Voice and silence in organizations

• Author: Moasa, H.
• Position: National School of Political and Administrative Studies
• Pages: 33-40

Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov

Series VII: Social Sciences • Law • Vol. 4 (53) No. 2 - 2011

VOICE AND SILENCE IN

ORGANIZATIONS

Horia MOAŞA1

Abstract: Unlike previous research on voice and silence, this article breaks

the distance between the two and declines to treat them as opposites. Voice

and silence are interrelated and intertwined strat egic forms of

communication which presuppose each other in such a way that the absence

of one would minimize completely the other’s presence. Social actors are not

voice, or silence. Social actors can have voice or silence, they can do both

because they operate at multiple levels and deal with multiple issue s a t

different moments in time.

Key words: voice, silence, minorities, organizational culture.

1 National School of Political and Administrative Studies.

1. Introduction

Voice and silence are interrelated and

intertwined [3] strategic forms of

communication (Scott, 1993; Grice, 1989)

which denote expressing or revealing

ideas, opini ons and aspects of identity,

respectively withholding or non-disclosing

them [13], [3], [8]. Characterized by being

active, conscious, intentional and

purposeful, voice and silence become

critical components of social interaction

[13]. Voice and silence presuppose each

other and social actors have both voice and

silence because they operate at multiple

levels and deal with multiple issues at

different moments in time.

This definition builds upon and re-

conceptualizes recent research studies that

employ the concepts of voice and silence

to address issues of political representation

and communicative influence within

organizations.

Similar to previous research on voice and

silence, this definition employs the t erms

in a metaphorical sense: voi ce and silence

have moved beyond the simple definitions

that relate them to the presence or absence

of sound and speech, towards definitions

that tightly connect them to po litical

representation, influence and equal-

consideration [3], [14].

Unlike such research, however, this

definition breaks the distance between

voice and silence, and declines to treat

them as opp osites. For example, the 2003

JMS special issue on voice and silence

though making an important step of

shifting the analysis from structure to

agency still maintains silence separate

from voice since the issue is ‘devoted to

papers that, in one way or another, focus

on the question of when and how people in

organizational settings will choose voice

and how and when they wi ll choose

silence’ [9].