arbiter
JournalsAccount

“Have you heard!?” The narrative roots of organizational silence

Claudia Pferner

German Journal of Human Resource Management2026https://doi.org/10.1177/23970022251408578article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This study complements existing longitudinal research on voice and silence in organizations by addressing how Implicit Voice Theories (IVTs)—for example, the belief that speaking up is risky—can spread and become deeply embedded in organizational culture. Based on a qualitative longitudinal study conducted over nearly 3 years at an automotive production site in Germany, 48 managers at various hierarchical levels were interviewed repeatedly, resulting in a total of 128 interviews. One specific event emerged as particularly significant, providing the basis for an abductive exploration of how IVTs disseminate within organizations. The findings highlight two key mechanisms: storytelling and Coactive Vicarious Learning (CVL). These processes contribute to shaping colleagues’ communication behavior in organizations, fostering a generalized tendency toward silence—persisting even years later and beyond those directly involved.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/23970022251408578

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{claudia2026,
  title        = {{“Have you heard!?” The narrative roots of organizational silence}},
  author       = {Claudia Pferner},
  journal      = {German Journal of Human Resource Management},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/23970022251408578},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

“Have you heard!?” The narrative roots of organizational silence

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.