Psychological safety anti-patterns
Psychological safety is one of those evergreen topics: we all know we need it, everybody wants it, but it’s hard to measure and is hard to actually produce. It’s certainly something we talk to our coaching clients and workshop participants all the time!
But first, let’s talk about what psychological safety even is. This helps us understand how it can go wrong, even with the best intentions.
What psychological safety looks like
Trust is frequently mentioned as major component. But… what does “trust” mean? It’s often used in these forms, which isn't trust at all:
- I trust you to do the right thing. Tends to be interpreted as a subtle threat: do it my way, or else.
- I trust you to meet your commitments. You will do the thing you said you’d do in the time frame we agreed on. But this is more about competence than trust. (David Marquet of “Turn the Ship Around” has a short video on why these are different things.)
Trust is more about the absence of fear:
- I trust that there won’t be negative consequences for trying new things and failing. This obviously comes with some parameters around scope, risk, competence, and consideration for opportunity cost. But at its heart it frees people from having to hide their work until it is “perfect”. It provides space for experimentation and innovation. It provides space to undo things that didn't work out. It is not a get-out-of-jail free card to hare off down a rabbit hole (consequences are still real).
- I trust that there won’t be negative consequences for not knowing everything. It must be safe to say “I don’t know” or “Let’s figure it out together”. An environment without this kind of trust is one in which people take longer to do their work because they are left to learn without guidance, or gamely forge ahead down the wrong path with the best of intentions.
Much as Yoda knows that “Fear leads to the dark side”, which eventually “leads to suffering”, we also know that the absence of fear and the assumption of good intent are required for psychological safety.
- I trust that you will assume that I am making the best decision I can make with the information I have at the time.
- Your knowledge of my competence means that you trust that I will ask for help when I am not confident about the task in front of me. I trust that you will not shame me for asking for that help.
The absence of fear leads to a learning culture.
Good intentions can sabotage team trust
Here are four phrases you might hear that can indicate your culture is working against your team’s psychological safety.
- Our psychological safety is great!
- But nobody has said there’s anything wrong …
- We have a flat hierarchy, everyone is equal.
- But only I know the big picture.
Let’s look at these in more detail.
Anti-pattern 1: Our psychological safety is great
This falls down in two scenarios:
- A few people in the team have that sense of safety, but the rest do not. There’s an informal power imbalance, due to seniority, choice of project, or even friendships.
- Your team’s safety was great, but as people join and leave the team, or the project changes, it has naturally eroded over time.
Anti-pattern 2: But nobody has said it’s bad…
Silence is golden, unless you have a toddler, a cat, or there’s a problem at work that nobody’s talking about. Then silence is suspicious. Very suspicious!
If people are not feeling confident about speaking up or asking questions about their work day to day, they are also not going to feel confident about admitting they don’t have psychological safety or an absence of fear. And if asked directly, they are likely to tell you what you want to hear instead of the truth.
You cannot assume no news is good news.
Anti-pattern 3: We have a flat hierarchy, everyone is equal
There’s a difference between what the org chart says, and what actually takes place day to day. Those informal power structures are getting in the way again.
The idea of a flat hierarchy is to empower everyone to participate in the decision making process, to remove rank, and divest authority evenly to all. Making this work in practice takes effort!
“We are all equal, it’s just some people are more equal than others.”
Anti-pattern 4: Only I know the big picture
Leaders are used to being rewarded for having the answers. “Just do what I say” is an easy route to take. It is easy to think you’re the best placed person to make a decision, either because of strategic contextual knowledge, or a sense of expertise from seniority.
This urge to control the situation worsens when something is urgent, or high risk, or we are frustrated or tired. It makes us revert to a more directive/autocratic style and use our authority to just make things go, because that feels ‘safe’ for us.
Unfortunately this makes it less safe for the team. They lose their autonomy, they’re working on something without knowing why, or being unable to ask questions, or they’re worried about risks that have been dismissed or that they haven’t felt able to even raise.
Countering these anti-patterns
Counter 1: We have good psychological safety
It’s always worthwhile to keep a low key watch on how your team interacts, whether your team has changed or not.
- Does everybody get an equal share of time to offer their thoughts?
- Are some people’s ideas routinely dismissed or interrupted?
- Are group decisions being finalised outside of the group?
Spotting informal power gradients:
- Is dissent regularly sought and honoured with constructive discussion?
- Do conversations occur without judgement of the people, even if the idea is eventually discarded?
To address these problems, you want to foster positive traits: ensure everyone is heard equally, and that ideas are considered on their merits (not just because an idea came out of a particular person’s mouth).
Counter 2: Nobody has told me it’s bad (and they would if it was)
As a leader, we can have blind spots, where we don’t realise that people might be telling us what they think we want to hear. To show you trust your team, and to demonstrate what good psychological safety looks like, you can use language to support you.
- Instead of
- “if you need me, let me know” - this might show up in an ‘open door’ policy, where there is an invitation but it also signals that you are otherwise too busy to check in proactively
- use “On a scale of 1-5, how helpful would it be if I … [took an action]” - this gives you feedback in the moment of how confident the other person is, without it being a yes/no response. It also gives the opportunity to talk about changing what the action is. Do they need to just have a checkin at the end of the week? Or have you sit in on a meeting? Or have a whiteboard session right now to nail down some details?
- Instead of
- “do you have any questions?” - a closed yes/no response, which people can have a mental blank in the moment
- use “What are the downsides to this idea?” or “What things might happen that mean we should pause?” or “What about this feels the most unclear/most risky to you?”
Counter 3: We have a flat hierarchy
Even a flat hierarchy has power structures. As a leader, you will still have greater influence than others. Use your authority judiciously, if you want to make it safe for others to discuss, make mistakes, learn and grow.
- Seek out opinions and thoughts from every one of the team members. The team isn't made up of clones. Even the newest junior on staff will know different things to the seasoned old hand, which are just as valid.
- Don’t offer your opinion until the end, otherwise people will anchor to what you’ve said first.
- Acknowledge not just good ideas, but also good questions. Encourage the behaviour you want to see more of: critical thinking presented kindly, and answered thoughtfully.
Counter 4: Only I know the big picture
Even if you believe you are an expert, and your way is the best way, hopefully your hubris doesn’t get in the way of validating that plan. If you've ever been stuck on something for hours one day, then woken up the next day with the elegant solution, that shows that even our own brains are not instant reliable geniuses. It stands to reason that getting input from a wider bunch of individuals will give us a stronger understanding of the pros and cons of an approach.
Role modelling is a really strong skill. If the leader can normalise vulnerability, it becomes easier to identify and call out behaviour that doesn't match this pattern. It’s normal, and human, to not know everything. Leaders generally spend more time further away from the tools: they’re no longer technical experts.
Whether you are genuinely the expert, or just wanting to get things done, there’s still great ways to bring others on board, that won’t consume too much time:
- What about this makes you uncomfortable/feels risky?
- What would have to be true for this to feel safer?
- How could we validate/test for the bad stuff?
- What are the holes in this plan/what is it missing?
- This is only one plan: what are some other options?
Building psychological safety when you’re not the leader
If you’re not the person with the most cultural influence, but you’re still invested in improving your team’s sense of trust, all hope is not lost!
- Start by proposing small changes, that are low risk and not likely to be contentious: what if we tried/experimented with …
- During code review, or pair programming, ask “I wonder what are some other ways to do this.”
- Have a go with something like the Inclusion Meeting Cards from Meetings Done Right. This encourages people to step out of their usual roles in group discussions.
- To raise things with your manager, who may be otherwise apparently unaware: “I know you need to make a decision on Thing X. How helpful would it be to hear the team’s thinking?”
Summary
Creating and maintaining psychological safety can be hard: humans are complicated on their own, and the complexity multiplies when we’re in a team. Psychological safety requires an absence of fear, to support the ability to learn and try new things.
This is an article, not a book, and so we have only looked at four ways that we can be blind to the state of trust in our teams, how we can spot when things are turning bad, and what we can try to address the situation.
If you’d like some support with improving and maintaining psychological safety in your organisation, schedule a no-obligation chat with us. We have helped many organisations with this challenge: make the most of our expertise!
This is a writeup of a talk Nicola gave to Tech Leading Ladies in Sept 2024. We love supporting the communities we are part of. If you’d like us to talk at your meetup/conference/podcast, let us know!