Employee Voice in Hybrid Higher Education Workplaces: A Qualitative Document Analysis of Trust, Silence, and Managerial Engagement

As hybrid and remote work become the new normal, how employees express their voice sharing ideas, concerns, or feedback has become both more important and more complicated. This paper explores how employee voice operates in digitally mediated workplaces, particularly within private higher education institutions. Using a qualitative approach, we analyzed organizational documents, HR policies, and sector reports to identify common challenges and patterns. While digital platforms have opened up new channels for communication, many employees still face barriers like unclear feedback processes, limited psychological safety, and inconsistent managerial engagement. The study draws on Social Exchange Theory to explain how trust, reciprocity, and recognition shape whether employees feel safe to speak up. Beyond identifying these barriers, the paper offers practical strategies for organizations looking to foster more inclusive and responsive communication. We suggest that digital tools alone aren’t enough—organizations must actively build cultures of openness and trust. To deepen understanding, future research should consider combining qualitative and quantitative methods, engaging directly with employees through surveys or interviews. Case studies of organizations that have successfully created space for employee voice could also provide valuable insights. Exploring other theoretical perspectives alongside Social Exchange Theory may offer a broader understanding of how voice functions in complex, hybrid work settings.

employee voice, modern organization, digitalization, workplace, human resource

1. Akritidis, C. (2025). Navigating interactions, relationships, trust, and collaboration in hybrid workplaces: A qualitative study. University of Gothenburg. https://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/89571 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Athalage, K. C. (2024). The impact of hybrid working on employee way of life and the need to reshape the employee value proposition [Master’s thesis, United Arab Emirates University]. ScholarWorks. https://scholarworks.uaeu.ac.ae/all_dissertations/263/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Basheer, H. (2023). Sustainable graduate employability in the digital transformation era: A UAE higher education perspective [DBA thesis, University of Bath]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/files/282446237/Basheer_Hanady_DBA_Thesis_22_5_2023.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Burton, L. (2024). Employee engagement and hybrid work settings in higher education institutions. EBSCOhost. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. CIPD. (2023). Employee voice factsheet. https://www.cipd.org/en/knowledge/factsheets/voice-factsheet/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. De Winne, S., De Cooman, R., & Liu, N. (2025). Unraveling the relationship between algorithmic management, social distance, and employee engagement. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2025.2509777 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Deloitte. (2023). Human capital trends: The boundaryless workplace. https://www2.deloitte.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Gallup. (2023). State of the global workplace 2023 report. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Gyllenhammar Byström, L. (2023). Communication’s effect on trust in the hybrid workplace: A case study. University of Gothenburg. https://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/79260 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Hasle, M. (2025). Manager–employee relationships in the hybrid workplace: Line managers’ experiences of emerging challenges. Technical University of Denmark. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. https://orbit.dtu.dk/en/publications/manageremployee-relationships-in-the-hybrid-workplace-line-manag [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ishak, N., & Ayop, S. (2023). Examining managerial perspectives on customer co-creation through an engagement platform. In N. M. Suki et al. (Eds.), Strengthening governance, enhancing integrity and navigating communication for future resilient growth (Vol. 132, pp. 11–21). European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2023.11.02.2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Kalfa, S., Kwon, B., & Prouska, R. (2025). Disconnected workers: Can digital voice fill the gap? Human Resource Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.70006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Kougiannou, N., & Holland, P. (2022). Employee voice and silence in the digital era. In The Emerald handbook of work, workplaces and disruptive issues in HRM. Emerald Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Lee, L. (2024). Psychological safety in hybrid workplaces: A phenomenological approach. ProQuest Dissertations. https://search.proquest.com/openview/a87e2e3abecdfeaaf50de6c924f656d2/1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. McKinsey & Company. (2023). The state of organizations 2023. https://www.mckinsey.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2022). Hybrid learning policy circular. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2022). Garis panduan pelaksanaan pembelajaran dan pengajaran hibrid di IPT. https://www.mohe.gov.my [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Morse, S. (2022). Psychological safety in virtual and hybrid work environments [Doctoral dissertation, Capella University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. https://search.proquest.com/openview/e83b86cb171a74a83dcce7484fbb88dc/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Nikolic, M., & Holster, E. (2025). “Shouting straight into space”: A qualitative study on enablers and barriers of employee voicing in digital meetings [Master’s thesis, Lund University]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/search/publication/9197201 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Nilsson, L., & Norström, W. (2024). Understanding psychological safety in hybrid work teams: Experiences of barriers and facilitators [Master’s thesis, Lund University]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. https://lup.lub.lu.se/studentpapers/search/publication/9156472 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Nurhidayah, R., & Muliansyah, D. (2024). Digital leadership and employee engagement in hybrid work environments: The role of trust and communication. Review of Information and Governance in Global Settings, 4(1), 20–35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Perry, L. (2025). Exploring social exchange theory: Internal communication between staff and managers at Yale University. Liberty University. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/6567/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Prouska, R., & Psychogios, A. G. (2022). The emergence of ‘hybrid voice’ in UK SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. British Journal of Management, 33(4), 1611–1629. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12558 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Przytuła, S., Sułkowski, Ł., & Kulikowski, K. (2024). Human resource management in higher education institutions: An international perspective. Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781003458425 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Work Institute. (2023). Defining the voice of the employee: Why it matters. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. https://workinstitute.com/blog/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Wu, Y. J., Antone, B., & DeChurch, L. (2023). Information sharing in a hybrid workplace: Understanding the role of ease-of-use perceptions of communication technologies in advice-seeking relationships. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 28(4), zmad025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmad025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Xu, L., Zhang, Y., & Chen, L. (2024). Perceived hybrid HRM and employee voice behaviour in China: Examining a dual mediation model. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05838-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Zhu, Y. (2025). Navigating communication in hybrid work environments: Strategies for building cohesion and engagement. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389090256 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria