quality circles, suggestion schemes, and worker input into brieWng groups; and
complaints about fair treatment, such as grievance procedures, speak-up programs,
and whistle-blowing. TheWrst two of these typically appear within discussions of
HRM as they are explicitly aimed at ‘adding value’ within the context of organ-
izational goals. They are designed to give workers a chance to contribute to
managerial decision-making, either in their day-to-day work or through formal
and managerially instigated processes that tap into employees’ skills and ideas.
However, this overlooks the role that voice plays in articulating employee concerns
about management style and practice beyond the relatively limited conWnes of how
their own work is organized. Whilst it may not be immediately apparent how this
contributes to organizational goals, voice can be seen as an alternative to exit and
thus, amongst other things, to reduced levels of labor turnover (Hirschmann 1970 ).
It may also help to weed out supervisors who treat workers badly or are poor at
communications, and so help to improve productivity through the provision of
a fairer deal at work.
This chapter does not presuppose the dominance of any single style of people
management—such as high commitment—nor does it assume that voice is likely
to operate in precisely the same way in diVerent countries or sectors. The
interplay of forces between nation states, large multinational corporations, and
product and labor markets means that forms of voice vary depending on insti-
tutional, organizational, and workplace contexts (Katz and Darbyshire 2000 ;
Rubery and Grimshaw 2003 ). Even forms of voice sharing the same title may
diVer because of the rationale for their introduction, how they have been
implemented, and the inXuence of broader social systems. Workers’ expectations
from voice also diVer depending on the legal and vocational education systems,
the state of the product and labor markets, and the type of work on which they
are employed (Marchington et al. 1994 ; Kessler et al. 2004 ). Voice is probably
the area of HRM where tensions between organizational and worker goals,
and between shareholder and stakeholder views, are most apparent because it
connects with the question of managerial prerogative and social legitimacy.
This becomes even more complex when voice operates across organizational
boundaries as workers eVectively operate under the direction of two or more
sets of employers within a culture of contracting relations (Marchington et al.
2004 ).
The remainder of the chapter is structured as follows. First we develop
a framework within which diVerent forms of voice can be considered. Second,
we discuss links between embedded voice and worker perceptions, focusing on
the use of multiple and ‘deep’ techniques. Third, we analyze a number of factors
promoting or impeding voice at national, organizational, and workplace levels, in
so doing noting the tensions surrounding the concept. Finally, some conclusions
are drawn.
employee voice systems 233