2
opportunities to be heard in organizations. Before examining research on voice, I provide a foundation in muted-
group theory in order to provide support for examining the experiences of employees.
Muted-group Theory
Anthropologists Shirley and Edward Ardener initially developed muted-group theory as they recognized
through their fieldwork and observations that all societies privilege some groups over those of others (E. Ardener,
1978; S. Ardener, 1975, 1978). This theory addresses the process of muting groups through the dominant discourse,
but does not describe how a sense of voice can be regained or maintained nor does the theory attempt to articulate
those voices. The Ardeners described their finding that the communication of those at the top of the social hierarchy
in a culture determines the dominant discourse for that society, thus reinforcing the worldview of those in power.
Simultaneously, however, those groups that are not privileged are not given voice to express their experiences and
perceptions and do not have their worldview included in the societal discourse. The dominant discourse renders
these other perspectives “mute” or “inarticulate” by leaving out their voices. Although the Ardeners recognized the
process of muting of groups on a cultural level, the manifestations of voice or lack of voice are present in daily
interpersonal, group, and organizational interactions.
In the United States, women and people of color (i.e. non-European Americans) have been historically
muted, as have people who are disabled, homosexuals, and often non-native English speakers. Muted-group theory
was expanded through the work of communication scholars examining the experiences of members of these groups,
especially women (Kramare, 1981). The basic tenet of muted group theory is that some groups are privileged over
others. As a result, members of different groups (e.g., men and women) have different experiences and they perceive
the world differently. Privileged groups dominate the public discourse so it is their concerns and perspectives that
are centralized while others are kept at the margins. This presents an additional challenge, as members of mute or
subordinate groups must use the language of the dominant group to get their concerns recognized in the public
realm. Yet, resistance is possible. By creating new vocabulary and developing new media, it is possible for muted
groups to change their status. A number of studies have attempted to remedy this lack of voice by helping members
of some of these groups to voice their concerns. One of these studies is described here as an example.
Orbe (1994) studied the communication of African American males as a muted group since their discourse
and worldview are not typically part of the dominant norms in the United States. Using a phenomenological
approach, he gathered insights from 35 African American men to better understand their lived communication
Convention