Disagreeing with Employees’ Constructive Disagreement: On Giving (Non-)Specific Explanations for Rejecting Employees’ Voiced Suggestions

When employees express constructive disagreement (i.e., engage in voice behavior) with managers, it provides valuable opportunities for organizational improvement. However, managers cannot implement all suggestions, and how they handle rejection can shape employees’ willingness to speak up again. This study explores whether managers’ explanation specificity—offering clear, detailed reasons for not endorsing employees’ ideas—can foster a sense of voice safety, and in turn voice resilience—voice behavior about an issue following a prior instance of voice non-endorsement on a different voiced issue. Two experiments, one conducted with American participants and another with Chinese participants, show that when managers explain their rejections with specificity rather than with vague, non-specific remarks, employees feel safer and more likely to voice a new suggestion. Our findings highlight a practical means for managers to sustain the flow of constructive employee input, underscoring the importance of clear managerial communication within the voice process.