Analysis of Antecedent and Outcome Factors of Employee Voice Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstrak Objective: This research provides an integrative and comprehensive review of 158 articles on employee voice behavior over 53 years (1970 – 2023) using the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) research method. The aim is to provide information about the concepts, factors, and outcomes influencing Employee Voice Behavior in companies and identify research gaps for future studies. Design/Method/Approach: This research uses the Systematic Literature Review method, which involves software such as VOSViewer, Publish or Perish, and Mendeley. These tools facilitate the systematic analysis of selected articles. Findings: Research findings show a significant increase in using Employee Voice Behavior topics in research publications. In general, employee voice behavior is influenced by five main elements: individual characteristics, attitudes and perceptions towards work and the organization, feelings and beliefs, behavior of superiors and leaders, and contextual factors. These elements provide room for further investigation by future researchers. Originality/Value: This research makes a significant contribution to the literature by offering a comprehensive analysis of decades of Employee Voice Behavior research. By identifying key influencing factors and trends, this research enriches our understanding of this pivotal aspect of organizational behavior, thereby enhancing the body of knowledge in this field. Practical/Policy Implications: The insights gleaned from this research carry significant practical implications for organizations and policymakers. Understanding the factors that shape employee voice behavior can be a powerful tool in the arsenal of HR practices, leadership development, and organizational policies. These insights can be harnessed to foster employee participation and engagement, thereby enhancing organizational effectiveness.


Introduction
Organizations face significant challenges due to intense competition and rapid environmental changes (Salamzadeh et al., 2019).In order to gain a competitive edge, companies today must depend on the voice behavior of frontline employees (Cropanzano et al., 2017).Leveraging human strengths is essential for companies to gain a competitive advantage (Kantur, 2016).Employee voice is recognized as crucial, as companies increasingly rely on the knowledge and ideas of their employees in today's competitive and uncertain work environment (Song et al., 2022).Therefore, it is essential for organizations trying to maintain their position in intense competition to receive helpful criticism and suggestions from employees (Kok et al., 2016).Although employee voice behavior has attracted the attention of a wide range of information.The goal is to organize large amounts of information by recognizing the main characteristics of a specific topic (Macke, 2019).
Next, researchers conducted a search on the Scopus electronic database to analyze "Employee Voice Behavior".The Scopus electronic database was chosen for use because it is a very reputable scientific database and provides a variety of journal articles that have gone through a review process by experts (Chhatoi, Sahoo, & Nayak, 2021).Apart from using the Scopus electronic database, this research also used journals indexed by Google Scholar and Web of Science.This research was limited by looking for English language journal articles for at least the last year, namely from 1970-2023.Figure 1 presents a flow diagram that visualizes the process of selecting articles for inclusion in this review.
Step 2 reduced the sample by 532 articles due to duplication between different search engines, reduced articles to the source type "journal" to a total of 76 articles that were not from journals and limited articles focused on discussing "English" to a total of 27 journals that were not in English.In step 3, the total number of reports sought to be retrieved was 827.In step 4, the abstracts, titles and keywords of 827 articles were checked based on the criteria, so that the next 605 articles were deleted leaving 222 articles remaining and 158 articles included in the review.

Analysis Tool Preparation
In carrying out data analysis using VOSViewer, there are several applications that need to be prepared.First of all, we need a Mapping tool that can be downloaded from the open source software VOSViewer.VOSviewer is a software tool for constructing and visualizing bibliometric networks.It can be used to visualize bibliographic data, such as citations, bibliographic coupling, co-citation, or co-occurrences of important terms.The software provides various visualization options, including density maps, label views, and cluster density views, which can be used to explore and interpret bibliometric networks.In this research, VOSViewer is used as a tool to visualize data that has been analyzed so that it can be described.Next, the second application that must be prepared is a reference manager.There are several reference management applications that can be used, including Publish or Perish as and Mendeley.Publish or Perish is a software program that retrieves and analyzes academic citations.It uses various data sources, including Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic Search, and others, to gather citation data for individual researchers or publications.The software can calculate various citation metrics, such as the h-index, g-index, and other performance indicators, which can be used to evaluate the impact and influence of researchers or publications.Mendeley is a reference management tool that helps researchers organize, share, and collaborate on their research materials.It allows users to create and manage their personal library of references, including articles, books, and other research materials.Mendeley also provides features for annotating and highlighting documents, as well as collaborating with other researchers through shared libraries and groups.This reference management application is useful for collecting research data that will be analyzed bibliometrically using VOSViewer.
In the context of bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer, Publish or Perish and Mendeley can be used to gather and manage the relevant research data.Publish or Perish can be used to retrieve citation data from various sources, which can then be exported and imported into VOSviewer for visualization and analysis.Mendeley can be used to organize and manage the research articles or publications that will be analyzed using VOSviewer.The combination of these tools allows researchers to efficiently collect, organize, and analyze bibliometric data, enabling them to gain insights into research trends, collaborations, and the impact of publications or researchers in specific fields.

Data Retrieval
The data used in this research is data regarding journal publications regarding Employee Voice Behavior.This data was obtained using the reference management application, namely Publish or Perish.Publish or Perish is used to search literature related to the selected research topic, thereby forming a database of relevant research themes.With the help of Publish or Perish, we can identify the most frequently cited authors, determine the oldest and newest year of each article, and obtain bibliometric information from each study that will be used in this research.Publish or Perish provides several choices of research data sources that can be used, including Crossref, Google Scholar, PubMed, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and Web of Science.In this study, data was taken from the Google Scholar, Scopus databases.and Web of Science.These three databases were chosen because they are among the most comprehensive and widely used academic citation databases, covering a vast range of disciplines and publication sources.
Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across numerous online repositories, publishers, and databases.While it has broad coverage, the data quality and completeness may vary, making it suitable for initial exploration or when other sources are unavailable.Then, Scopus is a large abstract and citation database curated by Elsevier, containing peer-reviewed literature from various disciplines, including scientific journals, books, and conference proceedings.It is known for its comprehensive coverage of scientific, technical, medical, and social sciences literature, and its data quality is generally considered high.Last, Web of Science, owned by Clarivate Analytics, is another prestigious citation database that indexes high-quality scholarly journals, books, and conference proceedings across various disciplines.It is particularly valuable for its detailed citation data and its unique feature of tracking citations across different databases within its network.
By utilizing data from these three sources, researchers can leverage the strengths of each database and obtain a more comprehensive and diverse set of bibliometric data for their analysis.This approach helps to mitigate potential biases or limitations associated with relying on a single data source and ultimately leads to more robust and reliable findings in the bibliometric analysis conducted using VOSviewer.

Result
This systematic literature review highlights several notable research gaps in the study of Employee Voice Behavior (EVB).First, while there is substantial research on the antecedents of EVB, the outcomes remain underexplored, suggesting a need for future studies to focus on the long-term organizational and individual impacts of EVB.Additionally, most existing research is based in Western contexts, indicating a gap in understanding how cultural differences influence EVB across diverse settings.Methodologically, there is a predominance of quantitative studies, highlighting the need for more qualitative and mixed-method approaches to capture the nuances of EVB.Furthermore, the role of digital communication tools in facilitating or hindering EVB is an emerging area that requires further exploration.Lastly, there is limited research on practical interventions that organizations can implement to encourage EVB, underscoring the necessity for future studies to test and validate different strategies in various organizational environments.Addressing these gaps can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of EVB and its implications for organizational success.

Publication Channels and Temporal Distribution
As shown in Table 1, there are ten leading journals with the highest number of articles discussing employee voice behavior.Compared to other journals, the Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Current Psychology stand out with a relatively higher number of relevant articles, each ranging from six to nine articles.The remaining seven journals, which include the International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Personnel Review, Social Behavior and Personality, Employee Relations, Frontiers in Psychology, and Human Resource Management, each contain four to five relevant articles.Additionally, the most frequently cited article among these is published in the Academy of Management Journal in 1998, with a total of 4857 citations.564 (Spencer, 1986); 4857 (Lepine & Van Dyne, 1998); 2481 (Wang et al., 2005); 3177 (Detert & Burris, 2007); 4562 (Zhang & Bartol, 2010); 981 (Burris, 2012);1928(Liang et al., 2012)); 827 (Zhang et al., 2012); 611 (Fast et al., 2014) 2.
Frontiers in Psychology Q2, SJR 2023; 0.8 and H-Index 184 4 50 (Ju et al., 2019); 17 (Yang et al., 2019); 8 (Li et al., 2022); 2 (Buzás & Faragó, 2023) 10.Human Resource Management Q1, SJR 2023; 2.34 and H-Index 114 4 460 (Farndale et al., 2011); 255 (Holland et al., 2011); 380 (Wilkinson & Bay, 2011); 110 (Knoll & Redman, 2016) Source: Data processed, 2024 The chart presented in Figure 2 illustrates the trend in the number of published papers on employee voice behavior over the last 53 years, from 1970 to 2023.As depicted by the data points, there is a significant and steady increase in research publications on this topic.Initially, from 1970 to the early 1990s, the number of publications was relatively low, indicating emerging interest in the subject.However, starting in the mid-1990s, there is a noticeable increase that becomes more pronounced as we move into the 2000s and beyond.This trend reflects a growing academic and practical interest in understanding employee voice behavior, underscoring its importance in organizational studies.The cumulative nature of the chart confirms how knowledge in this area has expanded significantly, with a sharp rise in the number of publications in recent years.This proliferation of research highlights the continuously evolving significance of employee voice behavior in the fields of management and organizational behavior.Between 1970 and 2023, the highest number of articles published was in 2023, with 25 articles, followed by 20 articles in 2022, 19 articles in 2020, and 14 articles in 2021.This indicates that the period from 2018 to 2023 saw the most significant number of articles addressing this topic.

Bibliometric Map Research on Employee Voice Behavior
After searching via Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar, researchers collected 158 research documents relevant to the topic of Employee Voice Behavior.Then, the documents were downloaded in RIS format and entered into VOSViewer for further analysis.The following are the results of research mapping using VOSViewer: The results of the Co-word map network visualization related to the topic Employee Voice Behavior are divided into 8 clusters as shown in Figure 3 as follows: • Cluster 1.

Co word map Density Visualization
The cluster density view refers to items that are marked based on their visibility.Each item point will have a color determined by how close together the items are at the same time.This helps in identifying that the color of each point still depends on its relationship with other items.Co-Word Density Maps are used to provide an overview of the structure of a bibliometric map by identifying items that are considered important for analysis (Muñoz-Leiva. F., 2012).From the research results shown in Figure 4, we can interpret the most commonly used keywords in publications that illustrate the density map visualization of the development of co-word research on employee voice behavior.Figure 4 reflects the density map resulting from the analysis of all articles on employee voice behavior from 1970 to 2023.This density map means that the yellower the color with the larger circle diameter, the higher the frequency of the keyword appearing, while the more the color fades and almost blending into the green background, it shows that the keyword appears infrequently (Tupan, 2019).

The Most Productive Researchers
In mapping the development of Employee Voice Behavior research using VOSViewer, the researcher created a map based on bibliographic data, then read the data from the manager's reference file with the supported RIS file type.Then, the full counting method was used, with a maximum number of authors of 25 per document and a minimum number of authors of 5. Of the 470 authors, only 5 met the requirements.
Based on the information provided, VOSviewer presents the most productive researchers based on the number of documents listed for each author.The authors with the highest number of documents in this particular dataset are: a. Lansdown, Tony -15 documents b.Wilkinson, Adrian -24 documents c.Donaghey, Jimmy -10 documents d.Freeman, Richard b (Richard Berry) -5 documents e. Van Dyke, Linn -7 documents This information allows the user to verify and select the authors they want to include in further analysis or visualization within VOSviewer, likely for tasks such as mapping author collaborations, citation networks, or identifying influential researchers in a particular field or dataset.The relationship between the three is visible in the illustrations listed in Figures 5 and 6.  (Hirschman, 1970) first introduced the concept of voice based on the ideas of exit, voice and loyalty.This concept states that when an employee feels dissatisfied with their job, there are two options they can choose: leaving the situation or using voice.Employee Voice Behavior was first defined by (Hirschman, 1970) as any action aimed at changing an unsatisfactory situation, not by running away, but by petitioning either individually or collectively to the management responsible, or by making a request.to higher authorities with the aim of forcing change (Brien et al., 2023).According to (LePine & Van Dyne, 2001) voice behavior is an action that is not absolute and aims to improve the situation rather than just providing criticism.Employee Voice Behavior also refers to employee actions that constructively challenge the status quo in their work with the aim of increasing the interests of the organization (Hu & Jiang, 2018).There are three main characteristics associated with voice behavior: independence, likes challenges, and potentially risky (Lepine & Van Dyne, 1998).Expressions of opinion can be considered risky because they signal the need for a change in policy to people who may have designed it, are responsible for it, or have personal involvement with the existing state of affairs.The majority of targets of this behavior are superiors who have the authority to provide rewards and sanctions, as well as control over salaries, promotions and assignments of subordinates, so that leaders' actions become very important as signals to regulate behavior.When followers feel that the potential risks of speaking out behavior outweigh the possible benefits (Milliken FJ, 2003).

Definition of Employee Voice Behavior
Although sounds are often expressed verbally, this is not limited to verbal behavior by (Hirschman, 1970); it includes actions such as sending emails and writing memos (Withey & Cooper, 1989).On the other hand, not all expressive behavior is vocal (Van Dyne, 2003).To be considered voice, the expression must be (a) openly communicated, (b) organizationally relevant, (c) focused on impact on the work environment, and (d) accepted by someone within the organization.Therefore, providing improvement-oriented suggestions to a manager is an example of a voice, whereas notifying regulatory bodies about errors occurring in the organization or placing anonymous notes in a suggestion box is not an example (Maynes & Podsakoff, 2014).

Definitions for Each Type of Voice
Supportive voice, In our model, supportive voice represents the preservation and promotion quadrant.Being supportive means defending or supporting (i.e., promoting) in addition to defending i.e., preserving (Borman, 1993).Supportive voice is defined as the voluntary expression of supporting policies, programs, goals, procedures, and so on that are beneficial to the job or speaking up in defense of them when they are unfairly criticized.Representative behavior may include supporting beneficial work practices or defending legitimate organizational policies that are criticized by colleagues.Supportive and affirmative voices both emphasize support for employment practices (Van Dyne et al., 2003).Votes in favor must be motivated by the belief that they cannot make a difference, but votes in favor are not subject to the same constraints.Supportive voice is also similar to organizational loyalty, namely, ties to the organization and its leaders (Graham, 1991) and loyal boosterism.Supporting voice, on the other hand, differs from this construct in that it must convey information to members of the organization.
Constructive voice, This is the voice of the challenge/promotion quadrant.Being constructive means encouraging improvement by challenging current circumstances (Gorden, 1988).Constructive voice is the voluntary expression of ideas, information, or opinions that focuses on how changes in an organization's operations impact the work environment.Expressions of constructive voice may include recommendations about (a) new or better methods of doing something; (b) solutions to previously identified problems; or (c) a solution to a previously identified problem.By prioritizing the improvement of the work environment, constructive voice is similar to active/constructive voice (Gorden, 1988), organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) voice forms identified by (Van Dyne & Lepine, 1998) and prosocial voice (Van Dyne, 2003).However, constructive voice is also different.Active/constructive voice and OCB have a broader meaning because OCB includes non-expressive behavior, such as staying informed about work problems and participating in decision making.Prosocial voice, on the other hand, is more limited because it must be driven by a desire to help others.
Defensive voice, Defensive voice is defined as behavior that follows the preservation or prohibition quadrant.In this case, being defensive means protecting the status quo from potentially protective changes (Ashforth & Lee, 1990).Defensive voice is defined as voluntary resistance to changes in an organization's policies, procedures, programs, and practices, even when those changes are good or necessary.Representative behavior includes stubbornly opposing changes to work methods or vocally opposing changes to standard operating procedures.Behaviors referred to as defensive voice were also included in the three-factor model (Van Dyne, 2003).Although their notion of these constructs is similar to ours, namely, that both are defensive measures intended to reduce a perceived threat, they differ in two important respects.First, their idea of defensive voice is broader, because their idea of defensive voice is focused on protecting the status quo, and second, their idea of defensive voice is broader, because their idea of defensive voice includes more people than ours Because both emphasize to maintaining the status quo, a defensive voice is similar to resistance to the construct of change.However, defensive voices are more active because they ask that change not occur; resistance to change is more passive because the focus is on avoiding change that has already occurred.
Destructive voice: The last voice is the challenge/prohibition quadrant.This kind of behavior is called destructive noise.Hurting or criticizing by challenging or putting down or ending (by forbidding) is the definition of being destructive (Gorden, 1988).Destructive voice is defined as the voluntary expression of hurtful, critical, or demeaning opinions about policies, practices, customs, and so on (Maynes & Podsakoff, 2014).Representative behavior includes criticizing organizational policies, making disparaging comments about work-related programs, and harshly criticizing the way the organization operates.Destructive voice and active voice both emphasize deep criticism of the status quo (Gorden, 1988).However, active and destructive sentences include uncritical expressions about the work context such as fawning and duplicity.Destructive voice also resembles the construct of OCB in that it depicts a lack of sportsmanship with behaviors such as "complaining, moaning, and railing against real or imagined insults" (Organ, 1988).Destructive voting differs from poor sportsmanship in three important ways.The first is that poor sportsmanship is not limited to conveying information; the second is that poor sportsmanship behavior includes unrestricted delivery of practices, policies, or work methods; and the third is that bad sportsmanship does not include disparaging expressions.

Antecedents of Employee Voice Behavior
Several previous studies have deeply explored vocal behavior, and in this study, we investigated the entire literature including a number of empirical studies (see table 2) that provide insight into the elements that influence vocal behavior.Findings regarding the factors that influence vocal behavior have also been classified into two levels, namely the individual level and the group level.to core abilities and personal traits that influence how they tend to process thoughts, experience feelings, and behave.Job and organizational attitudes and perceptions factors, related to work attitudes refer to relatively stable cognitive evaluations, while job perceptions show how someone understands and interprets their position in the workplace.The emotion and beliefs and schemas factors refer to an individual's feelings and understanding of the work environment.Supervisor and leader behavior factors, leaders can encourage or hinder staff members from voicing their opinions, so that these factors influence their voices.Meanwhile, contextual factors refer to factors that come from outside and environmental attributes.

Outcomes of Voice behavior
From the analysis we conducted of all existing literature, it can be concluded (as stated in Table 3) that employees who demonstrate vocal behavior have the potential to increase work engagement, job performance, employee retention, innovation, employee satisfaction, organizational climate, leader member exchange etc.

Individual
Employee motivation (Aboobaker & Zakkariya, 2023;Alfayad et al., 2017;Buzás & Faragó, 2023;Donovan et al., 2016;Duan et al., 2022;Hosseini et al., 2020;Ju et al., 2019;Lee, Choi, et al., 2023;Liao et al., 2019;Lin et al., 2020;Mowbray et al., 2020;Ng & Feldman, 2012;Ouyang et al., 2022;Rubbab et al., 2023;Smith, 2012;Zhang et al., 2020) Organizational Factor Individual Leader member exchange (LMX) (Hsiung, 2012;Liao et al., 2019;Liu et al., 2021;Nazir et al., 2020;Opoku et al., 2020 From the information documented in Table 3, it can be seen that several factors that tend to be influenced by voice behavior can generally be categorized into individual factors and organizational factors.In the context of individual factors, this relates to the way individuals generate impact when they express or express their views, turn creative ideas into measurable results, and trigger innovative changes.Meanwhile, in the context of organizational factors, this relates to efforts to build strong relationships between employees and the organization.

Antecedents
Outcomes their ideas and feedback.Positive emotions at work also play a critical role in promoting voice behavior, as happy employees are more likely to engage in proactive communication.c.Emotion, Beliefs, and Schemas Factors: This includes Engagement, Self-efficacy, Psychological Empowerment, and Psychological Safety.Engagement refers to the emotional and cognitive connection employees have with their work, which motivates them to contribute ideas.Self-efficacy, or the belief in one's own ability to succeed, encourages employees to express their thoughts and suggestions confidently.Psychological empowerment involves employees feeling a sense of control over their work and decisions, which fosters a proactive communication environment.Psychological safety is the belief that one can speak up without the risk of punishment or humiliation, which is crucial for voice behavior.d.Individual Disposition Factors: This refers to the role of personality traits in influencing Employee Voice Behavior.Traits such as proactivity, openness to experience, and conscientiousness can significantly impact an employee's likelihood to speak up.e. Contextual Factors: These include Organizational Career Development, Organizational Commitment, Organizational Culture, and Organizational Identification.Organizational career development opportunities can motivate employees to voice their suggestions for improvements.Organizational commitment reflects the emotional attachment employees have to their organization, which can drive them to speak up for its betterment.A supportive organizational culture that encourages open communication is essential for promoting voice behavior.Organizational identification, where employees feel a strong alignment with the organization's values and goals, can also enhance their willingness to voice their opinions.f.Individual Outcomes: These include Innovative Behavior, Employee Satisfaction, Well-being, and Employee Motivation.Voice behavior can lead to increased innovative behavior as employees feel more empowered to share creative ideas.It also enhances job satisfaction and overall well-being, as employees feel valued and heard.Employee motivation can be boosted when employees see their suggestions being implemented.g.Organizational Outcomes: These encompass Leader-Member Exchange (LMX), Organizational Culture, Work Engagement, Job Performance, Employee Retention, and Organizational Climate.Effective voice behavior can improve LMX, creating a more cohesive and supportive work environment.A positive organizational culture that values employee input can be reinforced.Increased work engagement and job performance are direct outcomes of an environment where employees feel their voices matter.Higher employee retention rates can be achieved as employees are more satisfied and committed to an organization that values their input.Lastly, a positive organizational climate that fosters open communication and trust can be established.In brief, Figure 7 illustrates a comprehensive framework where various antecedents across different levels influence Employee Voice Behavior, leading to significant positive outcomes both for individuals and organizations.Understanding these relationships helps in creating strategies to promote an environment where employees feel encouraged and safe to express their ideas and concerns.

Discussion
After investigating a number of relevant articles in the context of research regarding Employee Voice Behavior, it was found that there were 21 variables that were related and had the potential to influence Employee Voice Behavior.There are several supervisor and leader behavior factors, including:

Transformational Leadership dan Employee Voice Behavior
Transformational leadership involves inspiring others to aim high, creating strong emotional connections, and challenging employees to innovate.Research shows that transformational leaders make employees feel psychologically safe, allowing them to speak openly without fear of judgment.This triggers employee voice behavior due to a high level of trust and understanding of their superiors.Research also shows that employees under transformational leadership have more opportunities to communicate with their superiors informally, which strengthens interactions and the exchange of ideas.Other studies confirm that transformational leadership has a significant effect on voice behavior (Detert & Burris, 2007;Duan et al., 2017;Ross et al., 2014).

Ethical Leadership dan Employee Voice Behavior
Ethical leaders demonstrate normatively appropriate behavior and influence employee behavior through twoway communication, reinforcement, and decision making.From several points of view, ethical leaders influence employee voice behavior.They serve as models for their employees, building trust and loyalty, and encouraging a transcendental search for meaning in life.Research supports that ethical leadership influences voice behavior (Avey et al., 2012;Bai et al., 2019;Cheng et al., 2022).

Servant Leadership dan Employee Voice Behavior
Servant leadership pays attention to employee growth and creates a work environment that motivates and appreciates employees.This encourages active employee participation and creates an environment where ideas and suggestions are heard and valued.Research shows that servant leadership has a positive effect on employee voice behavior (Detert & Burris, 2007;Liao et al., 2022;Lu et al., 2021).

Inclusive Leadership dan Employee Voice Behavior
Inclusive leadership focuses on the interactive relationships and involvement of subordinates in the organization.Inclusive leaders encourage employee participation and acceptance of new ideas, which can encourage employee voice behavior.Research shows that inclusive leadership is positively correlated with employee voice behavior (Carmeli et al., 2010;Guo et al., 2022).

Paternalistic leadership, Authoritarian leadership dan Employee Voice Behavior
The paternalistic leadership style consists of morality, benevolence, and authoritarianism.Morality reflects a strong moral nature and commitment to the welfare of others.Benevolence shows concern for employees, both in personal and work matters.Authoritarianism emphasizes strict control and total obedience of subordinates.Paternalistic leaders support employee voice by facilitating social exchange relationships, asking for employee opinions, and offering solutions for work improvement.Research shows that both paternalistic and authoritarian leadership have a positive effect on employee voice behavior.(Chan, 2014;Nazir et al., 2020;Li & Sun, 2015;Zhang et al., 2015) shows that paternalistic and authoritarian leadership leadership has a positive effect on employee voice behavior.

Authentic leadership dan Employee voice behavior
The ideas of positive psychology became the basis of the authentic leadership theory developed by Avolio and his colleagues.This theory emphasizes four main components: self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and understanding identity.Authentic leadership is expected to influence employee work attitudes and behavior, such as job satisfaction and commitment to the organization.Research shows that leaders who are aware of their strengths and weaknesses are more likely to support employee voice (Hsiung, 2012).Although there is no clear theoretical or empirical relationship between authentic leadership and voice behavior, positive mood and good relationships between leaders and employees may mediate the relationship.Therefore, it is important for businesses to select and promote authentic leaders to create a work environment that supports the exchange of ideas among employees.

Leader member exchange (LMX) dan Employee Voice Behavior
Exchange theory provides a basis for understanding the relationship between leaders and their subordinates, which is referred to as Member Exchange (LMX).LMX emphasizes the quality of relationships between leaders and individuals in the organization.Leaders may have different relationships with each employee, affecting their level of freedom, opportunity for voice, and access to communication channels.High LMX relationships, characterized by mutual trust, respect, and loyalty, provide employees with more opportunities to voice and exchange ideas with their leaders than those with low LMX relationships.This leads to Employee Voice Behavior that is more active and productive in the work environment.This also goes with research conducted by (Hsiung, 2012;Liao et al., 2019;Liu et al., 2021;Nazir et al., 2020;Opoku et al., 2020;Park & Nawakitphaitoon, 2018;Shehata et al., 2023;Van Dyne et al., 2008;Wang et al., 2023;Zhang et al., 2015) shows a positive relationship between LMX and employee voice behavior.
In job and organizational attitudes and perceptions factors, there are several factors that influence Employee Voice Behavior, including:

Managerial opennes and Employee voice behavior
Employees tend to be more active in speaking up if they feel their managers are open to their input, even though the decision to speak up is an individual choice.A manager's openness is reflected in his ability to listen to employees, pay attention to their input, and give fair consideration to the ideas and suggestions presented.This openness is considered important in facilitating the exchange of information from employees to managers.In line with research conducted by (Detert & Burris, 2007;McCarthy & Keller, 2022;Prince & Rao, 2022;Zhu & Akhtar, 2019) shows that managerial openness is positively related or has an influence on employee voice behavior.

Trust in management and Employee voice behavior
Trust is a psychological condition that makes a person vulnerable to the actions of others, based on positive expectations of their intentions and behavior.Employees' trust in management refers to their willingness to accept management's vulnerability in risky situations.Citizenship behavior, similar to voice behavior, involves more than simply performing a primary duty; also includes conveying ideas and opinions to others.Because voice is often associated with initiative and change, it is considered a proactive behavior.Employees who trust management tend to be more active in speaking up because they feel more comfortable voicing their opinions and problems to management.This is in line with research conducted by (Farndale et al., 2011;Holland et al., 2012;Hu & Jiang, 2018;Rees et al., 2013;Spencer, 1986;Unler & Caliskan, 2019;Zhou et al. , 2017) states that trust in management is an important factor in creating a positive psychological atmosphere for speaking.Conversely, when employees do not trust management, they will be more reluctant to take risks and remain silent about their problems.

Felt obligation dan Employee voice behavior
Felt obligation describes employees' subjective beliefs that they must contribute more to advancing the organization.This motivates them to use their voice because they feel a strong responsibility towards the welfare of the organization.Employees with felt obligation actively take responsibility for the results of their work and look for ways to improve organizational operations.Vote is a spontaneous action that cannot be forced by a company, and is triggered by a complex cognitive assessment process.This is in line with research conducted by (Duan et al., 2022;Liang et al., 2012;Liu et al., 2021;Rubbab et al., 2023;Um-e-Rubbab et al., 2023;Yang et al., 2019;Zhu & Akhtar, 2019) which states that felt obligation has a positive relationship or influence on employee voice behavior.

Job autonomy dan Employee voice behavior
Work autonomy is an employee's innate need to have control over their own actions.Hackman & Olham's (1976) definition states that work autonomy involves significant freedom, independence, and freedom in performing and scheduling tasks.Employees who feel they have work autonomy tend to show high levels of engagement and improve their performance.They are also more likely to take pro-organizational actions outside of their official duties, assist in solving problems, and provide constructive suggestions to improve organizational performance.This shows that job autonomy contributes to employee engagement and better organizational performance.In line with research conducted by (Elsetouhi et al., 2023;Ju et al., 2019;Kao et al., 2022) states that job autonomy has an influence positive towards voice behavior.

Positive emotion dan Employee voice behavior
Positive emotions are strong affective experiences, such as happiness, pride, and satisfaction.The broaden and build theory states that positive emotions increase life satisfaction, expand attention, and build physical and psychological resources.As individuals interpret changes in situations, they experience brief reactions known as positive emotions, such as gratitude.When organizations implement Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices, it can give rise to positive emotions such as happiness and pride among employees, according to emotional events theory.Research conducted by (Chou et al., 2020;Du & Wang, 2021;Liu et al., 2021;Ruck et al., 2017) argues that positive emotions are related to employee voice behavior due to work events, and certain emotions can predict their attitudes and behavior.The expanded and constructed theory of positive emotions is a framework that evaluates how positive emotions influence human functioning.
Furthermore, regarding emotion, beliefs and schemas factors, there are several factors that influence Employee Voice Behavior, namely:

Engagement dan Employee voice behavior
Employees who are physically, emotionally, and psychologically engaged at work tend to make significant contributions to organizational growth and goal achievement.The concept of involvement, introduced by Kahn in 1990, shows that employee involvement in the organization, whether physically, cognitively, or emotionally, is related to work performance.In 2004, Gallup researchers highlighted the importance of employee engagement, which involves individual thoughts and feelings.Engaged employees will work collaboratively, look for innovative ways to increase organizational productivity, and feel comfortable lending their voice to make valuable contributions.An organizational environment that facilitates employee voice and builds trust in leadership tends to increase levels of employee engagement, which is a valuable asset for organizational success.In line with research conducted by (Alfayad et al., 2017;Azevedo et al., 2021;Chan, 2014;Du & Wang, 2021;Ghani et al., 2023;Hashemiamin & Ramezani, 2022;Jha et al., 2019;Kao et al., 2020;Lam, et al., 2016;Liang et al., 2017;Lin et al., 2020;Liu et al., 2022;Nazir et al., 2020;Ng & Feldman, 2012;Qi & Ming, 2014;Rees et al., 2013;Ruck et al., 2017;Shehata et al., 2023;Song et al., 2022;Wilkinson et al., 2004;Wu & Du, 2022;Xiao et al., 2023) states that employee engagement influences employee engagement.Employee engagement shows the level of employee ability and engagement in solving problems, communicating, and developing innovative services (Schaufeli et al., 2006).Employees who feel emotionally and cognitively involved with the organization will be more motivated to voice ideas and suggestions for the betterment of the organization (Burris et al., 2008).

Self efficacy dan Employee voice behavior
Managers often feel pressure to perform well, but their perceptions of their managerial self-efficacy vary, influencing how they accept suggestions and ideas from subordinates.Managers with low levels of managerial self-efficacy tend to be more receptive to input from subordinates, because they consider improvement ideas from below to improve their unit's performance.However, a lack of confidence in their abilities can make them feel threatened and reluctant to accept employee voice.Studies show that managers with low managerial self-efficacy tend to ask less for input, which in turn reduces the level of employee voice.Additionally, low managerial self-efficacy is associated with defensiveness toward feedback, indicating a negative impact on managerial-employee interactions.Therefore, self-efficacy has a relationship or impact on voice behavior, in line with research conducted by (Avery, 2003;Du & Bao, 2023;Fast et al., 2014;King et al., 2020;Choi et al., 2023;Li et al., 2022;Macmahon et al., 2018;Ouyang et al., 2023;Prince & Rao, 2022;Tangira et al., 2013;Wei et al., 2015;Xue et al., 2020;Zhang et al., 2019;Zhang et al., 2020) shows that self-efficacy influences voice behavior.

Psychological empowerment dan Employee voice behavior
Psychological empowerment, proposed by Conger & Kanungo, refers to the process of enhancing individual capabilities in an organization through the discovery and elimination of situations that lead to helplessness.It is related to self-efficacy, which reflects a person's belief in their ability to achieve desired goals and performance.Speaking behavior, as part of a challenge to the status quo in the organization, requires encouragement to carry Employees with psychological empowerment tend to feel more control over their work and are more likely to engage in voice behavior.Research shows that job satisfaction and psychological empowerment mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and employee voice behavior, highlighting the important role of voice behavior in psychological empowerment (Ilyas et al., 2021).

Psychological safety dan Employee voice behavior
Psychological safety, as explained by Mulyadi, Suhariadi, and Tulisyawati (2021), includes team behaviors that are focused on learning, including asking for feedback, seeking creative solutions, and being open to mistakes and concerns.Organizational success is positively influenced by psychological safety, which also influences the likelihood of employees using their voice.Previous studies have shown that when employees' perceived safety increases, they tend to be more willing to speak up, while Kahn stated that psychological safety in the workplace is demonstrated by supportive management and free speech.When employees feel psychologically safe, they feel more comfortable voicing their opinions because they see the team as a safe environment for taking interpersonal risks. in line with research conducted by (Buzás & Faragó, 2023;Elsaied, 2019;Kim et al., 2023;Liang et al., 2012;Miao et al., 2020;Opoku et al., 2020;Rong et al., 2022;Unler &Caliskan, 2019;Xue et al., 2020;Yan & Xiao, 2016;Yang & Wang, 2020) which shows the positive impact of psychological safety on employee voice.
Furthermore, in the individual position factor there are several factors that influence Employee Voice Behavior such as:

The role of personality dan Employee voice behavior
Several studies have investigated the five-factor model of personality as it relates to "talking up" behaviors, such as employee voice (Avery, 2003;Henry & Foss, 2015;LePine & Van Dyne, 2001;Tedone & Bruk-Lee, 2022).The five main personality traits that are focused on are extraversion, conscientiousness, openness to experience, agreeableness, and neuroticism.Although extraversion appears to influence voice behavior, other traits such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness to experience are not always consistent predictors.Conscientious people may prefer to solve problems themselves, whereas happiness or openness to experience does not always correlate with voice behavior.Although there is a relationship between extraversion personality and employee voice behavior, the findings suggest that the role of personality in voice behavior requires further research and that other factors may also moderate the relationship between work attitudes and voice behavior.And finally, in terms of contextual factors, there are several factors that influence Emloyee voice behavior, such as:

Organizational Career Development dan Employee voice behavior
Career development is a strategy that helps companies retain and develop employees who have appropriate competencies and experience.This reduces dependency on recruiting new employees and provides benefits to both the company and the individual.Career development helps employees plan their future at the company, providing respect and opportunities for growth.Social exchange theory supports a positive relationship between voice behavior and organizational career growth, as employees feel a responsibility to give back when given the opportunity by the company.In addition, organization-based self-esteem, which reflects a person's confidence in his or her abilities and importance as a member of the organization, also influences voice behavior.The third theoretical basis for our research is psychological attachment theory.As research conducted by (Wang et al., 2014) found a positive relationship between three dimensions of organizational career growth and voice behavior.Research conducted by (Ahmad & Bilal, 2023;Amah & Oyetunde, 2023;Chen et al., 2023;Weng et al., 2010) shows that career development has an impact on employee voice.

Organizational Commitment dan Employee voice behavior
Organizational commitment is a measure of how strongly employees are connected to the company's goals and values.This reflects the employee's tendency to remain part of the organization.People with high affective commitment will be more dedicated to supporting the organization, even in difficult situations.The strong relationship between affective commitment and extra-role behavior indicates that employees who have a strong commitment to the organization tend to actively participate in voice behavior, making positive contributions to the company.This research is in line with research conducted by (Caliskan et al., 2023;Cheng et al., 2022;Farndale et al., 2011;Garg & Anand, 2020;Harwiki, 2016;Jena et al., 2017;Lapointe & Vandenberghe, 2018;Nisar et al., 2020) shows that commitment within the organization is very important and has an impact on employee voice behavior to convey ideas and ideas for the progress of the organization.

Organizational identification
Identification with the organization influences employee motivation and performance.Employees who feel connected to the organization tend to be more motivated and perform better.For those who feel strongly attached to an organization, the way the organization portrays them is also important, as this influences the individual's identity.Social identity theory helps explain that helping others and citizenship behavior are normal because they also benefit oneself.Identification with the organization encourages employees to voice their opinions, as they feel they own the organization's goals and objectives as their own.Therefore, the benefits of identification on performance usually occur in the form of behavior that is under the individual's control, such as voice behavior.Research conducted by (Kim & Rim, 2023;Mowbray et al., 2015;Qi & Ming-Xia, 2014;Wang & Yen, 2023) shows that organizational identification has an influence on voice behavior.
The results of this research, which are related to the results or impacts of the influence of employee voice behavior (Employee Voice Behavior), show variations in results with 10 variables that are influenced by Employee Voice Behavior (EVB).In terms of individual factors, there are several factors that are influenced by Employee Voice Behavior, such as:

Innovative behavior
Voice behavior, which includes providing opinions and suggestions to improve organizational efficiency, is a key way for employees to demonstrate proactivity in the workplace.Although sometimes considered threatening to management, this behavior is actually indicative of a psychologically altered team leader.Employees who speak out for the organization gain prestige and self-esteem, demonstrate organizational status, and may be more motivated to behave innovatively.Innovation, driving new solutions and ideas, is the key to higher productivity and competitive advantage in an era of fierce competition.Therefore, voice behavior not only influences innovation and creativity, but also represents a proactive step towards change that benefits the organization.In line with research conducted by (Azevedo et al., 2021;Elsetouhi et al., 2023;Jha, 2022;Li et al., 2022;Miao et al., 2020;Nazir et al., 202a;Ouyang et al. al., 2022) states that employees who dare to express opinions or convey ideas will have an impact on innovative behavior.

Employee satisfaction
Employee voice behavior is not just critical; they also influence a person's work attitude positively.Proposed changes in the organization can be seen as an effort to improve performance and improve operating procedures, so employees who speak up tend to respond positively.Voice behavior not only provides organizational benefits, but also provides personal benefits to employees, improves team communication, aids problem solving, and strengthens employees' reputations in the public eye.Research shows that employee voice influences job satisfaction, as it expresses a desire to share positive experiences at work.In line with research conducted by (Adhyke et al., 2023;Alfayad et al., 2017;Avey et al., 2012;Chou et al., 2020;Donovan et al., 2016;Farrell, 1983;Gorden, 1988;Hashemiamin & Ramezani, 2022;Stamper & Van Dyne, 2001;Tedone & Bruk-Lee, 2022;Unler & Caliskan, 2019) argue that the voice of employees who successfully complete tasks or offer new work experiences increases self-confidence and job satisfaction.Therefore, employee voice influences or impacts job satisfaction.

Well-being
Employee well-being includes health, happiness and comfort at work.Research shows that employee voice behavior has a positive impact on their well-being.When employees feel heard and appreciated, they feel a stronger emotional engagement with the organization, which can improve their well-being by enabling participation in problem solutions and a feeling of ownership towards the company.In line with research conducted by (Avey et al., 2012;Fan & Lin, 2023;Lin et al., 2020;al., 2023;Sherf et al., 2021) states that voice behavior has an impact on employee well-being.
Meanwhile, in terms of organizational factors, there are also several factors that are influenced by Employee Voice Behavior, such as:

Leader member exchange (LMX)
Employee voice behavior involves making innovative suggestions for change and recommending modifications to standard procedures, especially when employees are dissatisfied and want to talk about their ideas for improving organizational success.Although these behaviors are not mandatory in the job description, employee voice can be risky because it suggests changes to existing processes and procedures.Employees need to consider the risks and concerns of their voices, especially when having a good relationship with their boss.High quality LMX relationships can make employees more comfortable speaking up because it creates open channels of communication between them and their leaders.In accordance with research conducted by (Hsiung, 2012;Liao et al., 2019;Liu et al., 2021;Nazir et al., 2020a;Opoku et al., 2020;Park & Nawakitphaitoon, 2018;Shehata et al., 2023;Van Dyne et al., 2008;Wang et al., 2021;Zhang et al., 2015) states to encourage effective and positive changes in situations Organizations currently need the voice of employees who will have an impact or have a high LMX relationship with their leaders.

Organizational culture
Voice behavior is someone's courage to voice opinions, input, or criticism about matters relating to the organization, such as policies, procedures, work environment, or other issues.Such as research conducted by (Aslam & Maitlo, 2019;Bach & Edwards, 2013;Emelifeonwu & Valk, 2019;Kim & Rim, 2023;Kwon & Farndale, 2020;Moorman & Blakely, 1995;Ouyang et al., 2022;Park & Nawakitphaitoon, 2018;Qi & Ming-Xia, 2014;Stamper & Van Dyne, 2001;Tangirala et al., 2013;Yue et al., 2022) Because voice behavior can encourage innovation, work improvement, employee involvement, and create trust and openness.Therefore, it is important for an organization to encourage a culture that supports voice behavior to create an environment where employees feel safe to voice their opinions and their opinions are valued.

Job performance
When employees feel supported to convey ideas, concepts and solutions, this can increase innovation, the ability to identify problems, communication between teams, as well as employee involvement and motivation in doing their work better.Therefore, research conducted by (Chou et al., 2020;Dua et al., 2023;Graham, 1991;LePine & Van Dyne, 2001;Lin et al., 2020;Ng & Feldman, 2012;Wilkinson & Fay, 2011) states that this voice behavior plays an important role in improving overall performance in the organization

Employee retention
Employee retention rates are greatly influenced by employee voice behavior, which includes the opportunity and ability to voice opinions, ideas and issues related to the organization.When there is support for voice behavior, employees feel valued, heard, and make significant contributions.This increases engagement and emotional attachment, as well as job satisfaction, which are major factors in an employee's decision to stay with the company.Research conducted by (Lam et al., 2016;McCarthy & Keller, 2022;Salamzadeh & Hosseini, 2021;Spencer, 1986) states that by encouraging positive voice behavior, companies can improve the relationship between employees and the company, which increases the possibility of retain valuable employees.

Organizational climate
With voice behavior support, employees feel valued and heard, and feel comfortable voicing their opinions, input, or concerns.It influences organizational culture by increasing transparency, openness, and trust between employees and management.A culture that supports voice behavior also encourages creativity, innovation, and more effective conflict resolution.Therefore, research conducted by (Cheng et al., 2022;Hsiung & Tsai, 2017;King et al., 2020;Mowbray et al., 2020;Rubbab et al., 2023;Wang & Yen, 2023;Wei et al., 2015) stated that companies with a culture that supports voice behavior tend to have higher levels of employee engagement, as well as a more positive and productive work environment that contributes to performance and success.

Conclusion
This research provides an integrative and comprehensive review of the literature on Employee Voice Behavior (EVB) over the past 53 years.By systematically examining both the antecedents and outcomes of EVB, this study identifies several research gaps and offers directions for future research.This study uses 158 relevant articles.These 1970-2023 articles are chosen by title, abstract, and keyword.Analyses used VOSViewer, Publis or Perish, and Mendeley.According to this study, several factors affect employee voice behavior.This study's framework can be expanded and analyzed in other research contexts.Understand Employee Voice Behavior to create a more complete framework.Thus, this research is intended to inform the development of Employee Voice Behavior research structures, focusing on additional factors that may affect it and its future effects.

Theoretical Implication
This study makes significant contributions to the existing body of literature by systematically examining the factors influencing Employee Voice Behavior (EVB) within organizations.By utilizing advanced bibliometric tools such as VOSViewer, Publish or Perish, and Mendeley, this study offers a comprehensive analysis of existing research, identifying key themes and trends in the field.This systematic literature review aims to bridge the gap between theoretical insights and practical applications, providing a nuanced understanding of how EVB can be leveraged for organizational success.By elucidating the mechanisms through which employee voice can foster innovation, enhance organizational performance, and improve managerial decision-making, this research provides valuable insights for both academics and practitioners

Managerial/Practical Implication
The findings of this study are expected to inform the development of targeted strategies that organizations can implement to encourage and effectively manage employee voice, thereby gaining a competitive edge in today's dynamic business environment.For managers, understanding the factors that influence EVB can lead to more informed decisionmaking and strategy formulation.By fostering an environment where employees feel safe and valued when expressing their ideas, organizations can enhance employee satisfaction, retention, and overall performance.Furthermore, practical applications of this research could include training programs aimed at improving leadership styles, particularly transformational and ethical leadership, which have been shown to significantly impact voice behavior

Limitation
This study provides a comprehensive review of research advancements in employee voice behavior spanning over five decades.However, it acknowledges several limitations.Firstly, employing the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) method risks introducing bias in article selection, potentially excluding significant contributions from non-English language articles.Secondly, focusing solely on published works may limit understanding of the broader contexts influencing Employee Voice Behavior holistically.Thirdly, while the study identifies factors influencing employee voice behavior, further analysis is necessary to comprehend the complex interactions among these variables and their practical implications across diverse organizational contexts.
To address these limitations, future research is advised to consider the following steps.First, to mitigate selection bias, researchers could broaden their search scope to encompass publications in various languages and from diverse geographical regions.For instance, collaborating with international scholars to translate and include studies from non-English journals could provide a more comprehensive insight.Second, incorporating grey literature such as dissertations, conference papers, and industry reports can capture a wider range of contextual variations.Third, conducting in-depth contextual analyses through case studies or qualitative research across different organizational settings could deepen understanding of contextual factors influencing voice behavior.For example, a case study on employee voice behavior in multinational corporations could illuminate how cultural differences impact the expression of ideas and concerns.Moreover, researchers could explore how cultural values influence employees' confidence in voicing their ideas in global work environments.Such studies could adopt interdisciplinary approaches integrating insights from psychology, sociology, and management, alongside advanced statistical methods like structural equation modeling or multi-level analysis, to unravel the intricate interactions among variables influencing voice behavior.This approach aims to contribute significantly to enhancing the theoretical understanding and effective management practices of employee voice behavior across diverse organizational contexts globally.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Stages of Research Methods

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Temporal Distribution of Publications

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Co-word map network visualization

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Correlation of the most productive researchers in Employee Voice Behavior

Figure 7 .
Figure 7. Findings of Antecedents and Outcomes of Employee Voice Behavior Source: Data processed, 2024 4.1.8.Findings of Antecedents and Outcomes of Employee Voice Behavior Figure 7 presents a detailed visualization of the factors influencing Employee Voice Behavior and the subsequent outcomes.It categorizes these factors into several groups, each impacting Employee Voice Behavior in distinct ways.a. Supervisor and Leader Behavior Factors: This includes various leadership styles such as Transformational, Ethical, Servant, Inclusive, Paternalistic, Authentic leadership, and Leader-Member Exchange (LMX).Transformational leadership inspires and motivates employees to transcend their self-interests for the sake of the organization, fostering an environment where employees feel safe to express their ideas and concerns.Ethical leadership involves leaders demonstrating normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, influencing employees to speak up.Servant leadership focuses on serving the needs of employees, encouraging them to share their ideas openly.Inclusive leadership emphasizes involving employees in decision-making processes, which promotes open communication and idea sharing.Paternalistic leadership combines strong authority with fatherly benevolence, leading to a protective and participative atmosphere.Authentic leadership, which involves being true to oneself and transparent with employees, builds trust and encourages openness.Lastly, Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory highlights the quality of the relationship between leaders and their followers, which can significantly impact employees' willingness to voice their opinions.b.Job and Organizational Attitudes and Perception Factors: These factors include Managerial Openness, Trust in Management, Felt Obligation, Job Autonomy, and Positive Emotion.Managerial openness refers to the extent to which managers are approachable and willing to consider employees' suggestions, directly affecting employees' propensity to voice.Trust in management creates a safe environment for employees to express their thoughts without fear of negative repercussions.Felt obligation is the sense of duty employees feel towards the organization, which can drive them to voice their concerns for the betterment of the organization.Job autonomy provides employees with the freedom to make decisions, which can encourage them to share

job satisfaction, job performance, meta analysis, moderating role, organizational justice, responses, trust dan work. • Cluster 6. Warna biru muda yang terdiri dari 10 item antara lain climate, context, cross level, felt obligation, leadership, multilevel, organizational culture, personality, servant leadership dan speaking. • Cluster 7. The orange color consists of 5 items such as, behavior, organizational identification, self, support, work engagement. • Cluster 8. The brown color consists of 4 items, such as, authentic leadership, commitment, high performance work dan impact
The red color consists of 20 items, including: citizenship behavior, diversity, employee engagement, employee silence, Employee VoiceBehavior, empowering leadership, engangement, identity, india, intrinsic motivation,  involvement, job autonomy, justice, management, mediating role, motivation, organizational commitmen, powerdistance, self determination theory dan workplaces • Cluster 2. The green color consists of 18 items including: construct, creativity, Employee Voice Behavior, ethical leadership, extra role behavior, gender, model, organizational citizenship behavior, performance, proactive personality, psychological safety, satisfaction, self efficacy, silence, stress, supportive leadership, transformational leadership, voice behavior • Cluster 3. The blue color consists of 14 items including, abusive supervision, antecedents, consequences, conservation, identification, perceptions, power distance orientation, prohibitive voice, promotive voice, psychological ownership, regulatory focus, resources, social exchange dan supervisor sub ordinat.• Cluster 4. The yellow color consists of 14 items including: china, employee involvement, employee voice, human resource management, industrial relations, information sharing, innovation, leader member exchange, LMX, participation, paternalistic leadership, proactive behavior, promotive voice behavior dan voice.• Cluster 5.The purple color consists of 11 items including, lain citizenship, impression management,

There are 5 researchers who have the largest number of publications in the field of Employee Voice Behavior. The most productive researcher in publishing his research results, namely Tony Dundon, is Professor of HRM and Employment Relations, Department of Work & Employment Studies in the Kemmy Business School, namely 15 documents. Adrian Wilkinson is a Professor at Griffith University, Australia, namely 24 documents. Jimmy Donaghey is Professor of Human Resource Management at UniSA Business School, namely 10 documents. Richard Barry Freeman is an economist, The Herbert Ascherman Professor of Economics at Harvard University, namely 5 documents and most
recently Linn Van Dyne received her Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota with a concentration in Strategic Management and Organization, namely 7 documents.These researchers often work together to publish research results.

Table 2 ,
Employee Voice Behavior is generally influenced by five factors, namely individual disposition factors, job and organizational attitudes and perceptions factors, emotion and beliefs and schemas factors, supervisor and leader behavior factors, and contextual factors.Individual disposition factors relate

Table 3 .
Outcome of Employee Voice Behavior