This document analyzes different forms of employee voice systems and how they may challenge managerial prerogative. It discusses direct and indirect forms of employee voice, with direct forms like participation and engagement giving employees more say and potentially limiting managerial decision-making power. While employee voice can challenge managerial authority by allowing employees to voice dissatisfaction or make their own decisions, it may also improve productivity and performance if a content workforce is achieved. Overall employee voice seems to be an important consideration for modern organizations, though it does constrain management prerogative to some extent.

1. Evaluate the different forms of employee voice systems in a workplace and critically analyse why
active employee voice may be seen as a challenge to managerial prerogative.
Conor O’Dwyer.
13306811.
MG332 Work and Organisations.
Lecturer: Dr Eugene Hickland.
Word Count: 1493
02/03/2016

2. SignedPlagiarismStatement.
I herebycertifythatIunderstandwhatplagiarismisandthat thisessayisentirelymyownwork.
Neitherthe paperinitsentiretynorpartsthereof have beenpublishedelsewhere ineitherpaperor
electronicformunlessindicatedthroughreferencing.
Signed:

3. Employee Voice hasbecome ahottopicinbusinessinrecenttimes.The sharpdeclineinTrade
Unionrepresentationwithinthe workplace coincidingwiththe introductionof lawssuchasthe E.U
InformationandConsultationDirective 2002, describedby Dundon(2007) as givingemployeesa
legal rightto be informedandconsultedshouldtheyoptin,haspromptedcompaniestomake
employeevoice mechanismsapart of theirbusiness. There are numerousdifferentmechanismsof
implementingemployee voicewithinabusinesswhichcanbe dividedintodirectandindirect
mechanisms andwill be lookedatnextinthe essay.There isalsoa multitude of termsusedinplace
of voice suchas involvementorengagement, because of thisitishardto finda universal definition,
however,Dundon(2007) offersa gooddefinitionbywayof Boxall andPurcell (2003),definingit as
“a whole varietyof processesandstructureswhichenableandattimesempoweremployees,
directlyandindirectly,tocontribute todecisionmakinginthe firm.”Sovoice isessentiallygiving
employeesasayin the runningof the company,and Blyton(2011) feelsthatitfostersa
commonalityof interestsandgreaterco-operationbetweenworkersandmanagement.Howeverit
isapparentthat voice mechanismscanindeedhinderthe managerialprerogative,somethingwhich
will be discussedlaterinthe essay.
Indirectformsof Employeesvoice involve employee representativesconsultingwithmanagement
overissuesinthe business.Fromanemployee’sperspective,these canbe a lesseffectiveform.The
mostobviousformof indirectvoice isTrade Unions,Noon(2007) identifiesthatwhenemployees
joina union,theyrecognise thattheirinterestsare notidentical totheiremployers.Ingranting
unionrecognition,Noonalsonotesthatthe companyagreestotreat themas the representative
voice of theiremployeesandnegotiationsare done viacollective bargaining.Howeverthere isno
obligationonthe employertorecognise the union,thisisnotedbyBlyton(2011) whoadds that
some unionformsof representationcanbe a hollow shell andineffective.Anotherformof indirect
voice isqualitycircles,describedbyProcter(2000) as temporary,voluntarygroupsconcernedwith
findingimprovementstoworkprocesses. Theyare agoodway for managementtogaininsightinto
the creativityof theiremployeesandattempttoattainnew ideasforthe business.QualityCircles
are oftencriticisedthoughdue totheirdegree of influence,Procteraddsthatthey’re the mostdilute
formof employeevoice, whilstBlyton(2011) adds that managementonlymonitorsengagement
fromthe side-lines.Fromthe perspectiveof management,indirectformsof voice maywell optimum
for themintermsof preservingtheirprerogative astheycancontrol what isdiscussedwith
employeesandoften,the final decisionisalwaysmade bythem.
Directformsof employeevoice involvesdirectcommunicationbetweenemployeesand
management. Dundon(2007) highlightsthe biggestdevelopmentinemployeevoice inrecenttimes
has beenashiftfromindirecttodirectforms.Despite the termsbeingusedinplace of employee
voice,participationandinvolvementare different.Involvementisthe weakerformof voice,defined
by Dundon(2007) as solicitingthe views,opinionsandco-operationof employeeswithoutsharingof
powerindecisionmaking. Whilstparticipationinvolves sharingpowerbetweenemployeesand
managementinthe makingof jointdecisions.Thisisclearlymore extensiveanddirectandWilkinson
(2011) feelsinvolvementisanecessaryprecursorforparticipation.A seconddirectformisteam-
working,seenbyProcter(2000) as more extensivethanotherforms,beingpersonal,allowing
employeesagreaterdegree of influenceandcontrol overwork.Thisistrue,team-workallows
workersgreaterautonomyandmore communication withbothco-workersandmanagement.
Employee engagementisthe mostcomplete type of directvoice,definedbyDundon(2007) as when
people employthemselvesphysically,emotionallyandcognitivelyintheirjobtowardsorganisation
goals.This givesemployees avoice inthe organisationand encouragesthemtomake itpart of their
life.Guest(2014) explainsitsuse incompanieswitharesource basedview,where theyseetheir
humanresourcesas key toleverage competitiveadvantage.Dundon(2007) highlightsleadership,

4. engagedmanagers,goodvoice mechanismsandintegrityas keydrivers of engagement.Directforms
of voice are oftenbetterfromthe perspective of the employeeastheyhave a biggersayinthe
company,formanagementhowever,some directforms,especiallythose like engagement,require
themto give upsome decisionmakingpower,whichmayaffecttheirprerogative.
Dundon(2007) highlightsanevaluative frameworkwhichcanbe usedto testthe thoroughnessand
effectivenessof the voice mechanismswhichexistwithinanorganisation.The areasinwhichit’s
examinedare depth,scope,level andform.Depthdescribesthe extenttowhichemployeesshare in
decisionmakingwhilstscope isthe range of issuesonwhichtheyhave asay, these are oftenlinked.
Level describesthe hierarchical level inthe orgat whichthe voice takesplace.Finally,formisthe
type of voice methodused,whetherit’sdirectorindirect.Thisframeworkisveryuseful andcanbe
usedbymanagementtodecide whattype of voice theywantto use dependingonhow muchpower
theywantto relinquishtoemployees.Theymaywantavoice type witha shallow depthinorderto
minimise challengestotheirprerogative.
The BusinessDictionary.comdescribesmanagementprerogativeasmanagement’sunqualified
authoritytoexercise itsdiscretionwithoutdiscussion.Implementingemployee voice inthe
organisationcancertainlyhinderthisprerogative. The firstwayinwhichmanagement’sprerogative
can be challengedbyemployee voice isthroughemployeeschallengingdecisions.Dundon(2004)
noteshowvoice can be an articulationof dissatisfaction.Employeesmayvoice theirdispleasure with
the actionsor decisionsof managementmeaningtheycouldgetverylittle done andnotgettodo
the thingswhichtheywant.Noon(2007) alsomakeslightof how employees,throughvoice,will vent
theirdissatisfactionwiththeirjobandtheirinvolvementindecisionmaking.Managementmayalso
lose a degree of powerwithinthe organisationasaresultif implementingemployee voice
mechanisms. Losingadegree of decisionmakingpowerwill come withsome formsof voice and
mostcertainlywill hindertheirprerogative.Aspartof the informationandconsultationdirective,
managementare requiredtoconsultonissuesregardingthe economicsituationof the organisation
and work/contractual arrangements,Dundon(2007) arguesthat these are issuesthatmanagement
wouldsee aswithintheirprerogative,especiallywhenthere’sanassumptiontheymustreachan
agreementonthese.Managementcanalsoexperience alossof powerwhere theyhave
implementedteamwork.The more independenceandautonomyallowedtothe teammaysee them
make theirowndecisionsonaregularbasis,notrequiringthe inputof management.Thispointis
backedby Procter(2000) whonotesthat whenteamsare givenresponsibilityformanaging
disciplineandattendance,the distinctionbetweenmanagersandnon-managerscanbecome
blurred.Thisisalsothe case withTrade Unions,Noon(2007) saysthat theyonlyexistbecause of an
imbalance of powerbetweenemployerandemployee.A Unionsobjective istotake some of this
powerawayfrom managementandgive ittoemployees.
Voice can alsodothingsto helpmanagersinrunninga smoothandefficientorganisation.Employee
voice hasbeenseentoimprove jobsatisfactioninemployees,Dundon(2004) notesthatvoice can
be seenas helpingtoreduce exitandimprove employeebehaviour,makingemployeesmore loyal
and committed.Havingadedicatedandcontentworkforce will have alotof benefitsfor
managementone of whichmaybe a more productive organisation,highlightedbyWilkinson(2011)
whofeelsitcouldleadtoincreasedproductivityandimprovedorganisational performance.Whilst
there isno definitivewaytomeasure these benefitsitiseasytounderstandhow theycan arise.
Withits array of differentformsandobviousgrowthinpopularityinrecenttimes,aconclusioncan
be drawn that employee voice ishere tostayinthe modernorganisation.Employeesare,atthe end
of the day,still the mostvaluable assetanorganisationhasandtheirwantto be heardin the
organisationistoolarge to simplybe ignored.There isnodoubtthatvoice can challenge the

5. management’sprerogative,somethingthatisan obviousworryforall managers,andWilkinson
(2011) saysthat voice doesn’thave toinvolve a“de jure sharingof authorityandpower”howeveras
deeperandmore directformsof voice become more popularanddemanded,the realityisthat
managersmay simplyhave agree togive upsome of theirprerogative inordertogainthe benefitsof
implementingemployee voiceintheirorganisation.Whilstthese benefitsare not,as yet,
‘scientifically’proven,whichmayexplainsomeorganisationsreluctance toimplementvoice,the
evidence thatalreadyexistsisenoughtoprove thatemployee voiceisoverall agoodthingforan
organisationtoadopt.

6. References.
Blyton.P,Heery.E, Turnbull.P(2011). Reassessing theEmploymentRelationship.New York:Palgrave
MacMillan.
BusinessDictionary http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/management-prerogative.html
Last accessed;01/03/16
Dundon. T, Rollinson. D(2007). Understanding EmploymentRelations.2nded.Maidenhead:
McGraw-Hill Education.
Dundon.T, Wilkinson.A,Marchington.M,Ackers.P. (2004). The Meanings andPurposesof
Employee Voice.TheInternationalJournalof Human ResourceManagement.15(6).
Guest.D. (2014). Employee Engagement:A Sceptical Analysis. Journalof OrganisationalEffectiveness
Peopleand Perfomance.1 (2),p141-156.
Noone.M, Blyton.P(2007). The Realities of Work. 2nd ed.Basingstoke:Palgrave.
Procter.S, Mueller.F(2000). Teamworking.Basingstoke:Macmillan.
Wilkinson.A,Fay.C.(2011). NewTimesforEmployee Voice. Human ResourceManagement.50(1),
p65-74.