make them view voice as being a vital right. Organizational leaders who consider both the effects of external factors and the cultural impact have higher chances of promoting voice at the organization.

More importantly, MNCs should know that the society today experiences complex economic, social, and environmental issues and that interoragnisational and cross-sector interactions shall provide the chance to address the challenges. An interpretive evaluation of the practitioners’ views exposes that features of voice are deemed vital for the success of cross-cultural relations and builds trust (Kaufman 2015). Promoting voice in such contexts provides the avenue from which the clashing aims of the collaborators can be achieved, bring together multiple sides from different professions and organizations, and it increases the likelihood of working together.  

Conclusion

The study explores the concept of employee voice and elaborates how different forms of engaging workers have varying effects on workers and outcome. Direct voice allows for personal involvement of workers in decision-making whereas indirect voice implies to the use of other parties to represent the workers’ views and requirements such as through the use of unions. The evaluation reveals how whereas some cultures prefer direct engagement, some value the trade and workers unions and all these depend on the cultural perceptions. Still, direct approaches happen to be more influential to employees who become more interested and motivated to do their job, and it is the reason why many organizations are shifting from indirect approaches, or apply both structures. MNCs learn the need to understand a particular culture before investing in the region to know whether direct or indirect methods work best. The organizational leaders should utilize appropriate structures such as Hofstede’s model, which illustrates how cultures differ in one aspect or the other. 

Reference List

Bowen, F, & Blackmon, K 2003,  ‘Spirals of silence: The dynamic effects of diversity on organizational voice,’ Journal of Management Studies, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1393-1417.

Budd, J, Gollan, P, & Wilkinson, A 2010, ‘New approaches to employee voice and participation in organizations,’ Human Relations, vol. 63 no. 3, pp. 303-310.

Gilman, M, Raby, S, & Pyman, A 2015, ‘The contours of employee voice in SMEs: The importance of context,’ Human Resource Management Journal, 25, no. 4, pp. 563-579.

Gollan, J et al. 2015, Voice and involvement at work: Experience with non-union representation,  Routledge, Oxford.

Gollan, J, & Xu, Y 2014, ‘Re-engagement with the employee participation debate: Beyond the case of contested and captured terrain,’ Work, Employment and Society, vol. 62, pp. 1-13.

Gunawardana J 2014, ‘Reframing employee voice: A case study in Sri Lanka’s export processing zones. Work, Employment & Society, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 452-468.

Harlos, P 2001, ‘When organizational voice systems fail: More on the deaf-ear syndrome and frustration effects,’ The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 324–342.

Johnstone, S, & Ackers, P 2015, Finding a voice at work? New perspectives on employee relations, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Kim, J, MacDuffie, J, & Pil, F 2010, ‘Employee voice and organizational performance: Team versus representative influence,’ Human Relations, 3, doi.org/10.1177%2F0018726709348936

Kaufman, E 2015, ‘Theorising determinants of employee voice: An integrative model across disciplines and levels of analysis,’ Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 25, pp. 19-40.

Wilkinson, A, Mowbray, P, & Sun, J 2018, ‘Employee voice in the Asia Pacific,’ Asia Pacific Journal Human Resources, doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12185

Wilkinson, A, et al. 2018, ‘Voices unheard: Employee voice in the new century,’ The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 711-724.