Why is psychological safety the number one key to your team's success?

People have shared basic human needs since the dawn of history. Belonging to a certain group implies survival. In a popular TED talk, Simon Sinek demonstrates how trust among humans was a critical component even in ancient times for providing a sense of safety.

“In a dangerous environment, you can only sit quietly if you believe someone else will guard the camp”

The last time I slept in a military ambush was many years ago, but I remember very well how quickly we fell asleep when our turn came. It was fatigue, but also the reliance on our friends within the team. Sinek argues that a similar experience exists in the modern business world, a competitive and constantly threatening environment. The sense of security within the team is crucial for people to collaborate and effectively face external challenges. It is, of course, the leader's role to create such a safe environment within a dangerous and uncertain world. This safety is based not only on the leader's knowledge or business skills but perhaps most importantly on the personal connection the leader establishes with their people. It also relies on a strong belief among the "followers" that the leader always prioritizes their needs above his own.

Google has conducted one of the most extensive studies in recent years on the subject of teams

They found that the strongest-performing teams in the company had one common element: Psychological safety. This refers to how much I can take a risk in this team without fear of significant reprisal or embarrassment in case of failure. For example, how freely can I raise a new idea without the fear of looking foolish? Am I likely to be attacked if I oppose an idea put forth by a team member? What price will I pay if I admit that I don't understand what I'm supposed to do?

Before delving into the psychological safety component, let's recall the other four elements (in addition to psychological safety):

• Dependability: How much can we trust each other to deliver high-quality work?

• Clarity: How clear are our roles and goals?

• Meaning of Work: Are we working on something that is personally meaningful to us?

• Impact of Work: Do we believe that the work we do makes a difference in the world or for the customer?

Why is psychological safety so crucial? 

Most of us are reluctant to enter situations that might challenge the way others think about us or perceive our abilities. Therefore, we refrain from asking questions we're unsure are relevant or seeking help when we're stuck. The point is that this is precisely what makes teams effective—teams that achieve high accomplishments. This is because their members take new initiatives, collaborate well, and stay in the organization over time.

“Be at your best" today is fundamentally different from what it was twenty or even ten years ago: instead of just quality task execution, “Be at your best" now means providing creativity and innovative thinking at all levels of the organization. To be at their best, people need to experience psychological safety.

Why is psychological safety so difficult to achieve? The answer is in the survival mechanism of Fight or Flight

Our brains are wired to recognize situations of danger or "life or death." In our modern world, this often translates to an offending remark from our manager or an insulting remark from a colleague at work being perceived as such a threat. The brain's amygdala, our neural alarm system, triggers a “Fight or Flight” response and temporarily overrides the functioning of other advanced parts of the brain, such as logical or empathetic analysis, leading to an "act first, think later" mentality. This mechanism, which was and still is effective in extreme situations, significantly limits our ability to think clearly in our work environment.

How do we recognize that there is a lack of psychological security in our team?

Anger and conflicts are always present in any team. What differs is how these situations are dealt with. Consider, for example, what happens when a team fails a task or encounters a significant issue: how do people react? Do they blame each other? Is there a “finger pointing” dynamic? Do people withdraw, or is there an effort to understand the source of the problem (a departure from the "fight or flight" mode)?

In a “Fight or Flight” situation, emotional and impulsive reactions are common, as are defensiveness, avoidance, and disconnect. We're all familiar with this state, where adrenaline floods our bodies, and we react from our nerves, not our head. It's very easy to slip into this state because it's an automatic response. In fact, such situations are part of life—a high level of passion and emotional involvement can certainly lead to emotional outbursts, and that's perfectly normal. The problem arises when this behavior becomes the norm in day-to-day interactions, and the workplace turns into a “battleground”. Such work environments usually suffer from hostilities—people form oppositional positions pitting themselves against their team members who take a different stance or support someone else.

I have worked with a management team that experienced a low level of psychological safety. Team members were excellent professionals, each in their respective fields. Their commitment to the organization was unquestionable. However, decision-making was extremely challenging, and even when decisions were made, everyone understood them differently. It was clear that the managers in this team did not trust one another. They were preoccupied with their personal agendas and dismissed any colleague's statement that contradicted their agenda, sometimes against them personally. In another article on the topic, I focused on structured processes for building trust in management teams.

Building psychological safety is a long and consistent process. Breaking it is much easier…

A condescending or dismissive statement can negate trust built through numerous expressions of trust. It doesn't work the other way around! I truly believe that people do their best to do the right thing to the best  of their understanding. When someone attacks you, saying "you don't know what you're talking about," they believe that it's the right way to convey a sharp message- to help you to take the right direction. However,  many times it only invites more of the same—fight or flight. I can't really ignore a statement like "I don't know what I'm talking about," and from there, it continues…

One of the most important roles of the leader is to properly handle the feelings of "fight or flight"

"Psychological safety is greatly influenced by role clarity and support from team members - when I understand what is expected of me and when I feel support and partnership from my colleagues, I feel secure to express myself.

The leader has a key role in creating such a work environment. Firstly, your team looks up to you and the way you handle conflicts. Therefore, engaging in a mature and attentive dialogue by the leader, even during disagreements, has a significant impact.

When there is conflict among your team members, help them find the bridge, the Win-Win. How can we reach a mutual solution? Our automatic reactions are either to take sides or not to intervene at all. Sometimes this might be the right thing to do, but often a more effective intervention is one that bridges the gap - talk to your team about the fact that their colleagues are doing their best and have their own perspectives and principles. Just like you, they also operate based on their beliefs and values, desiring satisfaction and appreciation. Just like you, they want to enjoy their work and maintain collaborative relationships. I know it might sound a bit Buddhist, but at least for me, it is very helpful (-: 

What else can the manager do to enhance psychological safety within the team

How do you, as a manager, respond to taking risks, encountering failures? Is it "dangerous" to make mistakes in your team? Consider also your own vulnerability: Do you occasionally share doubts and mistakes? Role modeling is always more powerful than any statement or expectation when it comes to creating a safe environment.

Replace blame with curiosity - blame and criticism escalate conflict and invite defensive attitudes and lack of commitment. If you're an Engineering manager and one of your team members struggles to provide quality code, genuinely assess the situation, and while doing that, assume there could be several explanations for the performance gap. Explore the situation together, let them lead the solution, and offer your assistance.

Building psychological safety in a team is an ongoing effort that requires determination, patience, and tons of role modeling. I believe there's no other way to succeed, and beyond that - being part of or leading a safe team is simply much more enjoyable!