I have now finished reading Think Again: The Power of knowing What You Don’t Know by Adam Grant which I highly recommend – see my blog Keeping an Open Mind. In it I came across a concept which I recognise and understand, but had never seen expressed or explained so clearly – “psychological safety”. This is described as “fostering a climate of respect, trust and openness in which people can raise concerns and suggestions without fear of reprisal.” It is a term that was first coined by Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson in 1999 who codified the concept as “the belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes, and the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking”.
The topic is well presented in this Harvard Business Review article What Is Psychological Safety? where the author “reached out to Amy Edmondson… for a refresher” and which explains how Amy Edmondson arrived at this concept and defines psychological safety as “a shared belief held by members of a team that it’s OK to take risks, to express their ideas and concerns, to speak up with questions, and to admit mistakes — all without fear of negative consequences. As Edmondson puts it, “it’s felt permission for candor.”” It says “As Edmondson explained to me, the sense of safety and willingness to speak up is not an individual trait, even though it’s something you do feel and experience at the individual level; “it’s an emergent property of the group.”” It suggests psychological safety is important because:
This is particularly pertinent to any professional workplace. When I was in private practice I experienced two types of law firms. One was more collegiate and embraced its employees and partners in an open and co-operative way, encouraging collegiality and sharing work on matters for different clients. The other was more what was described as “eat what you kill” in which you kept all your clients to yourself and were very reluctant to expose the relationship to another colleague in case they “stole” the client. Of course, this is a matter of degree and there were elements of the opposite approach in each firm. I am also not saying one model is better than the other in terms of business success because they both work. However, looking back on my experience, I preferred working for the more collegiate firm, not just because it provided a more supportive environment, but because it encouraged open debate without fear of reprisal - which in turn led to better standards and improved business development. In other words it created an environment of psychological safety.
If you feel confident that a colleague will still support you after questioning an approach they may have – and vice versa – then you encourage an open culture where all can learn and grow. All are encouraged to have the freedom to speak up. See this article What Is Psychological Safety at Work? How Leaders Can Build Psychologically Safe Workplaces which starts “Psychological safety is the belief that you won’t be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. At work, it’s a shared expectation held by members of a team that teammates will not embarrass, reject, or punish them for sharing ideas, taking risks, or soliciting feedback.” And “Having a higher level of consistent psychological safety helps to unlock the contributions of all talent in the enterprise and ensures the organization is better equipped to prevent failure.” It suggests 8 steps to achieve this state including:
See also this McKinsey article What is psychological safety? which says: “Psychological safety nurtures an environment where people feel encouraged to share creative ideas without fear of personal judgment or stepping on toes.” And “it is consistently one of the strongest predictors of team performance, productivity, quality, safety, creativity, and innovation.” And in particular “leaders have a critical influence on a team’s psychological safety.”
This is a theme that comes out from Adam Grant’s book and through these various articles: creating this sort of open environment has to start at the top. The leaders of any professional organisation need to embrace the concept themselves and be open to suggestions and even criticism or this just will not work in their business.
As Edgar Schein professor at MIT Sloan School of Management observes “When leaders become genuine learners, they set a good example and help to create a psychologically safe environment for others.”
While the Stanford University professor Robert I. Sutton suggests “Psychological safety is the key to creating a workplace where people can be confident enough to act without undue fear of being ridiculed, punished, or fired – and be humble enough to openly doubt what is believed and done.”
And for a final word from Amy Edmondson “For knowledge work to flourish, the workplace must be one where people feel able to share their knowledge! This means sharing concerns, questions, mistakes, and half-formed ideas.”
The topic is well presented in this Harvard Business Review article What Is Psychological Safety? where the author “reached out to Amy Edmondson… for a refresher” and which explains how Amy Edmondson arrived at this concept and defines psychological safety as “a shared belief held by members of a team that it’s OK to take risks, to express their ideas and concerns, to speak up with questions, and to admit mistakes — all without fear of negative consequences. As Edmondson puts it, “it’s felt permission for candor.”” It says “As Edmondson explained to me, the sense of safety and willingness to speak up is not an individual trait, even though it’s something you do feel and experience at the individual level; “it’s an emergent property of the group.”” It suggests psychological safety is important because:
- [it] leads to team members feeling more engaged and motivated
- it can lead to better decision-making
- it can foster a culture of continuous learning and improvement
This is particularly pertinent to any professional workplace. When I was in private practice I experienced two types of law firms. One was more collegiate and embraced its employees and partners in an open and co-operative way, encouraging collegiality and sharing work on matters for different clients. The other was more what was described as “eat what you kill” in which you kept all your clients to yourself and were very reluctant to expose the relationship to another colleague in case they “stole” the client. Of course, this is a matter of degree and there were elements of the opposite approach in each firm. I am also not saying one model is better than the other in terms of business success because they both work. However, looking back on my experience, I preferred working for the more collegiate firm, not just because it provided a more supportive environment, but because it encouraged open debate without fear of reprisal - which in turn led to better standards and improved business development. In other words it created an environment of psychological safety.
If you feel confident that a colleague will still support you after questioning an approach they may have – and vice versa – then you encourage an open culture where all can learn and grow. All are encouraged to have the freedom to speak up. See this article What Is Psychological Safety at Work? How Leaders Can Build Psychologically Safe Workplaces which starts “Psychological safety is the belief that you won’t be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. At work, it’s a shared expectation held by members of a team that teammates will not embarrass, reject, or punish them for sharing ideas, taking risks, or soliciting feedback.” And “Having a higher level of consistent psychological safety helps to unlock the contributions of all talent in the enterprise and ensures the organization is better equipped to prevent failure.” It suggests 8 steps to achieve this state including:
- Facilitate everyone speaking up
- Establish norms for how failure is handled
- Create space for new ideas (even wild ones)
- Embrace productive conflict
- Make an intentional effort to promote dialogue
See also this McKinsey article What is psychological safety? which says: “Psychological safety nurtures an environment where people feel encouraged to share creative ideas without fear of personal judgment or stepping on toes.” And “it is consistently one of the strongest predictors of team performance, productivity, quality, safety, creativity, and innovation.” And in particular “leaders have a critical influence on a team’s psychological safety.”
This is a theme that comes out from Adam Grant’s book and through these various articles: creating this sort of open environment has to start at the top. The leaders of any professional organisation need to embrace the concept themselves and be open to suggestions and even criticism or this just will not work in their business.
As Edgar Schein professor at MIT Sloan School of Management observes “When leaders become genuine learners, they set a good example and help to create a psychologically safe environment for others.”
While the Stanford University professor Robert I. Sutton suggests “Psychological safety is the key to creating a workplace where people can be confident enough to act without undue fear of being ridiculed, punished, or fired – and be humble enough to openly doubt what is believed and done.”
And for a final word from Amy Edmondson “For knowledge work to flourish, the workplace must be one where people feel able to share their knowledge! This means sharing concerns, questions, mistakes, and half-formed ideas.”
RSS Feed
