A meeting, a project drifting off track, and one person who notices. They know there is a mistake in the numbers, or a risk nobody has named. They stay silent. Why?
Hannah Arendt (Hanover 1906 – New York 1975) asked a similar question in the most radical way. Following the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1961, she wrote “Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil” (1963). She was not describing a monster, but a man she saw as shallow and unable to look at things from another person’s point of view: an absence of thought. For Arendt, thinking is the “silent dialogue of me and myself”, and conscience grows out of that dialogue. In the lecture “Thinking and Moral Considerations” (1971) she argues that those who do not stop to think are more exposed to following rules without asking what they are doing; and that those who refused to collaborate under Nazism were those who dared to judge for themselves, because they could not “walk away from themselves”.
A caution: comparing a work meeting with that history would be wrong. But Arendt leaves us a small, very useful lesson: thinking needs a pause, and judging needs courage.
Work psychology looks at the other side: knowing is not enough, one must be able to speak. Milliken, Morrison and Hewlin (2003) interviewed 40 employees: most had been concerned about an issue without raising it with their supervisor, and the most cited reason was fear of being viewed or labelled negatively. Detert and Edmondson (2011) described “implicit voice theories”: taken-for-granted rules, learned early, about when speaking up is dangerous, which can hold back voice even in objectively safe environments. Morrison (2014) reminds us that the choice to speak depends on two judgements: efficacy (will it change anything?) and risk (will it cost me?). In Italy there is also a legal safeguard: Legislative Decree no. 24 of 10 March 2023, implementing EU Directive 2019/1937, provides internal reporting channels and protection from retaliation for those who report violations.
For anyone who leads an office or a team, this is an invitation to look ahead. For a long time it was assumed that a manager’s authority was measured by always having the last word and keeping the group in line. Today we know this model is outdated: a team where those who think differently learn to stay quiet is not more united, only less informed. And when disagreement is smothered with sarcasm, group pressure or the isolation of whoever steps out of line, that person stops contributing, and the company loses exactly the new ideas it needs.
A true leader does the opposite: they open up to debate rather than endure it. Welcoming a different opinion does not mean agreeing with it, and it takes nothing away from authority. It means testing your own decisions before reality does. Research on psychological safety in work teams (Edmondson, 1999) shows that teams where people feel free to ask questions, raise doubts and admit mistakes are more likely to learn, correct course and innovate. Open debate is an investment in productivity, not a concession.
For office managers and Human Resources, then, the message is simple: nurturing a space where people can disagree respectfully is one of the most concrete ways to grow people, teams and results. Someone who offers a different idea is not a problem to be managed but a resource to be heard. And the manager who knows how to listen grows together with their team.
What to do on Monday morning? Two gestures. If you see a problem, before staying silent give yourself ten minutes of “dialogue with yourself” and write one sentence: “I noticed X, the risk is Y, I propose Z”. If you lead a group, ask in the meeting “what are we not seeing?” and thank the first person who answers, even when the answer is uncomfortable. A team’s silence is rarely a lack of ideas: more often it is a calculation of how much speaking costs.
When did you last stay silent in a meeting? What would have helped you speak?
Sources
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Hannah Arendt” (sections 1, 6.1-6.3).
- Arendt H. (1963), Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.
- Arendt H. (1971), “Thinking and Moral Considerations”, Social Research.
- Milliken F.J., Morrison E.W., Hewlin P.F. (2003), “An Exploratory Study of Employee Silence”, Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453-1476. DOI 10.1111/1467-6486.00387.
- Detert J.R., Edmondson A.C. (2011), “Implicit Voice Theories: Taken-for-Granted Rules of Self-Censorship at Work”, Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 461-488.
- Morrison E.W. (2014), “Employee Voice and Silence”, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 173-197.
- Edmondson A. (1999), “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
- Legislative Decree no. 24 of 10 March 2023 (Italy), transposing EU Directive 2019/1937 (whistleblowing).
Follow me on social media
If you found this article helpful, I share content like this every day on my channels too. Subscribe and follow along:
Lascia un commento