Decoding the psychological safety complexity

A recent executive who had changed his job made an interesting observation. He was my ex-student who had come for advice. Sitting with him was his friend, who was teasing him for leaving a big brand to join a much smaller brand.

Their conversation was telling. My ex-student looked at me and said, “It is not about being a small brand. It is big for me as I have a say there. What use is a big company where I am a nobody.” To this his friend replied, “Well, you were managing a portfolio of Rs…millions.” To this he replied, “Heading a million-dollar unit, and feeling as if I were worth less than a dollar.”

The conversation highlighted deeper insights. Big companies have their own pull but smaller companies have their own charm. When we talk about people being charming, we talk about why they are attractive. How many times have we seen highly placed, qualified, powerful people being overshadowed by charming people with lesser trophy traits? Many a time.

Organisations give a lot of importance to physical safety and little to psychological safety. You see companies have a whole division of “security” which is laced with people, equipment and budgets. Organisations consider safety their duty and top priority. Campaigns like SHE, i.e., safety, health, environment, are part of the major awareness and prevention plans. All of this is much needed.

Psychological safety that actually defines the real well being of a person is still just a corporate speak. Amy Edmondson defines psychological safety as “The belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes, and that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking”. Seems simple, isn’t it? Corporate corridors are crammed with leaders in a hurry. They breeze out of the boardrooms with the stress of delivering more and more. They are short of time, resources and breath. This makes them resort to the reactive mode. The mode of passing the stress downwards. Hurried meetings, plethora of numbers, ultimatums.

In this whole rushed, hushed environment, teams feel shut out, shunted out and voiceless. They dare not ask, question or complain as it will be held against them. That then creates that fearful insecurity that cannot be compensated by the best SHE (safety, health and environment) system that organisations have. According to a career trainer report the lack of psychological safety is cited as a major contributor to stress and anxiety for 70% of employees. That makes it a major barrier in engagement and company growth. Focusing on creating a psychologically safe culture will pay more dividends than investing in machines and capital. Let us decode the psychological safety drivers:

Decode#1- open and vulnerable: Leaders need to learn to step down from pedestals and show their own vulnerabilities to their employees. If he openly admits to his own imperfections he makes himself relatable. Other people become comfortable in expressing their shortcomings. Recently, one senior leader won over the Gen Z employees by admitting humorously, “My poor tech literacy needs help from our AI experts, SOS guys, please tutor me”. This comment literally opened the minds and hearts of people in the room. The fear of being inadequate vanished.

The unease of admitting it in front of others lessened. Humorous tone defused the seriousness of the situation. Psychological insecurity makes people resort to posing. Posing is trying to appear something other than what you feel. While posing is handy in some occasions, it is not a long-term solution. Leaders often pose to know it all. Leaders often pose as if the success belongs to them while failure is due to others. Such posing gives negative signals.

Decode#2-shift from genius to curious: Leaders associate their positions with their knowledge. They feel that they have reached superior positions due to their superior experience and knowledge. True. That, however, does not mean that the leader only tells, explains, instructs. If anything, leaders need to step down or out and get close to the employees and to the ground reality. With change accelerating its pace, leaders need to catch up constantly. That requires a shift to the curiosity mode. That requires a shift to the listening mode. That requires a shift to the questioning mode.

When leaders start listening and asking thought-provoking questions to employees, the disconnect starts fading. When people feel their views are being sought they feel engaged. When instructions become dialogues, relationships improve. The psychological impact of converting from being told and ordered to being asked and involved is 360 degrees. It invigorates minds, stimulates conversations and, most importantly, makes people part of the process.

Decode#3-from assent to dissent: The reason why people do not venture ideas forth is that they are afraid that if they do not agree with the higher-ups, they will face consequences. That is where the silent rebellion takes place. People are there but not there. When a leader deliberately creates a culture where disagreeing is not considered a fight but a creativity tool, then people feel safe to contribute. The main point is to disagree with respect. Training is required where people can be taught to say, “Your idea has some great merits, but I have another way of seeing it.” Such cultures liberate people psychologically and emotionally. “I can share my ideas even if they differ from those of my seniors,” said an employee when I asked him what was the best thing about the culture of the company.

Decode#4-from assuming to discovering: “I have to answer my boss’ message within an hour even if I am on the deathbed.” A delayed response on email or Whatsapp, a midnight ping, are all stress triggers for people. One employee who had not been able to reply for half a day as he was stuck in a house emergency said his boss was furious and labeled him as slow, dumb and rude. Not having that personal space is really like a sword dangling over your head. A culture where the leader assumes, labels and calls out people is definitely in the harassment category.

We live in a world of security alerts. Red and orange and other colours signify the threat level. These colours should also be used to signify the psychological safety of the departments and companies. No amount of bomb proof office can provide safety to a mind that is being oppressed, stressed and depressed. Unlike physical safety, psychological safety is not tangible. However, it is like oxygen. You cannot see it, but you cannot live without it.  With it the organisation breathes; without it the organisation dies.