Skip navigation

The Spiral of Silence, Employee Silence, and Courageous Followership in the Military Context

The Spiral of Silence, Employee Silence, and Courageous Followership in the Military Context

Ellen R. Noble | 2025

Abstract

How often have you seen something unsettling at work but been wary of saying anything about it, instead choosing silence? This study addressed the convergence of the concepts of the spiral of silence, employee silence, and courageous followership in the military context. The spiral of silence refers to a person’s reluctance to address a topic when they believe others disagree (Noelle-Neumann, 1974), and employee silence puts the need to speak up in the context of work (Beheshtifar et al., 2012; Ghias & Kazmi, 2022; Lee et al., 2014). Followership theory involves the interaction between followers and leaders. Against that backdrop, courageous followership qualities include a willingness to confront a leader or others who are in the wrong (Chaleff, 2009b). While silence and speaking up are at odds, the military context adds a dimension of obedience and following orders to the environment. Leaders have the power to encourage thoughtful debate or stifle dissent, and their actions can produce effects on an organization. Shin et al. (2022) called for research on individual expression of views in fields beyond social media and public opinion, and Zia-ur-Rehman et al. (2022) recommended further qualitative study of courageous followership. The spiral of silence, employee silence, and courageous followership are broad topics individually. Academic searches did not produce results that combined them and added the military context. Therefore, this qualitative phenomenological study answered two research questions: (a) What influences an Air Force officer to remain silent when the circumstances call for speaking up? and (b) What encourages the traits of courageous followership in these situations? The results indicated that difficult leaders, military structure, individual confidence levels, and potential consequences affected the participants’ willingness to speak up, while followers assessed their environment to determine the expected efficacy of exercising courageous followership by speaking up. Yet, some situations compelled participants to speak up, regardless of the potential consequences. Furthermore, followers would speak up if leaders encouraged it. Understanding the factors contributing to silence versus speaking up in the military context and beyond could help theorists and practitioners develop and encourage courageous followership behaviors.

Keywords: Courageous Followership, Employee Silence, Military Context, Speak Up, Spiral of Silence