Informal Communication, Gossip, and Decision Distortion in Shift-Based Long-Term Care Teams: A Conceptual Model

A conceptual model explaining how shift fragmentation, ambiguity, and stress can amplify negative gossip and organizational silence—distorting operational decisions and increasing burnout in long-term care teams.

Keywords

workplace gossipinformal communicationorganizational silenceshift worklong-term carenursing homesburnoutorganizational justiceteam dynamicsdecision quality

References

Almost, J. (2006). Conflict within nursing work environments. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(4), 444–453.
Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 452–471.
Arasli, H., & Tumer, M. (2008). Nepotism, favoritism and cronyism: A study of their effects on job stress and job satisfaction. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 28(9–10), 393–406.
Beersma, B., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2012). Why people gossip: An empirical analysis of social motives, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(11), 2640–2670.
Brady, D. L., Brown, D. J., & Liang, L. H. (2017). Moving beyond assumptions of deviance: The reconceptualization and measurement of workplace gossip. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(1), 1–25.
Bulduk, S., & Bulduk, E. O. (2016). The relationship between gossip and job satisfaction in nurses. Health Psychology Research, 4(1), 37–41.
Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400.
Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392.
Dyrbye, L. N., Shanafelt, T. D., et al. (2017). Burnout among health care professionals: A call to explore and address this underrecognized threat to safe, high-quality care. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 92(8), 1294–1301.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G., & Wittek, R. (2012). Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work? Social Networks, 34(2), 193–205.
Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2015). The effects of workplace incivility on employee silence and turnover intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(3), 619–631.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140.
Foster, E. K. (2004). Research on gossip: Taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 78–99.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.
Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16(2), 399–432.
Hutchinson, M., Vickers, M. H., Jackson, D., & Wilkes, L. (2006). Workplace bullying in nursing: Towards a more critical organisational perspective. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56(2), 118–126.
Kurland, N. B., & Pelled, L. H. (2000). Passing the word: Toward a model of gossip and power in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 25(2), 428–438.
Laschinger, H. K. S., Leiter, M., Day, A., & Gilin, D. (2009). Workplace empowerment, incivility, and burnout. Journal of Nursing Management, 17(3), 302–311.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2009). Nurse turnover: The mediating role of burnout. Journal of Nursing Management, 17(3), 331–339.
Manser, T. (2009). Teamwork and patient safety in dynamic domains of healthcare: A review of the literature. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 53(2), 143–151.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422.
Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725.
Noon, M., & Delbridge, R. (1993). News from behind my hand: Gossip in organizations. Organization Studies, 14(1), 23–36.
O’Daniel, M., & Rosenstein, A. H. (2008). Professional communication and team collaboration. In Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. AHRQ.
Rosnow, R. L. (2001). Rumor and gossip in interpersonal interaction and beyond. Psychological Science Agenda, 15(4), 1–4.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
West, M. A., & Lyubovnikova, J. (2013). Illusions of team working in health care. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 27(1), 134–142.
Wu, L. Z., Birtch, T. A., Chiang, F. F. T., & Zhang, H. (2018). Perceptions of negative workplace gossip: A self-consistency theory framework. Journal of Management, 44(5), 1873–1898.
Xie, J., Huang, Q., Wang, H., & Shen, M. (2019). Coping with negative workplace gossip: The joint roles of self-monitoring and impression management tactics. Personnel Review, 48(2), 443–460.

Long-term care organizations operate under continuous service delivery, rotating shifts, high emotional load, and fragmented communication cycles. Under these conditions, informal communication becomes a core sensemaking mechanism—yet it can also create reputational distortions that influence operational decisions (Noon & Delbridge, 1993; Kurland & Pelled, 2000).

1. Rationale

Gossip is evaluative communication about absent third parties and can reduce uncertainty, support social bonding, and enforce group norms (Foster, 2004; Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012). In environments where ambiguity is high and stakes are meaningful (e.g., shift allocation, vacation approval, task assignments), rumor and negative gossip can intensify and form self-reinforcing reputational cascades (Rosnow, 2001).

2. Structural conditions in shift-based teams

Shift fragmentation produces partial overlap between teams and asynchronous information cycles. This increases ambiguity and reduces collective alignment opportunities (Manser, 2009; West & Lyubovnikova, 2013). When formal channels are perceived as incomplete or unreliable, workers default to informal networks.

3. Gossip, micro-coalitions, and incivility

Gossip can be positive or negative; negative gossip tends to target specific reputational objects and reinforce network dynamics and coalitions (Ellwardt et al., 2012; Wu et al., 2018). Under workplace incivility, conflict can spiral and shift to indirect channels (Andersson & Pearson, 1999), which is particularly damaging in interdependent care teams (Almost, 2006).

4. Organizational silence and perceived favoritism

When scheduling and approval decisions are perceived as opaque or partial, organizational justice research predicts lower trust and higher favoritism attributions (Greenberg, 1990; Colquitt, 2001; Arasli & Tumer, 2008). In turn, employees may withhold concerns and feedback (employee silence), reducing error correction and increasing reliance on gossip (Morrison & Milliken, 2000; Dyne et al., 2003).

5. Outcomes: burnout, turnover, and decision quality

Burnout is linked to sustained organizational stress and low perceived control/support (Maslach et al., 2001). In healthcare, burnout and turnover reduce continuity and stability, amplifying systemic fragility (Leiter & Maslach, 2009; Dyrbye et al., 2017). Moreover, lower psychological safety undermines team learning and early problem signaling (Edmondson, 1999).

6. Conceptual model and hypotheses

The model links:

shift fragmentation → informational ambiguity
informational ambiguity → negative gossip intensity
negative gossip → organizational silence + reputational distortion
gossip/silence → burnout + lower trust → lower decision quality

Testable hypotheses:

H1: Shift fragmentation increases informational ambiguity.
H2: Informational ambiguity increases negative gossip.
H3: Negative gossip increases organizational silence.
H4: Gossip and silence increase burnout and reduce trust.
H5: Gossip and silence reduce perceived decision quality.

7. Practical implications

High-leverage interventions include explicit criteria for shifts and vacations, structured handovers, protected feedback mechanisms, and communication governance oriented to transparency and verifiability (O’Daniel & Rosenstein, 2008).

8. Conclusion

Gossip is not merely “noise.” In shift-based care environments it can become a parallel information system that, when persistently negative, distorts reputations and decisions while reinforcing silence and stress. The model provides a basis for empirical testing and targeted organizational interventions.