‘Te Pakistan Journal of Social Issues, Volume 7, 2016 How Bad Can Voice Aversion Be? An Empirical Investigation of the Joint Influences of Own and Coworkers’ Experience of Voice Aversion: A Moderation Mediation Model Beenish Qamar’, Mohsin Bashir", Sharjee! Saleem” and Shahnawaz Saqib’ Abstract Ensuring employees voice is fundamental to organizational performance and therefore, many researchers have attempted to spot those managerial practices that can improve voice mechanisms in an organization. Existing literature elaborates why and how, managers may display an aversion to employee voice but the fact that this aversion takes place in a social context and how employee's coworkers are being treated by the manager, may also affect an employee's responses, is yet to be explored. Thus, this study based on social exchange theory, examines the interrelated effects of voice aversion targeted towards employees (employee voice aversion by managers) and towards their coworkers (coworker voice aversion by managers) on an employee's perception of job insecurity and relational identity mediated by employee manager relationship and affect based trust in coworkers. The model was tested using a sample of 340 part-time MBA students through hierarchical regression analysis and the results revealed that voice aversion either experienced personally or experienced by coworkers, can have a detrimental impact on employees’ relational dynamics. Keywords: Employee Voice Aversion, Coworker Voice Aversion, Employee Manger Relationship, Affect based Trust in Coworkers, Job Insecurity, Relational Identity Introduction A company is people...employees want to know...am | being listened to or am Ia cog in the wheel? People really need to feel wanted. -Richard Branson, Founder at Virgin Group Business organizations are now fully aware that they can gain a better competitive advantage by expanding their knowledge base rather than by depending merely on economies of scale and scope (Grant & Ashford, 2008). * PRD Scholar (Business Administration), Government College University, Faisalabad, Email: beenishoamar(ahotmailcom “Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Government College University, Faisalabad, Emuil: mobsinhusw@emailcom “Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Government College University, Faisalabad, ail: sharilealeem(@zmi.com PAD Scholar, Department of Business Administration, GC University, Faisalabad, Pakistan BTS‘Te Pakistan Journal of Social Issues, Volume 7, 2016 Research elucidates that numerous advantages accrue at all hierarchies of the organization, when managers are more encouraging and receptive to the thoughts, propositions and feedback of their subordinates (Mowbray, Wilkinson, & Tse, 2014). As by speaking up to those who occupy positions that are hierarchically higher than their own, employees can help eliminate unethical business practices, address ill- treatment or injustice, and bring problems and opportunities for improvement to the attention of those who can empower action (Ng & Feldman, 2012). The workers on the frontlines, such as those in direct contact with equipment, clients, or vendors are uniquely positioned to identify very early signs of opportunities and problems, and thus are more able to provide crucial inputs to the organizational strategies (Ryan & Oestreich, 1998). Besides, employee voice also stimulates performance and efficacy of an organization (Rees, Alfes, & Gatenby, 2013). The positive reception of voice is directly associated with enhanced working environment (Walumbwa & Schaubroeck, 2009), overall employee satisfaction (Holland, Pyman, Cooper, & Teicher, 2011), decreased turnover intention (Burris, 2011) and superior effectiveness of employees (Wood & Wall, 2007). Nevertheless, despite of having said all that, a close assessment of managers’ activities in workplaces illustrate that a huge number of managers, on the contrary engage in measures that show an aversion to seeking, gratifying, and implementing employee voice (Milliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). A substantial number of workers usually feel unsafe to reveal their ideas and give suggestions simply because they believe that by speaking up their minds for change they may become symbols of conflict (Detert & Burris, 2007; Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). Taking note of this occurrence, organizational researchers have sought to spot the managerial behaviors and practices that support or discourage voice, and to elaborate how these actions affect employee self-esteem, motivation and performance (Bu 2011; Holland et al., 2011; Ng & Feldman, 2012; Wood & Wall, 2007) Even though existing literature elaborates the fact that how managers may display an aversion to employee voice in organizations (McClean, Burris, & Detert, 2012), as well as why managers averse voice (Fast, Burris & Bartel, 2014) but the fact that this aversion of employee voice by the manager takes place in a social context and consequently, how others are being treated by the manager may also affect an employee's responses and performance, is yet to be explored. This social context can have a number of implications on the relational dynamics of the employees, which makes it crucial to study voice aversion of the employees in relation to the voice aversion of their coworkers by the same authority figures (Duffy, Scott, Shaw, Tepper, & Aquino, 2012) This social context can be explained in terms of the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) which derives its essence from interactions that generate emotions of mutual reliance and commitment. It implies that the strength of an association varies with the extent to which parties follow the rules of exchange. Among the numerous exchange regulations, researchers have devoted the highest attention to the rule of io}