Having "a say": Forms of voice in Australian call centres

McDonnell, A; Connell, J; Hannif, Z; Burgess, J

Having "a say": Forms of voice in Australian call centres

McDonnell, A Connell, J

Hannif, Z Burgess, J

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Employee Relations, 2014, 36 (3), pp. 214 - 234
Issue Date:: 2014-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	having a say.pdf	Published Version	208.19 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	McDonnell, A	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Connell, J https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9604-6756	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Hannif, Z	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Burgess, J	en_US
dc.date.issued	2014-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Employee Relations, 2014, 36 (3), pp. 214 - 234	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0142-5455	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/34234
dc.description.abstract	Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to bridge a gap in the call centre literature by considering how individual employees perceive their level of voice over workplace decisions. The inclusion of direct voice mechanisms is noteworthy as these are forms that have received much less attention vis-à-vis indirect voice. Design/methodology/approach: A mixed-method approach was utilized comprising focus groups and questionnaires from over 350 respondents in nine call centres in Australia. Findings: The most pervasive type of employee voice found across all call centres was through direct channels. The team leader was viewed as especially important in terms of employees asserting that they have some influence over workplace issues. There was evidence that the greater the number of voice mechanisms available the higher the perception of autonomy and influence over work tasks, pace of work and quality standards. Research limitations/implications: Greater consideration is needed in the voice literature at how employees perceive different mechanisms and how institutionalized and legitimate these are within organizations. There appeared to be minimal positive feedback on how union's influenced the workplace, even in unionized environments. We call for further research on how union representation and direct voice channels work together and the impact on key individual and organizational outcomes. Practical implications: Employees may view the provision of multiple voice channels more favourable than any particular mechanism. The role of the team leader appears especially crucial in positive perceptions of employee voice. Originality/value: Call centre environments may be changing for the better and effective team leader/employee relationships appear to be at the heart of these changes. The paper demonstrates that direct voice mechanisms dominate the case study sites and that employee perceptions of "being heard" are as important as the actual voice mechanisms. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Employee Relations	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1108/ER-01-2013-0005	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Industrial Relations	en_US
dc.title	Having "a say": Forms of voice in Australian call centres	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	3	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	36	en_US
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CMOS - Centre for Management and Organisation Studies
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	3	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	36	en_US

Abstract:

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to bridge a gap in the call centre literature by considering how individual employees perceive their level of voice over workplace decisions. The inclusion of direct voice mechanisms is noteworthy as these are forms that have received much less attention vis-à-vis indirect voice. Design/methodology/approach: A mixed-method approach was utilized comprising focus groups and questionnaires from over 350 respondents in nine call centres in Australia. Findings: The most pervasive type of employee voice found across all call centres was through direct channels. The team leader was viewed as especially important in terms of employees asserting that they have some influence over workplace issues. There was evidence that the greater the number of voice mechanisms available the higher the perception of autonomy and influence over work tasks, pace of work and quality standards. Research limitations/implications: Greater consideration is needed in the voice literature at how employees perceive different mechanisms and how institutionalized and legitimate these are within organizations. There appeared to be minimal positive feedback on how union's influenced the workplace, even in unionized environments. We call for further research on how union representation and direct voice channels work together and the impact on key individual and organizational outcomes. Practical implications: Employees may view the provision of multiple voice channels more favourable than any particular mechanism. The role of the team leader appears especially crucial in positive perceptions of employee voice. Originality/value: Call centre environments may be changing for the better and effective team leader/employee relationships appear to be at the heart of these changes. The paper demonstrates that direct voice mechanisms dominate the case study sites and that employee perceptions of "being heard" are as important as the actual voice mechanisms. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/34234