This paper explores the power effects of, and possible justifications for, the differential 'voice' and 'silence' accorded academic and non-academic subjects within Critical Management Studies (eMS). I explore these issues through a discussion of the practice of 'giving voice' to some subjects critiqued in eMS journal articles by providing them with the opportunity to publish a 'response'. I question the justification for extending this right only to academic subjects, and use this example to provoke eMS to question further its institutional orientation to issues of voice and silence in relation to the non-academic research subject
