Communicating your participation at work: an exploration of participation types, communication behaviors, organizational commitment, and satisfaction
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to determine the existence of and then
clarify employees’ varied responses to participative opportunity. The study
explored communicative participation by delineating participation classes 1
and
categorizing participation relevant communication behaviors. Specifically,
connections between employees’ motivation, sense of opportunity, and selfefficacy
were created to determine unique groupings with differing approaches to
participation. Next, categories of participation relevant communication behaviors
were determined and then related to the participation classes. Finally, differences
1 The label “class” can be understood as a synonym for category or cluster.
There is no intended meaning related to social class structure.
among the participation classes on satisfaction with participative opportunity and
organizational commitment were tested.
These data suggest the presence of five participation classes: sideliner,
engager, coaster, potential engager, and avoider which are marked by varying
levels of four dimensions of communication behavior: formal, informal, social,
and non-participation. The greatest contributor to the model of participation class
was employees’ sense of opportunity to participate. This was followed by their
general self-efficacy, and finally their motivation to participate. Further, results
indicate that only coasters, with low levels of commitment and satisfaction, vary
significantly from the other classes on these issues of morale. In addition,
potential engagers are significantly less satisfied with the opportunity to
participate in their organizations.
These findings have implications for participation theory and practice.
One key contribution is a model of participation types that can explain why
employees respond to participative opportunity in differing ways within the same
context. The model also suggests that one reason participation programs achieve
differing levels of success is the lack of differential management of employees
who possess varied perspectives and abilities in relation to participation. In
addition, the findings focus our theoretical understanding of participation by
clarifying that the participative act is inherently communicative. One valuable contribution this study makes for practitioners relates to the
importance of participation in organizational change efforts. Classification of
employees prior to implementation of an initiative, which is then followed by
management of their participation in a manner that complements their class
characteristics, may alter the type of involvement employees contribute as well as
the organizational climate during and after the change effort. The benefits of
differential management can influence individual and organizational outcomes.
Department
Description
text