Deciding to speak up or to remain silent following observed wrongdoing: The role of discrete emotions and climate of silence

Abstract

Employees who observe wrongdoing in the workplace must decide whether to speak up or remain silent. Despite the prevalence of wrongdoing in organizations, little is known about the decision-making of employees in this context and, in particular, the role of emotions in this process. We fill this void by proposing a model that specifies how discrete emotions influence employees’ decisions to engage in silence and whistle-blowing. Drawing on theoretical models of emotion and decision-making, we argue that employees’ emotional reactions to perceived wrongdoing involve a complex decision-making process involving experienced emotions, anticipatory emotions, and anticipated emotions. Specifically, we analyze the potential role of five discrete emotions in this process, arguing that anger and guilt predict whistle-blowing, whereas anticipatory fear and shame predict decisions to remain silent. We also discuss the role of anticipated regret in driving silence and whistle-blowing. Further, we suggest that an organizational climate of silence moderates the way employees respond emotionally and behaviorally following an episode of perceived wrongdoing. Finally, we conclude by discussing limitations, future directions, and implications for research.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 62 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.