Psychological Safety - Not a Buzzword

Speaking to eighty people on a Zoom teleconference, our C-level leader, Bob, broke the news that we were pivoting. This time it amounted to a major change in strategy. 

We listened to the sobering news, recognizing that all the work we'd done and believed in for over a year was now mostly irrelevant. Worse, I know from subsequent conversations amongst the staff that many of us disagreed with the new strategy, in addition to feeling dismay over the loss of one we widely supported. 

“Okay, that’s the situation,” said Bob. “What do you think? Psychological safety, everyone. Speak your minds.”

Did you roll your eyes at that? You should. Bob just took one of the most difficult and important human factors at any company and put it into play as a buzzword. It was a very disappointing moment that came right on the heels of a very disappointing moment.

Why was it so disappointing? Bob asked for feedback after breaking the news. Did he really want to start a legitimate debate about the merits of the pivot? Did he hope to figure out if there were key misses or flaws in the plan that no one had yet brought to light? No, it was already a done deal, put into action behind closed doors. If Bob really wanted staff input, he would’ve asked us before it became a fact of our work life. Since he didn’t want to hold a debate, we can also deduce that he wasn’t interested in our opinions on the change. He just wanted to identify negative reactions. Then he could intervene (or send in his direct reports, which is what he did) to smooth over any problems. 

So What Is It Really?

What he did was the opposite of psychological safety. Given that story, and many other indicators, I think psychology safety (PS) is sadly misunderstood. Consider your current work environment:

• Can each person in a meeting be trusted to hear something that they might react to negatively, and yet refrain from putting down that person or damaging that person’s willingness to take the risk of speaking out? If a person states his point of view, confesses something, expresses, opines, whatever, and it is going to be weaponized, even privately, by anybody present, there is no PS. That can't be avoided in any large group teleconference, and everyone instinctively knows it. 
• You know the old saying about Edison and the light bulb? “I didn’t fail a thousand times. I just discovered a thousand ways NOT to create a light bulb.” This implies that every step, whether it achieves the hoped for success or not, is a necessary part of the journey. In order to get to that PS zone, can everyone in the group agree that mistakes – even mistakes that make the team late, even mistakes that create work for others – are additive steps in the right direction? 
• Can everyone in the group agree that having contrary opinions is everyone’s right, so long as their overarching intention is to put the team’s and the group’s success foremost? Can everyone agree that the company’s leaders see it the same way?
• Earning and keeping the team’s trust should be a leader’s ultimate goal. That’s incredibly hard and requires that the leader choose actions contrary to how most leaders are taught to act. PS goes even a step further, requiring that trust is spread between teammates, as well as between leaders and team members. If a leader is off making critical business decisions without input from those who need to make the decision a reality, how much trust is earned and kept by that leader? How much can we expect teammates to trust each other in that environment?

Is this true in your company or your group? If you don’t believe me, check out Simon Sinek in this fantastic TedTalk. Even more telling is Google's Project Aristotle, their research project seeking the qualities and characteristics of the perfect team. It's an extensive analysis but the bottom line is this: PS is #1 most important factor for high performance.

The Big Deal About PS

I’ve been asked, So what’s the big deal? If it takes so much work, PS can’t be worth it. Why does any of that matter? Look, people, I’ve seen it in action. I’ve enjoyed the colossal payoffs that come with strong PS. Here is what I have experienced.

When debate is espoused as healthy and necessary, the best ideas are always heard.

Ideas don’t die in someone’s mind because that person is reluctant to contradict or start an argument. Think about that for a moment. Like most tech companies, you’ve probably got a lot of brilliant introverts. They don’t want to rock the boat – they want to be invited into the conversation earnestly and encouraged to articulate even contrary perspectives. Without PS, at any instant of any day, someone in your team, group, or company could have a thought that unlocks your entire future (or prevents your worst catastrophe). Without that person feeling safe enough to speak out, her golden thought goes unspoken. Additionally, a byproduct of PS is an intrinsic respect that is granted to each team member to air opinions, share ideas, disagree, debate, collaborate. Every idea gets fair consideration. Without that intrinsic respect, even if a person with a golden idea speaks out, she would not be truly heard unless she happens to have high status throughout the organization. 

When mistakes are extolled as forward steps toward the team’s goal, people making mistakes don’t hide them.

Then they are quickly resolved with group aid and never repeated due to socializing of the knowledge of how to not make that mistake again. What should be understood here is that (other than politics) there is no single factor preventing success as profoundly as hidden mistakes.

When each team member trusts that the team will help and support each other, even when they fundamentally disagree, everyone is empowered.

Teammates are inclined to take more risks, try new approaches, attack something that requires a bit of growth, offer ideas that could save time and extra work, ask for help, jump in and help others even when they don’t have to. Empowering a team lights it up to achieve performance levels that surpass hopes. 

PS, and the trust it requires, engenders great and fearless loyalty.

When employees trust that leadership will protect them, give them the benefit of the doubt, and put their welfare and happiness above their own, magical things happen. They stay with the company. They give more than they’re asked to. They voluntarily uplift others around them. They grow to be happy. Do you know how rare that is in a group? Without that, the inescapable alternative is that your company becomes a political beast, where fear and infighting taint important factors, such as whether your employees stay or go, what decisions are minted and enacted in the trenches, how much of their energy and souls employees dedicate to their work, and whether or not your company achieves even a fraction of its hoped for success.