Bibliometric analysis identifies trends in employee voice research in HRM, suggesting future research directions.
This study aims to analyse the existing literature and identify major research trends in the field of employee voice within the human resource management domain. Data were retrieved from the Scopus database and include 265 publications published between 1992 and 2026. A bibliometric analysis was conducted using R Studio (Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny) and VOSviewer to examine publication performance, influential journals and documents, geographical distribution, keyword co-occurrence, and thematic structures within the research domain. The findings suggest a steady and expanding body of research linking human resource management with employee voice, reflecting growing scholarly attention to how HRM systems, employee participation, leadership, psychological safety, and employment relations shape employees’ willingness and ability to speak up. The literature is primarily published in journals related to human resource management, employment relations, industrial relations, organizational behaviour, and management studies. Geographically, research activity is strongly represented in the United Kingdom and Australia, while increasing contributions from China, the United States, India, Pakistan, Spain, Turkey, Iran, and South Korea indicate the growing internationalization of the field. Keyword co-occurrence and thematic mapping identify six major research themes: sustainable voice climate and workplace risk governance; participatory HRM systems and employee involvement; voice–silence dynamics and managerial engagement; leadership, motivation, and contextualized voice behaviour; employee well-being and performance outcomes of HRM voice practices; and employment relations and collective voice institutions. The study also outlines future research directions aimed at strengthening the integration of HRM, leadership, employment relations, psychological safety, sustainability, and digital work perspectives, particularly in contexts shaped by employee silence, green HRM, algorithmic management, and evolving workplace environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chau et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: