IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jomorg/v24y2018i06p793-807_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relationship between organizational dissent and workplace freedom of speech: A cross-cultural analysis in Singapore

Author

Listed:
  • Croucher, Stephen M
  • Zeng, Cheng
  • Rahmani, Diyako
  • Cui, Xuejun

Abstract

This study is a test of the relationship between organizational dissent and the perception of workplace freedom of speech in Singapore. Through a quantitative analysis of 384 individuals in Singapore, the following was found: articulated dissent and latent dissent are positively correlated with workplace freedom of speech. In addition, multiple analysis of covariance analyses revealed nation of birth exerted considerable influence on articulated dissent, and latent dissent, but not on workplace freedom of speech. The results provide evidence of how nation of birth is related to an individual’s willingness to express dissent. Theoretical and practical implications for research into organizational behavior are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Croucher, Stephen M & Zeng, Cheng & Rahmani, Diyako & Cui, Xuejun, 2018. "The relationship between organizational dissent and workplace freedom of speech: A cross-cultural analysis in Singapore," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(6), pages 793-807, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:24:y:2018:i:06:p:793-807_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1833367216000730/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kelly Z. Peng & Fang Lee Cooke & Xuhua Wei, 2023. "Managing minority employees in organizations in Asia Pacific: Towards a more inclusive workplace?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 877-902, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:24:y:2018:i:06:p:793-807_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jmo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.