Something to Say?

The Background

Many organisations claim to value open dialogue. Leaders talk about psychological safety, speak-up cultures, and inclusion. Yet women still learn, quickly and accurately, that some truths are safer left unsaid. That silence is not accidental. It is learned.

What the research tells us about women, voice, and silence

Women’s silence at work is not a confidence problem; it’s a rational response to their environment. This was the key finding in Tinuke M. Fapohunda’s 2016 study, Gender, Voice and Silence. It makes a point that is often missed in organisational conversations, that voice and silence are not personality traits; they are behaviours shaped by power, culture, and consequence.

When speaking up leads to being ignored, penalised, or subtly punished, silence becomes a sensible form of self-protection.

The study identifies different forms of silence, including:

• Defensive silence, to avoid backlash or harm

• Acquiescent silence, when you’ve stopped believing that things will change

• Pro-social silence, where people stay quiet to protect others or the organisation

Silence becomes an output of awareness.

The study also shows why many formal voice mechanisms fail women. Grievance procedures, feedback systems, and networks exist, but without psychological safety and leadership follow-through, they remain symbolic rather than usable.

The wider context

This research matters because it sits within a much bigger reality.

In the UK and globally, progress on gender equality is glacial. Widely cited research suggests it will take more than 130 years to close the gender pay gap in the UK at the current pace. When women are expected to be resilient, confident, and vocal in cultures that quietly punish honesty, then inequality is sustained not disrupted.

Psychological safety is a good example. Many leaders believe they have created it because they invite challenge or encourage feedback. The research suggests something more uncomfortable. Safety is not what leaders intend; it is what employees experience. It lives in what happens after someone speaks up.

When women see that raising concerns leads to defensiveness, inaction, or personal cost, silence becomes the logical choice.

Why this matters in the workplace, right now

The cost of silence is not abstract. When women go quiet, organisations:

• lose insight,

• lose challenge,

• and early warnings.

• Issues stay hidden.

• Innovation suffers.

• Trust erodes.

• Over time, disengagement turns into exit.

The study is clear that inclusion does not improve through statements or policies; it requires intentional leadership, cultural capability and consistency.

Leaders need to understand how power operates day to day, how their reactions shape future silence, and how voice mechanisms function in practice, not just on paper. Voice without listening is not inclusion. Feedback without action is not safety.

In my work with organisations, progress tends to start when leaders stop asking, “Why aren’t people speaking up?” or “Why does no one know what’s going on?” and start asking, “What happens when people are honest here?”

If your inclusion agenda feels stale or stuck, this may be why. Stagnation is not neutral. It signals that the underlying conditions have not changed.

When women go quiet, they are telling you something important. The question is whether leadership is prepared to listen and to act.