Internal branding and employee dissent via online public outlets: implications for crisis prevention and communication

Our proposal focuses on a specific aspect of discursive dislocation and contesting in organisations: employee dissent via external online outlets. We link this issue to internal branding and its role in preventing publicly visible crisis threats. Dissent research indicates that dissatisfied employees might choose to either voice their concerns in the workplace, or remain silent (Morrison, Milliken 2000). Besides these two options, research outlines that silence does not mean acquiescence and might be an indicator of dissenting voice acts expressed via alternative outlets (Kassing, 1997). Such a discursive dislocation of dissent increasingly takes place in online outlets, where employees perceive higher public support and control over the discussion and their anonymity (Gossett, Kilker, 2006). Dissent and negative comments disclosed via online public outlets can originate “paracrises” (Coombs, Holladay, 2012) which require extensive scanning, quick assessment and even improvisation (Falkheimer, Heide, 2010) to avoid severe consequences on the organizational reputation (Ulmer, Sellnow, and Seeger, 2006; Schwarz, 2012). Internal branding is depicted as a communicative tool able to strengthen employee sense of belonging and supporting behaviours (Punjaisri, Evanschitzky, Wilson, 2009). In the context of displaced dissent and paracrises, internal branding might reduce the discontinuity between the position and interpretation of dissenting employees and those of the organisation, thus preventing disclosure outside organisational boundaries and its negative effects. Our proposal aims to broaden the understanding of these issues by building up a theoretical framework that displays antecedents and effects of displaced dissenting voice, with a particular focus on paracrises, and links this to internal branding as a relevant communicative means for understanding intra-organizational relationships and processes (Taylor 2010; Frandsen, Johansen, 2011) and eventually for preventing crises. Important implications for theory development and empirical research in crisis communication are discussed.