When (collective) losses loom larger than voice pains: the effect of loss framing on willingness to speak up at work

Previous research indicates that employees often believe that it is too risky to voice their concerns about organizational problems; however, prospect theory suggests that people are more willing to take risks when problems are framed in terms of potential losses rather than potential gains. To reconcile these perspectives, we draw on prospect theory and the principle of loss aversion to explain why loss framing (compared to gain framing) will increase employees’ willingness to engage in voice behavior. In Study 1, we used a scenario experiment and found that participants who considered potential losses (compared to gains) after writing about a problem at work were more willing to speak up. Further, integrating prospect theory with the research on other orientation, we extended these findings in Study 2, by hypothesizing an interaction between loss (compared to gain) framing and collective (compared to self) framing. Using experimental vignette methodology, we found the most voice behavior with framing that highlights potential for collective losses. In Study 3, we conducted a multi-wave, multi-source survey study using three organizational samples from different industries – healthcare, consulting, and auditing – and again found that employees were more willing to engage in voice when framing made collective losses salient. Altogether, our three studies integrate prospect theory and research on other orientation to show that framing, particularly in terms of losses and collective outcomes, is an important tool for eliciting employee voice. Theoretical and practical implications of our work, as well as ideas for future research, are also discussed