This study explores the role of email in organizational dissent expression and employees’ perceptions of the rules for using this medium. Twenty-one interviews were conducted with employees who commonly used email in their job to learn about some of the ways email was seen as playing a role in organizational dissent by those who commonly use the technology. Thematic analysis of data produced two rules employees cited for email usage: be careful what is committed to writing (because of loss of message control and fear of being monitored) and maintain an appropriate, professional communication style (free of emotion, sent only to the appropriate people, and used for topics not needing face-to-face interaction). Three additional strategic roles of email in organizational dissent include emails as a means of promoting strategic self-presentation; email as a means of inviting dissent; and email as a means of documenting/archiving potentially problematic interactions. The implications of this study for existing and future studies of dissent are explored.
American Management Association. (2007). 2007 Electronic monitoring & surveillance survey. New York, NY: Author.
2.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101.
3.
ByronK. (2008). Carrying too heavy a load? The communication and miscommunication of emotion by email. Academy of Management Review, 33, 309-327.
4.
CarbaughD. (1990). Communication rules in Donahue discourse. In CarbaughD. (Ed.), Cultural communication and intercultural contact (pp. 119-149). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
CochranD. S.DolanJ. A. (1984). Qualitative research: An alternative to quantitative research in communication. Journal of Business Communication, 21(4), 25-32.
6.
CushmanD. P. (1977). The rules perspective as a theoretical basis for the study of human communication. Communication Quarterly, 25, 30-45.
7.
DaftR. L.LengelR. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. In CummingsL. L.StawB. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 6 (pp. 191-233). Homewood, IL: JAI Press.
8.
DahlingJ. J.ChauS.MayerD. M. (2012). Breaking rules for all the right reasons? An investigation of pro-social rule breaking. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 21-42.
9.
DeKayS. (2010). Designing email messages for corporate readers: A case study of effective and ineffective rhetorical strategies at a Fortune 100 company. Business Communication Quarterly, 73, 109-119.
10.
DoughertyD. S.DrumhellerK. (2006). Sensemaking and emotions in organizations: Accounting for emotions in a rational(ized) context. Communication Studies, 57, 215-238.
11.
DucheneautN.WattsL. A. (2005). In search of coherence: A review of e-mail research. Human-Computer Interaction, 20, 11-48.
12.
D’UrsoS. C. (2006). Who’s watching us at work? Toward a structural-perceptual model of electronic monitoring and surveillance in organizations. Communication Theory, 16, 281-303.
13.
FinemanS. (1996). Emotion and organizing. In GleggS. R.HardyC.NordW. R. (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 543-564). London, England: Sage.
14.
FriedmanR. A.CurrallS. C. (2003). Conflict escalation: Dispute exacerbating elements of e-mail communication. Human Relations, 56, 1325-1347.
15.
GarnerJ. T. (2009). When things go wrong at work: An exploration of organizational dissent messages. Communication Studies, 60, 197-218.
16.
GilsdorfJ. W. (1998). Organizational rules on communicating: How employees are—and are not—learning the ropes. Journal of Business Communication, 35, 173-201.
17.
GoodboyA. K.ChoryR. M.DunleavyK. N. (2008). Organizational dissent as a function of organizational justice. Communication Research Reports, 25, 255-265.
18.
GrahamJ. W. (1986). Principled organizational dissent: A theoretical essay. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 1-52.
19.
GranberryN.StrasserP. B. (2007). Business and leadership. Email from “to” to “send.”AAOHN Journal, 55(3), 127-130.
20.
HarrisL.CronenV. E. (1979). A rules-based model for the analysis and evaluation of organizational communication. Communication Quarterly, 27, 12-28.
21.
HartR. P.BurksD. M. (1972). Rhetorical sensitivity and social interaction. Speech Monographs, 39, 75-91.
22.
HaughM. (2010). When is email really offensive? Argumentativity and variability in evaluations of impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research, 6, 7-31.
23.
HirschmanA. O. (1970). Exit, voice, loyalty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
JabsL. B. (2005). Communicative rules and organizational decision making. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 265-288.
25.
KassingJ. W. (1997). Articulating, antagonizing, and displacing: A model of employee dissent. Communication Studies, 48, 311-332.
26.
KassingJ. W. (1998). Development and validation of the organizational dissent scale. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 183-229.
27.
KassingJ. W. (2000a). Exploring the relationship between workplace freedom of speech, organizational identification, and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 387-396.
28.
KassingJ. W. (2000b). Investigating the relationship between superior-subordinate relationship quality and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 58-70.
29.
KassingJ. W. (2001). From the looks of things: Assessing perception of organizational dissenters. Management Communication Quarterly, 14, 442-470.
30.
KassingJ. W. (2002). Speaking up: Identifying employees’ upward dissent strategies. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 187-209.
31.
KassingJ. W. (2005). Speaking up competently: A comparison of perceived competence in upward dissent strategies. Communication Research Reports, 22, 227-234.
32.
KassingJ. W. (2008). Consider this: A comparison of factors contributing to employees’ expressions of dissent. Communication Quarterly, 56, 342-355.
33.
KassingJ. W. (2011). Stressing out about dissent: Examining the relationship between coping strategies and dissent expression. Communication Research Reports, 28, 225-234.
34.
KassingJ. W.ArmstrongT. A. (2001). Examining the association of job tenure, employment history, and organization status with employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 18, 264-273.
35.
KassingJ. W.ArmstrongT. A. (2002). Someone’s going to hear about this: Examining the association between dissent-triggering events and employees’ dissent expression. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 39-66.
36.
KassingJ. W.AvtgisT. A. (1999). Examining the relationship between organizational dissent and aggressive communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 13, 100-116.
37.
KassingJ. W.AvtgisT. A. (2001). Dissension in the organization as it relates to control expectancies. Communication Research Reports, 18, 118-127.
38.
KassingJ. W.DiCioccioR. L. (2004). Testing a workplace experience explanation of displaced dissent. Communication Reports, 17, 111-120.
39.
KassingJ. W.McDowellZ. (2008). Talk about fairness: Exploring the relationship between procedural justice and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 25, 1-10.
40.
KipnisD.SchmidtS. M.WilkinsonI. (1980). Intraorganizational influence tactics: Explorations in getting one’s way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440-452.
41.
KooC.WatiY.JungJ. J. (2011). Examination of how social aspects moderate the relationship between task characteristics and usage of social communication technologies (SCTs) in organizations. International Journal of Information Management, 31, 445-459.
42.
KramerM. W.HessJ. A. (2002). Communication rules for the display of emotions in organizational settings. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 66-80.
43.
LePineJ. A.Van DyneL. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 853-868.
44.
MantovaniG. (1994). Is computer-mediated communication intrinsically apt to enhance democracy in organizations?Human Relations, 47, 45-62.
45.
MarkusM. L. (1994). Electronic mail as the medium of managerial choice. Organization Science, 5, 502-527.
46.
McDonoughG. P. (2010). Why dissent is a vital concept in moral education. Journal of Moral Education, 39, 421-436.
47.
MorrisG. H.HopperR. (1987). Symbolic action as alignment: A synthesis of rules approaches. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 21, 1-29.
48.
MorrisM.NadlerJ.KurtzbergT.ThompsonL. (2002). Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 89-100.
49.
OwenW. F. (1984). Interpretive themes in relational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 274-287.
50.
PayneH. J. (2007). The role of organization-based self-esteem in employee dissent expression. Communication Research Reports, 24, 235-240.
51.
ReddingW. C. (1985). Rocking boats, blowing whistles, and teaching speech communication. Communication Education, 34, 245-258.
52.
SchegloffE. A. (1972). Sequencing in conversational openings. In GumperzJ. J.HymesD. (Eds.). Directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 346-380). New York, NY: Basil Blackwell.
53.
ShimanoffS. B. (1980). Communication rules: Theory and research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
54.
ShipleyD.SchwalbeW. (2008). Send: The essential guide to email for home and office. New York, NY: Knopf.
55.
SkovholtK.SvennevigJ. (2006). Email copies in workplace interaction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 42-65.
56.
SnyderJ. L. (2010). E-mail privacy in the workplace: A boundary regulation perspective. Journal of Business Communication, 47, 266-294.
57.
SpragueJ.RuudG. L. (1988). Boat-rocking in the high-technology culture. American Behavioral Scientist, 32, 169-193.
58.
SproullL.KieslerS. (1991). Computers, networks, and work. Scientific American, 265(3), 84-91.
59.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In WorchelS.AustinL. W. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
60.
TaylorH.FieldmanG.AltmanY. (2008). E-mail at work: A cause of concern? The implications of the new technologies for health, wellbeing and productivity at work. Journal of Organizational Transformation & Social Change, 5, 159-173.
61.
van den HooffB.GrootJ.de JongeS. (2005). Situational influences on the use of communication technologies. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 4-27.
62.
Van DyneL.AngS.BoteroI. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1359-1392.
63.
VolkemaR. J.FleckD.HofmeisterA. (2011). Getting off on the right foot: The effects of critical email messages on negotiation process and outcome. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 54, 299-313.
64.
WaldronV. R. (1999). Communication practices of followers, members, and protégés: The case of upward influence tactics. In RoloffM. E.PaulsonG. D. (Eds.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 22, pp. 251-299). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65.
WisemanR. L. (1980). Towards a rules perspective of intercultural communication. Communication, 9, 30-38.
66.
ZhuY.WhiteC. (2009). Practitioners’ views about the use of business email within organizational setting: Implications for developing student generic competence. Business Communication Quarterly, 72, 289-303.
