How can inclusive leadership motivate employee voice? A cross-level study from psychological capital and internal social capital perspective

Abstract

Purpose

Based on the conservation of resources theory, this study explains the impact of inclusive leadership style on employee voice and explores the mechanism of the mediating role played by psychological capital and internal social capital.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors conducted paired questionnaire surveys of supervisors and their subordinates in multiple enterprises in South China at three different time points. Ultimately, we collected 60 valid paired questionnaires from supervisors and 290 from subordinates. A multilevel structural equation modeling approach was employed to test the hypothesized relationships between variables.

Findings

The inclusive leadership style has a positive impact on employee voice, and both psychological capital and internal social capital serve as mediators in this relationship.

Practical implications

To motivate employees to actively voice their opinions, managers should exhibit inclusive characteristics. Additionally, actively fostering employees’ psychological capital and internal social capital is crucial for promoting employee voice.

Originality/value

This study, based on the conservation of resources theory, constructed a cross-level multiple mediation model. It found that inclusive leadership not only has a direct impact on employee voice but also indirectly promotes employee voice through two mediating pathways: internal social capital and individual psychological capital.

Introduction

In 2006, six Toyota Motor Corporation employees, as documented by the Los Angeles Times, courageously risked their jobs to submit a two-page report to senior management, outlining concerns regarding vehicle safety and manufacturing facility working conditions. Regrettably, this Valuable voice behavior was disregarded by the company’s leadership, ultimately culminating in the subsequent large-scale Toyota vehicle recall1. In today’s increasingly turbulent business environment, enterprises must be capable of continuous improvement and innovation to maintain flexibility and adaptability. Leaders’ decision-making and strategic planning are heavily reliant on employees’ insights and communication of rapidly changing market dynamics and cutting-edge information as well as their suggestions and strategies for organizational operations and management at various levels [1]. Voice behavior refers to the expression of employees’ ideas, suggestions, viewpoints, or opinions regarding work-related issues, aimed at improving organizational operations [2]. Research has shown that when employees actively voice their opinions, it can help organizations improve their work processes and correct operational deviations [3]. Gathering insights, constructive suggestions, and innovative ideas from employees can bridge the information gap between management and staff, enhancing team efficiency and resilience [4, 5]and promoting organizational innovation and performance [6, 7]. Organizations are increasingly relying on employees’ contributions of their suggestions to enhance processes, efficiency, and innovation within the organization [8], As Le Pine and Van Dyne noted, “employee voice behavior is a cornerstone of sustained organizational change and innovation” [9].

However, contrary to expectations, employee voice behavior, due to potentially confrontational nature [9], implies a challenge to authority. This results in interpersonal risks, such as disrupting harmony, conflicts, and misunderstandings. Traditional Chinese culture, deeply influenced by Confucianism, emphasizes hierarchical order and interpersonal harmony, advocating for values such as “silence is golden” and “knowing one’s place”. In such a social environment, employees tend to remain silent due to concerns about conflict and authority. Furthermore, the prevalent characteristics of high power distance and strong leadership authority in Chinese workplaces further suppress employees’ willingness to speak up, often leading them to choose silence over voicing their opinions [1, 10]. However, as China’s economy enters a new stage of high-quality development, market competition has become increasingly fierce, and technological iteration and digital transformation are accelerating. Consequently, organizations are facing unprecedented uncertainty and pressure for change. Against this backdrop, the traditional top-down management model is no longer sustainable. Companies must now rely on the collective wisdom and innovative vitality of all employees to drive continuous improvement and strategic adjustment [11]. Therefore, understanding how to motivate employees to speak up about their work and organizational development issues, break the silence, and create an environment in which opinions can be freely expressed and valued has significant practical implications for Chinese enterprises to maintain adaptability in a complex and volatile business environment, enhance organizational performance and competitive advantage, and achieve sustainable development [12, 13].

Due to the interpersonal nature of voice behavior, Detert and Burris pointed out that a leader’s behavior could be the most effective predictor of employee voice [3]. Existing research has also explored the influence of transformational leadership [14, 15], servant leadership [16–18], abusive leadership [19, 20], and ambidextrous leadership [21, 22] on employee voice behavior. With the influx of globally mobile and highly individualistic post-90s employees into the workplace, the trend of increasing diversity within workplace groups is becoming increasingly pronounced and is gradually emerging as a salient characteristic of the modern workplace. How to effectively manage a diverse workforce and unlock the immense potential of diverse employees to achieve organizational goals presents both a significant challenge for contemporary organizational management practices and a focal point of research in the field of organizational behavior [23]. Inclusive leadership, which emphasizes interaction with employees, respect, and inclusivity [24], is more compatible with the diverse characteristics of today’s organizational employees and better meets the needs of diversified management in enterprises [25]. Consequently, it has attracted increasing attention from researchers and managers. Existing studies have shown that inclusive leadership can effectively promote employee innovative behavior and organizational citizenship behavior [26, 27], reduce turnover intentions [28], and positively predict organizational performance improvement and atmosphere enhancement [29].

Previous studies have explored the different mechanisms through which inclusive leadership impacts employee voice based on leader–member exchange theory [30, 31], cognitive-emotional systems theory [32], and basic needs theory [33]. However, few studies have examined the relationship between them from the perspective of Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, or explored the potential mediating mechanisms involved. For the voicer, voice behaviors are high-risk and resource-consuming acts [34]. According to COR theory, individuals’ possession of sufficient positive resources may be a critical condition for promoting proactive behaviors when the outcomes of such behaviors are uncertain and risky [35, 36]. Compared to individuals with scarce resources, employees with abundant resources are more likely to engage in proactive behaviors to acquire new resources, thereby realizing a “gain spiral” of resources [35]. Inclusive leadership, as an organizational supportive resource within teams, can effectively assist employees in augmenting their resources. The replenishment of employees’ existing resources can trigger more extra-role behaviors (such as voice) [37]. Therefore, we argue that the underlying mechanism through which inclusive leadership on employee voice behavior can be explained through COR theory, potentially by providing employees with sufficient resources.

Psychological capital (PsyCap) is a measurable and malleable positive psychological state [38] and it is also an important psychological resource for individuals. PsyCap can improve job performance and foster an organizational competitive advantage by promoting individual growth and development [39]. Some studies have also confirmed that high PsyCap can effectively promote employee voice behavior [40, 41]. Besides their own resources, social capital within the work team, manifested as internal social capital (ISC), is also an accessible supportive resource that positively influences employee behavior. Team ISC represents a team’s capacity to access information and resources [42]. The formation of team ISC provides an important condition for individual to propose new technologies, new methods, and problems when they take the initiative to change [43]. Some references have verified the influence of ISC on organizational citizenship behavior, indicating that high ISC can stimulate organizational citizenship behavior [44]. Empirical research is needed to confirm whether employee voice, as a typical form of organizational citizenship behavior, can also be effectively predicted by team ISC. Based on the above analysis, PsyCap serves as a critical individual psychological resource for employees. Simultaneously, ISC, rooted in the organizational relational network, constitutes a vital conditional and energetic resource for employees. Therefore, we hypothesize that inclusive leadership may influence voice behavior through two pathways: PsyCap and ISC.

In summary, unlike previous research, this paper is based on COR theory, with individual-level PsyCap and team-level ISC employed as mediating variables. Through individual-level and team-level paths, a cross-level dual-mediation model is constructed in an attempt to reveal the dual mechanism underlying the influence of inclusive leadership on employee voice behavior through empirical research. Existing research on the relationship between inclusive leadership and voice has primarily focused on the individual level, while the group-level mechanisms remain under-explored. Our study addresses this gap in the literature. Furthermore, this study extends the boundary of research on the relationship between inclusive leadership and voice by incorporating, for the first time, the group-level variable of ISC capital into the theoretical framework and empirically validating its mediating role. This not only deepens the understanding of how inclusive leadership influences employee voice through ISC but also provides empirical support for the application of ISC theory in the domain of voice research. In conclusion, our study addresses a gap in the existing literature and provides both theoretical and practical guidance for managers on how to encourage employee voice behaviors through inclusive leadership, particularly relevant for navigating the current turbulent business environment and diverse organizational contexts in contemporary China.

Theory and hypotheses

Inclusive leadership and voice behavior

Voice behavior in organizations can be understood as “employees’ behavior aimed at helping organizations improve processes and enhance organizational effectiveness by presenting constructive ideas, opinions, and suggestions to the organization” [2, 45]. Although scholars have subsequently developed and refined this definition, there is a general consensus that voice is a discretionary role behavior that is both constructive and challenging [2, 46]. The implementation of voice behavior is not only important for solving problems in organizations and work but also for providing suggestions for employees’ own development. Therefore, it is more of a proactive behavior and an important way for employees to contribute wisdom to the organization.

In employee voice behavior research, leaders play a key role in stimulating or inhibiting employee voice [47, 48]. A meta-analysis by Chamberlin, et al. similarly concluded that, as they put it, “because a leader can influence workplace norms regarding voice and directly encourage or hinder employee voice” [49]. With the increasing diversification of the workforce in the workplace, the traditional authoritarian and paternalistic leadership styles in Chinese organizations are no longer suitable for the new generation of Post-90s employees with diverse values. There is an urgent need to cultivate an open and inclusive corporate culture and organizational climate [50]. Diversity, flexibility, and inclusiveness have become indispensable new elements in management contexts [51]. As a special form of relationship-oriented leadership, inclusive leadership behavior emphasizes communication and interaction between leaders and employees, showing full respect for employees [24]. Leaders’ ability to listen to employees’ voices with an open and inclusive attitude is considered an effective leadership style for adapting to today’s diverse workplace and complex management situations [24, 52].

Nembhard & Edmondson introduced the concept of “inclusion” from the field of education into the field of organizational management, specifically the idea of “inclusive leadership [53]”. Subsequently, Carmeli et al.. expanded on Nembhard’s research, emphasizing that inclusive leadership involves active communication with subordinates, building high-quality interpersonal relationships, encouraging active participation in organizational decision-making, and providing substantial support. The authors summarized three ways in which inclusive leadership is exhibited in interactions with subordinates: openness, availability, and accessibility [24]. Openness refers to the leader’s emphasis on employee opinions, actively inviting employees to participate in management decisions, and encouraging employees to use new ideas and methods to solve problems at work. Availability refers to the leader’s timely support, guidance, and assistance to employees when they encounter work difficulties. Meanwhile, accessibility refers to the leader’s affinity with employees and attention to subordinates’ needs, which increase employees’ willingness to establish close interpersonal relationships with them [24].

Due to the associated risks and potential for future stress, voice behavior is considered a resource-consuming act [54]. According to the COR theory, resources flow between individuals [35]. Leaders who have more resources at their disposal are clearly important resources providers, especially when they adopt an inclusive and respectful leadership style [55]. The fundamental principle of the COR theory is that individuals are motivated to acquire, retain, foster, and protect their valuable resources, and resource-rich individuals can leverage these resources to acquire further new resources, thereby generating positive psychological states and work behaviors [56]. Therefore, under inclusive leadership, employees receive extensive resource support from their supervisors, which effectively motivates them to engage in voice behavior.

First, inclusive leadership can provide employees with emotional and psychological resources. Characterized by openness and accessibility, inclusive leaders are willing to listen to employees’ ideas, encourage them to participate actively in decision-making, and show respect and understanding towards them, which fosters a strong emotional trust between employees and leaders [24]. The trust and support perceived by employees from their leaders make them feel that their opinions are valuable to the organization, thereby further motivating their enthusiasm to engage in voice behavior [52, 57].

Second, inclusive leaders, due to their focus on employee needs and their availability, are likely to provide employees with necessary social support resources [58]. When employees encounter difficulties, inclusive leaders utilize their accumulated expertise, skills, and experience to offer guidance and assistance, and strive to provide the conditional resources required for work, helping them overcome challenges [59]. Moreover, inclusive leaders are tolerant and accepting of employees’ innovative or even radical ideas and opinions. Employees do not have to worry about being blamed or treated differently by leaders for saying the wrong things [60].

These practices foster close and trusting interpersonal relationships between leaders and employees, enabling employees to experience a strong sense of psychological safety, which in turn lowers their perception of voice risks and encourages them to actively cultivate new resources through proactive behaviors [33]. Consistent with the tenets of the COR theory, abundant resource reserves provide individuals with sufficient confidence to invest their personal resources and hold positive expectations for future resource gain [35]. In fact, a few studies have confirmed the positive impact of inclusive leadership on employee voice [33, 61, 62]. Recent research also indicates that green inclusive leadership is a significant driver of employees’ pro-environmental voice behavior [63]. Based on the analysis presented above, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

• H1: Inclusive leadership behavior has a significantly positive impact on employee voice behavior.

The mediating role of team internal social capital

This study mainly focuses on the group level of ISC, which includes the structural resources produced and stored in the internal social relationship network of the enterprise, which can be obtained by the organization and which contribute to achieving organizational goals [64]. It is also defined as “the set of resources made available to a group through group members’ social relationships within the social structure of the group itself” [65]. Team ISC can be regarded as the ISC of the collective, with the work team as the unit. Team ISC is a resource reflecting the character of social relations within the team [65, 66]. Following Nahapiet & Ghoshal’s categorization of social capital, ISC is divided into three dimensions: structural, relational, and cognitive [64, 67].

The structural dimension of ISC refers to the network structural characteristics of information exchange among team members, namely, the channels and paths through which information is transmitted. This dimension can be used to measure the frequency and quality of communication within the team [62, 68]. The relational dimension refers to the nature and quality of the connections between members [62], reflecting the trust relationships, norms of reciprocity, and the degree of honesty in information sharing that they establish during the process of interaction [67, 69], thereby promoting team collaboration. The cognitive dimension concerns the extent to which employees share a common perspective about the team’s goals [68]. This dimension is a function of organizational attributes that facilitate a common understanding of collective goals and the subordination of parochial interests with regard these goals [67, 70]. Based on the above analysis, teams with high ISC are characterized by frequent communication and interaction among team members, involving the sharing of knowledge, information, and resources, as well as collaborative problem-solving. This, in turn, facilitates the development of high-quality interpersonal relationships based on mutual trust and assistance [64].

According to the loss priority principle of the COR theory, the impact of resource loss is more significant than that of resource gain [35]. The openness and accessibility of inclusive leadership, by fostering team trust, can mitigate the depletion of resources resulting from the work process. In addition, previous studies have pointed out that effective leadership styles can have a role-modeling effect [71], fostering positive interactions among employees and improving organizational ISC. Existing literature has primarily focused on the positive effects of specific leadership styles on ISC such as ethical leadership [72, 73], servant leadership [74], self-sacrificial leadership [75] and authentic leadership [43]. However, empirical research evidence on whether and how inclusive leadership impacts the level of ISC remains scarce. Team ISC broadly and directly reflects the nature of its internal operations, encompassing structural, relational, and cognitive components [64, 67]. By ensuring support and resources to foster high-quality, social, team-based ties [76], We argue that each dimension of team ISC can be enhanced through inclusive leadership.

Inclusive leadership can foster both the structural and relational dimensions of team ISC. Rempel et al. argued that organizational trust is crucial for building interpersonal relationships at work and cultivating a collaborative culture [77]. Indeed, the construction of trust relationships is at the core of team ISC. Inclusive leadership provides teams with ample emotional support and work resources, thereby expanding the pool of resources available to the work team. Consequently, team members, when provided with sufficient resources, are more inclined to reciprocate through reciprocal behaviors (e.g., knowledge sharing, mutual assistance) towards the organization [35].Specifically, inclusive leadership not only provides guidance and assistance to employees at work but also recognizes and appreciates their contributions. This in turn can reduce the psychological distance between leaders and subordinates, making employees feel cared for and respected, thereby generating a strong sense of belonging [24, 78]. In addition, the openness and accessibility of inclusive leadership make employees willing to share ideas and express their intentions with their superiors. Through frequent daily communication, mutual trust and high-quality interpersonal relationships can be established between both parties [24, 79]. Furthermore, inclusive leadership fosters communication among members and enhances trust to facilitate collaboration [52, 80]. When employees perceive benevolence from their leaders and colleagues, they also feel a sense of obligation to reciprocate the positive social interactions initiated by leaders and colleagues [81, 82]. This reciprocation fosters higher levels of trust within the team. Therefore, inclusive leadership can strengthen communication among team members, prompting them to cultivate an atmosphere and relationships characterized by mutual trust and reciprocity, thereby enhancing both the structural and relational ISC. Similarly, recent empirical studies have shown that inclusive leadership behaviors help to establish innovative, harmonious, and knowledge-sharing team atmospheres [29, 83, 84].

Inclusive leadership can foster cognitive dimensions of team ISC. When employees encounter setbacks or make mistakes, the inclusivity and support provided by inclusive leadership foster a stronger psychological connection between leaders and followers, thereby enhancing employees’ sense of identification with and belonging to the organization [59]. This positive leadership behavior can stimulate intrinsic motivation and collective efficacy among team members to achieve team goals, thereby enhancing the cognitive dimension of team ISC.

According to the resource caravans and resource caravan passageways principles of the COR theory, the organizational context can either facilitate or inhibit the creation and flow of resources [85]. Inclusive leadership, by promoting employee participation in decision-making, building a shared vision, and aligning individual goals, integrates dispersed resources within the team. During this process, inclusive leadership further fosters frequent interactions among team members, accelerating the flow and reuse of resources within the team and enhancing the accumulation of team ISC. As Leana and Pil’s research suggests, shared goals and missions contribute to promoting efficient collaboration and communication within the team [67]. In summary, inclusive leadership appears to have a positive impact on the formation and accumulation of team ISC. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

• H2a: Inclusive leadership has a significantly positive impact on team ISC.

According to the interactive model of COR theory, the external environment determines the creation and accumulation of resources, which can be diffused and transferred between individuals, within teams, or across organizations [85, 86]. The abundance of team ISC increases the amount of social capital available to each team member (i.e., resources spilling over from the team to individual employees), thereby stimulating employee voice behavior. As a bottom-up proactive behavior, voice is a change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior. In some situations, employee voice can be recognized by leaders and adopted by organizations, leading to employee performance improvements, winning the favor of leaders, and even promotion [87, 88]. However, the results may sometimes be different. ISC can promote the sharing of organizational knowledge and resources as well as the creation of intellectual capital by providing information and resource support for individuals to encourage proactive behaviors [64]. Early research has confirmed that access to information and resources provides individuals with opportunities to engage in change-oriented behaviors [89]. Specifically, team ISC may effectively foster employee voice behavior in three aspects.

First, teams with high ISC have an open, inclusive, and sharing team atmosphere, where frequent interaction and exchange of opinions among employees about work issues facilitate innovation, problems identification, and the generation of new ideas, providing conditions for the generation of voice. Recent studies have also confirmed that ISC plays a role in promoting innovative employee behavior [90, 91].

Second, the interpersonal relationships characterized by solidarity, cooperation, and mutual trust among team members provide employees with sufficient emotional support, enhancing their sense of psychological safety and thereby reducing their concerns about the risks of providing advice [92]. In such a high-quality interpersonal relationship atmosphere, employees can freely express their opinions and ideas without worrying about criticism or retaliation from leaders and colleagues for expressing their views [93]. Previous studies have shown that trust and support among team members can help establish an organizational atmosphere marked by information sharing, challenging of the status quo, and daring to change [94].

Finally, team members with high team ISC share a common vision, aligning their personal goals with organizational goals and demonstrating a stronger sense of collective consciousness and willingness and enthusiasm to contribute to the organization [95]. Choi found that a common vision is positively correlated with organizational citizenship behavior [12]. Similarly, Love and Dustin found that collectivism promotes proactive behavior among employees, making them more willing to engage in beneficial role behaviors for the organization, such as employee voice [96].

In summary, inclusive leadership, due to its characteristics of openness, availability, and accessibility, promotes the construction of an open, inclusive, and mutually trusting team atmosphere, thereby enhancing the level of team ISC. Employees in teams with high ISC can access abundant team resources, which enhances their psychological safety, reduces the perceived risks and stress associated with voicing, and motivates them to voice for the realization of shared team goals, thereby effectively promoting employee voice behavior. This leads to the following hypothesis:

• H2b: Team ISC has a significant positive impact on employee voice behavior.

• H2c: Team ISC plays a mediating role in the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee voice behavior.

The mediating role of psychological capital

As a core concept of positive psychology, PsyCap is a positive psychological state that individuals possess during their growth and development processes, which includes four dimensions: self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and resilience [97]. Luthans & Youssef emphasized that PsyCap can provide positive psychological support for individuals in both their work and personal lives in the future. At the same time, it can provide individuals with the courage to overcome difficulties and achieve success when facing adversity [98]. PsyCap is a core positive element that transcends human capital and social capital, offering individuals and organizations a competitive edge. It encompasses both stable psychological qualities and characteristics fostering change and development [36]. The PsyCap intervention model suggests that both individuals and organizations can employ appropriate methods to intervene and enhance individuals’ PsyCap [97].

Inclusive leadership behavior functions as a significant contextual resource for employees. It provides employees with work guidance and emotional support, enhancing their confidence in the resources available to them and promoting positive attitudes and psychological qualities [99]. On one hand, inclusive leadership provides employees with rich guidance and additional resources when they encounter difficulties, giving employees confidence and motivation to overcome challenges. Even in adversity, they exhibit persistence, rapid recovery, and adept problem-solving, significantly enhancing their self-efficacy and resilience. On the other hand, inclusive leaders encourage experimentation, tolerate failure, and give employees more opportunities to try. This empowers employees to boldly attempt new things, maintain optimism regarding positive outcomes, and be hopeful about achieving their goals. Some studies have explored the relationship between inclusive leadership behavior and PsyCap, empirically verifying the positive effect of inclusive leadership behavior on PsyCap [100, 101]. Thus, it can be inferred that inclusive leadership can effectively promote the enhancement of PsyCap. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

• H3a: Inclusive leadership behavior has a significant positive impact on PsyCap.

The positive predictive effect of PsyCap on individual attitudes and behaviors has been confirmed by numerous studies [102]. Based on the COR theory, access to sufficient resources not only affects employees’ psychological state but also influences their subsequent behavior [62]. Voice is essentially a role behavior with a change orientation. Employees who express their voice may face many uncertainties and risks, leading to significant pressure. However, when they have sufficient resources, it can alleviate the pressure related to using their voice and foster positive motivation [103]. Inclusive leadership provides employees with a deep supply of psychological resources, thereby enhancing there PsyCap. According to the principle of resource investment within COR theory, employees with higher levels of PsyCap are not only less susceptible to resource loss, but also more likely to reinvest resources to acquire new ones [56, 104]. This, in turn, facilitates the implementation of proactive behaviors, such as voice. Unika et al.. argued that PsyCap facilitates employee voicing, as self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and optimism encourage employees to actively use their voice in organizations [105]. Further, Liu & Guo noted that employees with higher PsyCap tend to acquire additional resources and are more likely to engage in positive voice behavior to acquire even more resources [32]. Employees’ PsyCap is positively correlated with voice behavior [41]. This leads to the following hypotheses:

• H3b: PsyCap has a significant positive impact on employee voice behavior.

• H3c: PsyCap plays a mediating role in the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee voice behavior.

The theoretical model of this study is shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Proposed model

Method

Sample and procedure

To reduce the impact of common method bias, we conducted a multi-wave, multi-source field study with one month between waves. We selected MBA alumni from a university in South China who graduated within the past three years as potential participants. Given their close ties with the college and professors, we anticipated a higher willingness to participate in the survey. Subsequently, we identified 200 alumni who were in managerial positions from the pool of potential participants and contacted them via the alumni directory. Before administering the questionnaire, we assured them that the data collected would be used solely for academic use and that their personal information would be kept confidential. Participants responded to our survey were required to provide a list of subordinates and their e-mail address. After the initial examination for above information, we invited leaders only with three or more subordinates to participate in this research considering the characteristics of multi-level modeling. To encourage participation, we offered employees 8 RMB ($1.1) and leader 10 RMB ($2.8) in compensation for each completed survey. In the end, a total of 81 supervisors and 352 subordinates participated the survey. In each wave, we sent online survey link via e-mail and provided participants with a general study overview, without disclosing specific research hypotheses.

At Time 1, we invited subordinates to rate their supervisor’s inclusive leadership and self-reported their demographical information. One month later (Time 2), leaders rated ISC of their team and provided demographical information; subordinates rated own PsyCap. At Time 3 (one month after Time 2), we sent an e-mail to supervisors, asking them to evaluate subordinates’ voice behaviors. We received 60 completed surveys from the supervisors. To improve the response rate, first, we sent a reminder email to subjects who failed to complete the survey before the deadline at each time point. Then, we recommended that participants link the email information to WeChat (the most popular instant messaging platform in China mainland) and provided a brief guidance, considering the low frequency of email usage by some employees. To ensure confidentially, first, we randomly assigned codes to leaders and their respective subordinates, creating a one-to-many coding system (e.g., Leader 20 has subordinates 60, 68, 93, 130). Then, email included the participant’s code, and an item in the survey asked respondents to enter this code, so that employees’ responses match their supervisors’ evaluations. Furthermore, we embedded attention check question (e.g. Please select 2 in this item) and checked the total answering time in each survey to identity and screen out careless respondents [106]. Altogether, 290 completed employee surveys from 60 teams were used in the final analysis, an overall response rate of 82.4% and 74.1%, respectively. All of these team consisted of a leader and three or more subordinates. Among the 290 employees, 56.2% were male, and 43.8% were female. 23.1% under 25 years old, 27.8% between 25 and 35 years old, 26.3% between 36 and 45 years old, and 22.8% over 46 years old. 40.8% were undergraduates, 23.3% were postgraduates. 12.5% had tenure of less than 1 years, 30.3% between 1 and 3 years, 20.2% between 3 and 5 years, 24.3% between 5 and 7 years, and 12.7% over 7 years.

Measures

We created Chinese versions for all measures following translation-back translation procedure [107].Specifically, the author collected the original English scales for all focal variables, which were then translated into Chinese by the second author, who is proficient in both Chinese and English. Subsequently, another author with proficiency in both languages translated all the scales back into English. The first two authors then compared the original English scales with the back-translated English versions and found no difference. All scales used a 5-point Likert scale, ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Inclusive leadership (T1)

We used a 9-item scale developed by Carmeli et al.. to measure inclusive leadership [24]. A sample item was: “The manager is attentive to new opportunities to improve work processes”. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.80.

Internal social capital (T2)

To measure ISC, we used a 7-item scale developed by Reed et al. [108]. A sample item was: “How adequately do your employees share information and learn from one another?”. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.75.

Psychological capital (T2)

We measured PsyCap with 24 items adapted from the measurement scale of Luthans et al. [39]. A sample item was: “I feel confident analyzing a long-term problem to find a solution”. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.84.

Employee voice behavior (T3)

We used a 6-item scale developed by Dyne & Lepine [109] and asked leader to rate their subordinates’ voice. A sample item was: “This particular co-worker develops and makes recommendations concerning issues that affect this work group”. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.75.

Control variables

Following previous research [3, 109], we controlled for age, gender, education, tenure and position of leader and employee, because these variables may affect employee PsyCap and voice.

Analytic approach

Because the data had a nested structure (i.e., every leader rated subordinates’ voice behavior), we conducted multilevel structural equation model (MSEM) using Mplus 7.4. We used two-level model with inclusive leadership and ISC at the group level and PsyCap and employee voice at the individual level. Before testing hypotheses, an important step was performed to confirm the necessity of multilevel analysis. We found acceptable statistical support for aggregating inclusive leadership to the group level, with an average r_wg(j) of 0.79, an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)₁ of 0.21, and ICC₂ of 0.35. These statistics show that sufficient rating agreement existed among items within teams and there was an appropriate amount of variance to warrant testing hypotheses by multilevel method. Thus, we aggregated followers’ ratings of inclusive leadership to the group level. To test indirect effect, our study used the Monte Carlo bootstrapping method with 20,000 sample repetitions to estimate the effects.

Results

Descriptive statistics and confirmatory factor analyses

Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, internal consistency reliability, and correlations of our study variables. Before analyzing the hypotheses, we tested the distinctiveness of the constructs using a multi-level confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) in Mplus 7.4. Following the procedure that Little et al.recommended, we created three inclusive leadership parcels and four PsyCap parcels based on dimensions [110]. Other variables were not parceled. The results revealed that the four-factor model provided a good fit: χ² [76] = 163.14, χ²/df = 2.14 < 3, CFI = 0.93 >0.9, TLI = 0.90 >0.8, RMSEA = 0.06 < 0.8 and SRMR = 0.06 < 0.8. All indicators met the minimum thresholds recommended by Hu and Bentler [111]. It is also a better fit than alternative models, as Table 2 summarizes.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics

Variables	Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Individual level (N = 290)
1. Employee gender	1.55	0.50	-
2. Employee age	2.45	1.03	–0.21**	-
3. Employee education	2.41	0.97	0.09	0.15*	-
4. Employee tenure	2.93	1.27	–0.09	0.69**	0.11	-
5. Employee position	1.48	0.71	–0.17**	0.28**	–0.17**	0.38**	-
6. PsyCap	3.90	0.34	–0.11	0.02	–0.02	0.03	0.04	(0.84)
7. Employee voice	3.71	0.51	0.03	–0.04	0.20**	–0.06	–0.02	0.20**	(0.75)
Group level (N = 60)
1. Leader gender	1.38	0.49
2. Leader age	3.31	1.13	–0.25
3. Leader education	2.90	0.89	0.13	0.01
4. Leader tenure	3.91	1.14	–0.03	0.68**	0.25*
5. Leader position	2.06	0.95	–0.31*	0.40**	0.23	0.41**
6. Inclusive leadership	4.20	0.40	0.13	0.11	–0.01	–0.09	0.08	(0.80)
7. Internal social capital	3.78	0.50	–0.21	0.21	0.13	0.06	0.13	0.51**	(0.75)

Reliabilities are presented in the parentheses at the diagonal

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Table 2.

Results of the multi-level confirmatory factor analyses

Model	χ2	df	χ2/df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR
Model 1: Four-factor model	163.14	76	2.14	0.93	0.91	0.06	0.06
Model 2: Three-factor model	476.61	78	6.11	0.68	0.59	0.13	0.12
Model 3: Three-factor model	466.62	78	5.98	0.69	0.60	0.13	0.11
Model 4: Three-factor model	486.19	78	6.23	0.67	0.58	0.13	0.14
Model 5: Two-factor model	777.92	79	9.84	0.43	0.29	0.18	0.15

N = 290. Model 2 specified inclusive leadership and PsyCap items to load on a single factor. Model 3 specified inclusive leadership and employee voice items to load on a single factor. Model 4 specified PsyCap and employee voice items to load on a single factor. Model 5 specified inclusive leadership, PsyCap, and employee voice items to load on a single factor

Hypotheses testing

Figure 2 illustrates that inclusive leadership was positively related to employee voice (b = 0.26, SE = 0.13, and p < 0.05). This finding supports H1. The results also reveal that inclusive leadership was significantly and positively related to ISC (b = 0.39, SE = 0.13, and p < 0.01), thus supporting H2a. Further, inclusive leadership was positively related to PsyCap (b = 0.15, SE = 0.06, and p < 0.05), which supports H3a. ISC (b = 0.39, SE = 0.15, and p < 0.01) and PsyCap (b = 0.48, SE = 0.19,and p < 0.05) were positively related to employee voice.

Fig. 2.

Hypothesized mediation model

Further, we used the Monte Carlo method to test the mediation effect of the model. As shown in Table 3, in the group level path, the results revealed that the mediation effect through ISC was significant for employee voice(indirect effect = 0.15, 95% CI [0.03, 0.32]). This finding indicates that inclusive leadership can indirectly influence employee voice through the mediating variable of ISC, thus supporting H2c.In the individual level path, the Monte Carlo simulation results show that the mediation effect through PsyCap was significant for employee voice (indirect effect = 0.07, 95% CI [0.01, 0.19]), indicating that inclusive leadership can indirectly influence employee voice through the mediating variable of PsyCap, thus supporting H3c.

Table 3.

Monte Carlo test results for mediating effects

Path	Indirect effect	95% CI
	(SE)	LLCI	ULCI
Path 1: inclusive leadership → ISC → employee voice	0.152* (0.075)	0.025	0.324
Path 2: inclusive leadership → PsyCap → employee voice	0.069* (0.048)	0.003	0.191
Path 3: inclusive leadership → employee voice	0.259* (0.127)	–0.002	0.507
Total effect: (path 1 + path 2 + path 3)	0.479** (0.126)	0.225	0.730

Discussion

This study aimed to investigate the positive impact of leadership, as an important situational factor in organizations, on employee voice. An inclusive leadership style, which is suitable for the characteristics of today’s diverse workplaces, was selected as the antecedent variable. The data analysis results supported the research hypotheses. Based on the COR theory, we constructed a cross-level research model with PsyCap and team ISC as mediators to examine the mechanism by which inclusive leadership impacts employee voice behavior. Data were collected from 290 samples across 60 teams and analyzed using multilevel structural equation modeling. The results revealed the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee voice behavior and elucidated the mechanism underlying this relationship from a resource perspective.

Two main conclusions can be drawn from this study. First, inclusive leadership significantly and positively influences employee voice behavior. Second, team ISC and PsyCap both partially mediate the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee voice behavior. It can be inferred that inclusive leadership not only has a direct impact on voice behavior but can also indirectly promote voice behavior implementation through the pathways of team ISC and PsyCap. Inclusive leadership, which is characterized by respect for employee diversity, understanding and acceptance of individual differences, and a willingness to listen to different voices, makes employees feel fully trusted and supported. In turn, this enhances team ISC and individual PsyCap levels, motivating employees to actively express their voice and contribute wisdom to the organization.

Theoretical implications

Through empirical research, we confirmed the positive impact of inclusive leadership on employee voice behavior, consistent with previous research findings [33, 61, 62]. This finding enriches the scholarly understanding of the relationship between inclusive leadership and challenging organizational behaviors, strengthening the theoretical foundation of their causality.

In addition, we addressed the existing literature gap regarding the influence of inclusive leadership on ISC. As previously mentioned, only a limited number of studies have currently explored the relationship between other leadership styles and ISC [43, 72–75]. This study is the first to empirically demonstrate the positive role of inclusive leadership in enhancing ISC. In doing so, this study extends the research findings on the group-level impact of inclusive leadership and makes a pioneering contribution. Moreover, it further underscores the importance of leadership in enhancing ISC, providing theoretical guidance and a new perspective for organizations to foster and strengthen ISC.

Furthermore, this study represents the first examination of the cross-level impact of ISC on employee voice behavior, enriching the research on the antecedents of voice behavior. While some individual studies have confirmed the facilitating role of factors at the team level, such as voice climate [112] and team member exchange [22], there has been a gap in research exploring the relationship between team ISC and voice behavior. The results of this study show that group-level team ISC positively promotes voice behavior, not only enriching the relevant theory of ISC but also expanding the factors impacting employee voice at the group level. Thus, the study compliments and refines existing studies on the antecedents of voice behavior.

Considering the insufficient research on the internal mechanisms underlying the relationship between inclusive leadership and voice behavior, a new research model was conducted in this study. From the perspective of resource conservation, the results show that inclusive leadership not only has a direct impact on voice behavior but can also indirectly promote employee voice by enhancing both team ISC and individual PsyCap. These findings enrich the understanding of the interaction mechanisms between inclusive leadership and voice behavior. While previous literature has explored the intrinsic mechanisms through which inclusive leadership influences employee voice, much of it has focused on individual-level factors like employees’ psychological perceptions. This study integrated factors at both the team and individual levels within the same research framework, confirming that inclusive leadership can positively facilitate employee voice by affecting team ISC and individual PsyCap. Additionally, the study answered the call for utilizing multi-level or cross-level analytical methods in inclusive leadership research [113].

Specifically, inclusive leadership emphasizes equal communication and exchanges with subordinates, attending to their needs, supporting and acknowledging their work achievements, and providing assistance and guidance when they encounter difficulties, thereby providing employees with sufficient resources. Due to leaders’ guidance and emotional care, employees perceive strong resource availability, fostering positive attitudes and psychological qualities. This, in turn, enhances their levels of PsyCap, increasing their psychological resource reserves. Individuals with more resources are more inclined to engage in proactive behaviors, such as voicing opinions to obtain more resources, resulting in a spiral of value creation. Studies by Xanthopoulou et al.. and Norman et al.. have also shown that PsyCap, as a type of personal resource, generates additional resources, motivating employees to engage in extra-role behaviors, such as organizational citizenship behavior [114, 115]. Furthermore, inclusive leadership fosters an inclusive, open, cohesive, and mutually beneficial team atmosphere, leading to high levels of team ISC. This encourages team members to actively contribute to achieving common goals and visions, ensuring a safe and supportive team environment for employees to voice their opinions actively and courageously.

Finally, this study extends the research on inclusive leadership and voice behavior in Chinese organizations by examining this relationship within the specific context of China’s turbulent business environment and an increasingly prominent post-90s workforce. This study provides a theoretical reference for promoting employee voice behavior in current Chinese organizational contexts through leadership style transformations and the cultivation of ISC and PsyCap.

Practical implications

This study reveals the importance of inclusive leadership, PsyCap, and team ISC in organizations and their positive effects on employee voice behavior, providing guidance for organizations to encourage employees to speak up actively.

First, enterprise leaders and managers at all levels should fully recognize the importance of inclusive leadership styles and consciously demonstrate inclusivity in their interactions with employees. Managers should respect employees’ diverse values and work styles, attend to their needs, and encourage them to express different ideas and viewpoints. This will help to bridge the psychological distance between them and employees, foster an open, inclusive, relaxed, and free organizational culture and team atmosphere, and motivate employees to actively voice their opinions. Additionally, organizations should emphasize inclusive leadership characteristics in the selection and development of leaders. In the recruitment and selection stage, candidates’ inclusive leadership traits can be assessed through psychological tests and situational simulations, with a focus on identifying and promoting candidates who demonstrate openness, accessibility, and approachability in their interactions. Candidates with potential for development should be included in succession plans. Previous research has also found that inclusive leadership styles can be cultivated [116]. Therefore, in leadership development, managers can be trained in inclusive leadership through courses and role-playing exercises. This will not only help them learn how to be inclusive leaders but also enhance their understanding of the importance and mechanisms of this management style in enhancing PsyCap, improving ISC, and stimulating employees’ proactive behavior.

Second, organizations should focus on developing employees’ PsyCap. The cultivation and shaping of PsyCap are long-term processes, but they hold particular significance for organizations. Employees’ PsyCap can create value for organizations, leading to a competitive advantage and helping organizations achieve sustainable development [39]. Organizations should also provide training for employees and collaborate with them to set career development goals and plans. Through learning and growth, employees can enhance their confidence and self-efficacy, leading to improved performance and the achievement of career goals. Employees’ confidence, optimism, and PsyCap can be nurtured through timely recognition and encouragement of their achievements. Indeed, recognition and encouragement are low-cost, high-return ways for leaders to motivate employees. Additionally, managers can encourage employees to engage in regular self-reflection and self-assessment, enhancing their self-awareness and self-efficacy. In summary, organizations should provide employees with the resources and assistance they need for self-growth and development, empowering employees to enhance their self-efficacy, improve their psychological resilience, maintain optimistic and hopeful attitudes toward the future, and cope with difficulties and challenges in their work.

Lastly, organizations need to focus on cultivating ISC, an intangible asset, representing effective resources that employees can access and utilize. This study confirms the significant role of ISC in the relationship between inclusive leadership and voice behavior. On the one hand, organizations should improve internal communication channels and create more opportunities for communication and interaction between teams and team members, such as regular work seminars or salons. Open office spaces and tea rooms can also be used to promote informal communication during breaks. On the other hand, leaders should focus on creating a free, open, mutually beneficial team atmosphere, strengthening trust among team members, and fostering harmonious and cooperative employee relationships. For example, organizations should ensure the fairness and transparency of organizational systems and procedures to create an atmosphere of mutual trust. Moreover, diverse team activities like team-building training, outings, and dinners can be organized to enhance emotional relationships and trust among team members. In conclusion, improving ISC primarily involves building a network of free, open, harmonious, and trusting interpersonal relationships within the organization. As exemplified by the successful practices of China Changan Automobile Group, enterprises can cultivate an open, inclusive, and collaborative organizational climate and culture by implementing a rationalization voice system centered on the “Five Smalls” innovation (small inventions, small creations, small renovations, small designs, and small suggestions)2. Over a decade of practical experience has demonstrated that this system effectively stimulates employees’ enthusiasm for voicing suggestions and their creativity, which not only significantly enhances organizational operational efficiency and financial performance but also injects sustained momentum into the improvement of the enterprise’s core competitiveness and long-term development.

Limitations and further research

This study also has certain limitations. First, the research explores the effect of inclusive leadership on employee voice behavior from both individual and team levels. However, due to the diversity of individual traits and organizational contexts, specific mechanisms may be influenced by certain boundary conditions. This aspect was not explored in this paper. Future research could introduce individual traits and organizational context factors as moderating variables to investigate the boundary effects of inclusive leadership on voice behavior from the perspective of COR theory. For instance, considering the high power distance characteristic of Chinese organizational culture, future research could introduce power distance as a moderator to investigate its moderating effect between inclusive leadership and the voice behavior of Gen Z employees.

Second, although the voice measurement scale used in our study was derived from a study published in a reputable journal, the scale is single-dimensional and does not deeply explore the connotation of voice.Future research could divide voice into two dimensions—promotive voice and prohibitive voice. The specific effects of inclusive leadership on promotive voice and prohibitive voice can then be explored through ISC and PsyCap, respectively.

Finally, this study examined the mediating effects of PsyCap and team ISC on the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee voice from the perspective of the COR theory. Future research could attempt to reveal the mechanism between the inclusive leadership and employee voice from a new perspective.

Conclusion

Employee voice behavior is the key to competitive advantage and sustainable development of enterprises. Inclusive leadership plays an important role in promoting employee speak up. While prior studies have explored the influence of inclusive leadership on aspects such as Psycap [66, 67] and voice [30–33], there remain gaps in the research on how inclusive leadership impacts ISC and Psycap, subsequently affecting their voice behavior. In order to elucidate this process, we propose research hypotheses and construct a cross-level dual mediation model. In the context of today’s complex and challenging external environment and a diversifying workplace, we examine the relationships between inclusive leadership, team ISC, Psycap and voice behavior. The study shows that inclusive leadership is significantly positively related to voice behavior, and that team ISC and Psycap plays mediating roles, respectively, between inclusive leadership and voice behavior. The findings of this study extend the research on the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee voice behavior, emphasizing the key role of ISC and Psycap as potential mechanisms that motivate positive voice. Additionally, our research enriches the antecedent research on ISC and voice, and provides insights for management practice in the field of organizational behavior.

Abbreviations

PsyCap

Psychological Capital

ISC

Internal Social Capital

COR

Conservation of Resources

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Jia Yang was responsible for the definition of conceptualization and methodology, and was a major contributor in writing original manuscript. Material preparation was performed by Han and Zhou. Data collection and analysis were performed by Wang and Huang. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by General research program from Lingnan Normal University, grant number WY2213; Philosophy and Social Science Planning Program from Guangdong Province, grant number GD23XJY70.

Data availability

The data, materials and code used to obtain the results in this paper are available from the first author and the correspond author by reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethical Committee of Lingnan Normal University on November 22th, 2024. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. We noted in the introductory statement that the study was to be completed anonymously and that completing the questionnaire in its entirety and submitting it constituted voluntary participation in our survey. The study data are strictly confidential and are for research use only. The study was conducted in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and they were allowed to withdrawal at any time.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.