Analysis

The Speak-Up-Check is a tool used to assess employees’ willingness and ability to express their opinions, report problems, or suggest changes in their workplace. Speaking up at work is critical to ensuring an open and participatory work culture, and it influences management, job satisfaction, and overall organizational effectiveness.

Purpose

The purpose of the Speak-Up-Check is to evaluate the level of willingness and the ability of employees to freely express their opinions in the workplace. Understanding this dimension can help organizations identify and resolve communication problems, promote a supportive culture, and strengthen employee participation in decision-making processes.

Calibration

The scale examines employees’ willingness to report problems, the level of support from management, concerns about career impact, and the difficulties that may arise when attempting to communicate. It usually includes questions evaluated on a Likert scale (e.g., from “1 = Strongly Disagree” to “5 = Strongly Agree”). Responses to these questions are analyzed to provide an overall picture of employees’ willingness and ability to express their opinions and report problems.

References

Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted assumptions of employee voice and silence, and the implications for voice and silence research. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 1–34.
Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373–412.
Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392.
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
Zhao, X., & Oliver, J. L. (2009). Voice behavior and perceptions of voice effectiveness: A contextual perspective. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(5), 1047–1068.