Creating psychological safety is a critical leadership energy in delivering traction of strategic objectives and building change-fitness.
An interesting observation talking with more and more leaders about Traction in their strategic programs and the leadership energy required to create psychological safety as a foundational phase – particularly for organisational leadership teams low in change-fitness is that the response falls into two distinct camps.
- The enthusiastic supporters
- The quiet sneer-ers
The quiet sneer-ers are the ones I like to draw out and explore the concern. It is always clear something is not quite right. The discussion raises frustration about having to ‘be nice”, “so called soft-skill stuff”, rah-rah, flowery ‘feel-good’ initiatives that don’t deliver results! It doesn’t take too much for them to open up and let it rip.
For those of you that have questions, or colleagues that have questions, about creating psychological safety as foundational energy for a leading with the most traction in your strategy execution and building a leadership team with the change-fitness to go again it is worth getting some things clear up front.
Talking about the importance to lead with creating psychological safety is not about being ‘nice.
It is about being kind. In fact, being ‘nice’ and not having the honest and challenging conversations is unkind.
‘Clear is kind. Unclear is unkind.’
—Brené Brown
This is supported by Brené Brown’s seven-year research study, where she explainsthat when we avoid clarity, we are being unkind and unfair.
In her book, Dare to Lead, Brown makes these four points:
- Feeding people half-truths to make them feel better (which is almost always about making ourselves feel more comfortable) is unkind.
- Not getting clear with a colleague about expectations because it feels too hard, yet holding them accountable or blaming them for not delivering, is unkind.
- Talking about people rather than to them is unkind.
- It is easier than a tough conversation to shut the discussion down saying something like “Got it, on it,” and run.
Anyone who has led transitions from lower levels of change-fitness can acknowledge that leading with creating psychological safety is uncomfortable for everyone. Knowing the fear, and removing yourself from the relationship is essential for individual and team growth. It requires you to care and play a bigger game than your discomfort.
When we are in fear, or an emotion is driving self-protection, there’s a predictable pattern to how we respond to that fear and protect ourselves. This self-protection is natural for anyone in a low level of change-fitness. Leading with acknowledgement and respect of our human nature is what we are talking about here.
I refer to Brown again here. Below, she demonstrates self-protection in the workplace by the armour we choose (Kininmonth, 2019).
- I’m not enough.
- If I’m honest with them about what’s happening, they’ll think less of me or maybe even use it against me.
- No way am I going to be honest about this. No one else does it. Why do I have to put myself out there?
- Yeah, screw them. I don’t see them being honest about what scares them. And, they’ve got plenty of issues.
- It’s actually their shortcomings and issues that make me act this way. This is their fault, and they’re trying to blame me.
- In fact, now I think about it, I’m better than them.
This self-protection ‘armour’ is familiar for anyone that visits an organisation low on change-fitness. You will hear a lot about ‘those people’.
Talking about the importance to lead with creating psychological safety is about managing by evidence.
Let’s look at this from a more analytical view though. Google brought their vast data capture and analytics capabilities to studying team effectiveness. In the now famous 2015 reWork study of 180 teams over two years they learned that there are five key dynamics that set successful teams apart from other teams at Google – and that the number one factor is –
Psychological safety: Can we take risks on this team without feeling insecure or embarrassed?
It is fascinating reading.
Creating a foundation of psychological safety opens an environment where we can appreciate differences, be open to new ideas, and take time to reflect; which are all essential for learning.
