Governing by discipline: evidence on employee silence under authoritative bureaucracies

Purpose This study investigates how employee silence is produced and sustained within authoritative bureaucracies, using Turkish public sport management as an illustrative case. It explores how hierarchical control, institutional routines, and internalised norms shape silence, as more than the absence of voice, functioning instead as a practice of organisational compliance. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a qualitative approach, combining critical thematic analysis with abductive reasoning. Data were collected from 34 professionals working in Turkish public sport management organisations through an online study. Analysis progressed through four iterative rounds, informed by Foucault's theory of disciplinary power and supported by reflexive collaboration with organisational scholars. Findings Silence emerges from relational and procedural mechanisms in authoritative bureaucracies. Three interrelated themes were identified: (1) silence produced through proximity and everyday power relations; (2) silence as a strategy under employment insecurity and organisational expectations; and (3) disciplining voice through self-governance. The findings show how silence becomes a rational and routinised strategy in response to embedded power relations, particularly among contracted, junior, and female employees. Practical implications Findings indicate that speaking up becomes more likely when its risks are structurally minimised. Anonymous digital reporting channels, reverse mentoring schemes and mandatory psychological safety training for managers create safer conditions for voice than simply encouraging employees to express themselves. Policymakers should establish credible and protected feedback systems, while reformers need to address the hierarchical bottlenecks that tie career progression to silence. Originality/value The study advances theoretical understanding of employee silence by highlighting how it is normalised and maintained in centralised public organisations through disciplinary power and internalised control. It contributes to public management and employment relations research by providing an empirically grounded account of how silence is institutionalised under authoritative bureaucracies, with implications for accountability, participation, and reform.