A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Journal of Business Ethics
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Journal of Business Ethics
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05799-5
ORIGINAL PAPER
Silenced byIncivility
KristinBain1 · KathrynColl2 · TamarA.Kreps3 · ElizabethR.Tenney4
Received: 21 December 2023 / Accepted: 7 August 2024
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2024
Abstract
Some theories suggest that women anticipate negative consequences (i.e., backlash) for counter-stereotypical actions and take
steps to avoid those consequences. We propose that women may expect gender-based backlash for voicing, or contributing
ideas that challenge the status quo, and thus engage in more silence (withholding those contributions) than men. However,
we also propose that women anticipate gender backlash, and hence engage in more silence, only when other group members’
behavior signals that deviating from prescribed gender norms is risky. In two studies with over 3000 participants, we found
that incivility increased women’s expectation that voicing would lead to gender backlash. In turn, women engaged in more
silence than men in uncivil groups, but we found no gender difference in silence in civil groups. Our findings reveal that
certain situations differentially alert people to interpersonal risks, thus influencing their decision to withhold contributions.
Keywords Incivility· Voice· Silence· Gender· Backlash avoidance
Introduction
“I was once told that 99% of the time, the perspective
and suggestions I offer about my business was “spot
on.” Seconds later I was told that the people I tell it
to think I’m “not nice,” because I offer it, not for any
other reason. In the end, management believed that
it was my problem that others didn’t perceive me as
“nice” and wanted me to change. I often wish for a way
to quantify the damage such decisions make on a com-
pany. Luckily, I’ve found smarter companies that make
fewer mistakes like these” (Metcalf, 2015; Facebook
comment responding to Sandberg & Grant, 2015).
“I’ve been spoken down to, laughed at, interrupted and
mansplained to more times than I can count!” (lawyer
explaining barriers she faced while trying to voice;
Cooper etal., 2021, p. 727).
Commentators including Rebecca Solnit (2012, 2014)
and Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant (2015) have written
widely popular and resonant essays pointing out that women
often feel silenced at work. In Internet comments responding
to these essays, hundreds of women shared experiences of
wanting to speak up with a contribution yet holding back.
In other words, these women could have engaged in voice
(sharing ideas, concerns, and opinions with the intention
of improving the workgroup or organization; Van Dyne &
LePine, 1998) but instead chose silence (i.e., withholding
those contributions; Morrison & Milliken, 2003). Unfortu-
nately, remaining silent in organizations can cost women:
Employees who withhold their contributions forgo benefits
that employees can gain from voicing, such as increased
status, better performance evaluations, and being perceived
as having promotion potential (Brykman & Raver, 2021;
Howell etal., 2015; Weiss & Morrison, 2018). Addition-
ally, individuals who frequently engage in silence may be
disproportionately denied benefits (An & Bramble, 2018)
and experience more burnout (Knoll etal., 2019; Sherf etal.,
Kristin Bain and Kathryn Coll have contributed equally.
* Kristin Bain
Kbain@saunders.rit.edu
1 Management Department, Saunders College ofBusiness,
Rochester Institute ofTechnology, 107 Lomb Memorial
Drive, Rochester, NY14623, USA
2 Management Department, College ofBusiness, University
ofNevada Reno, Reno, USA
3 Management andIndustrial Relations Department, Shidler
College ofBusiness, University ofHawai‘i atMānoa,
Honolulu, USA
4 Management Department, David Eccles School ofBusiness,
University ofUtah, SaltLakeCity, USA
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.