As many of you know, Lucent has been researching the topic of Organisational Silence*. We conducted the latest phase with a medium sized professional services company (approx 120 employees) to investigate further the factors which cause Organisational Silence and to begin to understand the different degrees of silence versus openness inside organisations. And of course, what we really want to know is what can be done to prevent it.
What did we find?
The professional services company we worked with has a friendly, participative culture. The employees generally trusted the senior team and regarded their managers as approachable and accessible. Yet, even within this culture, just under 20% reported feeling uncomfortable speaking up about a problem or idea, suggesting there may be a sizeable minority who find it difficult to speak up under any conditions. Even more (around 40%) felt uncomfortable questioning a manager’s decision that they disagreed with – even if it may be damaging to the company.
We found that managers are the most critical factor in contributing to or preventing organisational silence. The manager relationship emerged as the most significant driver of speaking up, controlling for job level, and above organisational factors. Organisational factors, such as trust in leaders, having a learning culture, feeling valued and understanding the values of the company were found to influence speaking up, but not as much as the manager relationship. Age and tenure did not make a difference – but formal hierarchy (whether someone was called a manager or not) did have a small impact.
Interestingly, personality did predict whether someone found it comfortable to speak up. Psychologists talk about ‘the Big Five’ elements of personality. These are Extroversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability (often known by its opposite label, Neuroticism) and Openness (sometimes called Intellect). We found that Agreeableness and Emotional Stability both positively predicted speaking up, even controlling for job level.
Another factor which emerged from our interviews was the importance of people having previous positive (or negative) experiences of speaking out. Positive experiences build what psychologists call self-efficacy, which is the belief that you can do something successfully. People learn self-efficacy through their own experiences and through observing others – so people are more likely to speak out in an organisational culture where they have observed their managers and colleagues speaking up openly. And it helps if they have seen or have had experience of a manager acting on the information they have been given. Resilience was also considered important, as, we were told, you have to be able to take the knock-backs and accept those times when speaking out does not seem to make any difference.
So what?
So, there appears to be a sizeable minority who don’t feel comfortable speaking up, and may never have done so. Some of this is probably down to personality, but some is influenced by a person’s experiences and by the organisation they work in. And even those who feel comfortable speaking up, may not do so if they think it is pointless. So we believe there are things organisations can do to create a more open culture and reduce the conditions under which Organisational Silence will thrive:
- The line manager relationship is critical. When organisations train and support managers so that they build better relationships and are more accessible, they are able to respond more positively to challenge. They need to know how to be responsive and be given the autonomy to act. And if managers are recognised and rewarded for behaving like this, there’s much more chance of building a positive, more open culture.
- Time is also a factor. Managers and teams need the time to seek input and value openness – silence is more likely to prosper if teams are constantly busy.
- Past experiences matter. Organisations can help to build their employees’ self-efficacy by providing positive speak up experiences, and by publicly acknowledging and rewarding times when people have successfully spoken out about an idea or raised an important issue.
- Organisations which value individual contribution and which seek explicitly to learn from mistakes are more likely to encourage speaking out. But these values need to be authentic, and supported by behaviours from top leaders down. And they should be followed through in all processes especially appraisal, reward and recognition.
- And finally, it’s no surprise that relationships are what matter. Hierarchy can create restraint and this helps silence thrive. Organisations that want to be open should actively encourage the building of networks and connections across levels and functions, especially from the most senior leaders to the youngest newcomers. Encouraging people to build personal relationships and really appreciate the worlds of those at different levels of experience, age and backgrounds can make a fundamental difference to your organisation and its performance.
