The Mediating Role of Organizational Dissent and Organizational Inertia in the Relationship Between Fear Culture and Organizational Blindness: Evidence from Schools

This study investigates the mediating effects of organizational dissent and organizational inertia on the relationship between fear culture and organizational blindness in schools. In contemporary educational institutions, which must adapt to rapid societal and technological changes, fear-based organizational climates can hinder teachers’ willingness to express opinions and engage in constructive criticism, thereby fostering organizational blindness. Organizational dissent, defined as employees’ expression of disagreements regarding organizational policies or practices, may serve as a counterbalance by enhancing awareness and preventing strategic errors. Conversely, organizational inertia, characterized by resistance to change and adherence to routines, can exacerbate organizational blindness. The study employed a correlational research design and collected data from 288 teachers working in state schools across various educational levels in Kilis, Turkey. Standardized scales were used to measure fear culture, organizational blindness, dissent, and inertia. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, correlation analyses, and mediation testing using Hayes’ PROCESS Macro (Model 4) with bootstrapping. Findings indicate that fear culture positively affects organizational blindness both directly and indirectly through increased inertia and decreased dissent. Specifically, organizational dissent partially mitigates, while organizational inertia reinforces, the impact of fear culture on organizational blindness. These results highlight the critical role of psychological safety, participatory management, and supportive school climates in fostering teacher engagement, promoting innovation, and reducing organizational blindness in educational settings. The study contributes to understanding the mechanisms through which fear culture influences school effectiveness and offers practical implications for educational leadership and policy.