How A Lack of Psychological Safety Can Break a Team
Not yet convinced about the critical impact of Psychological Safety on the performance and health of your team? Think it’s all a bit wishy washy? Please read on…
The (Fragile) Power of Trust in Teams
How Psychological Safety Fuels Collaboration and Innovation
Psychological Safety, defined by Harvard professor Amy Edmondson as "a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking," ensures that team members feel they can admit mistakes, speak up, share ideas, and express concerns freely, without fear of ridicule or punishment. Its importance has been validated not only by academic research but also by leading organisations like Google, who conducted studies into what makes teams successful.
Google's Project Aristotle: Uncovering the Key to Team Success
In 2012, Google launched an extensive research initiative known as Project Aristotle. The goal was to identify what makes some teams more effective than others. Having analysed hundreds of teams and examined a wide range of factors, from team composition (how individuals are selected) to the way team members interact, they found that the "who" of the team—its individual members—mattered less than how the team worked together.
The study found five key dynamics that separated high-performing teams from less effective ones:
Psychological Safety: Team members feel safe to take risks and be vulnerable in front of each other.
Dependability: Team members reliably complete high-quality work on time.
Structure and Clarity: The team has clear roles, plans, and goals.
Meaning: Work is personally important to team members.
Impact: Team members believe their work matters and creates change.
Among these, psychological safety was the linchpin. Without it, Google found, the other four dynamics could not thrive. In other words, psychological safety was the most critical factor in determining a team’s success. When people felt safe to express their opinions, disagree, and take risks without fearing embarrassment or negative consequences, teams were more likely to be innovative, collaborative, and ultimately successful.
The Impact of Psychological Safety - a personal perspective
The findings of Project Aristotle mirror my own experience, never more so than the times when psychological safety was lacking. In each instance, it was the leader who set the tone, who created a culture where inter-personal risk taking felt…well, too risky. These leaders rarely did so intentionally however. Nor was it for a lack of experience or genuine care for the team’s success; rather, it was their limited self-awareness, their inability to acknowledge their own fallibility, and a reluctance to accept the validity of other, often more junior, people’s insights, that stifled open dialogue, critical feedback and ultimately growth.
For the team to openly disagree or raise concerns, let alone admit mistakes, meant we were always at risk of being ridiculed, dismissed or simply ignored, and in the long term voicing dissenting opinions felt pointless, exhausting and counter productive. Over time, the impact was significant:
Ideas were left unsaid: Fear of being dismissed or ridiculed caused us to withhold valuable ideas, which could have driven innovation and improvement.
Collaboration broke down: Without trust, collaboration faltered. We became more focused on self-preservation than working effectively as a team.
Stress and disengagement increased: The constant pressure to conform to the leader’s views and the absence of open dialogue led to frustration, disengagement, self doubt, and eventually turnover.
Unforced errors were made and mistakes were repeated: Because genuine concerns were often dismissed and mistakes neither admitted nor learned from, ‘failing fast’ became ‘failing slowly, painfully and repeatedly’.
The Broader Lessons from Google’s Findings
Google's research highlights the importance of creating a psychologically safe environment where every team member feels respected and empowered to contribute. Here are a few key takeaways based on both their findings and my own experience:
A Leader’s Self-Awareness is Crucial: Leaders must be attuned to the impact of their behaviour on team members. A lack of self-awareness, even with good intentions, can create an environment where people feel stifled and afraid to speak up.
Feedback Should be Encouraged, Not Dismissed: Leaders should proactively seek and be receptive to feedback from their teams, as it is essential for fostering an open and safe culture. Psychological safety thrives when team members know that their contributions, including dissenting opinions, are valued. A culture where feedback is encouraged leads to more robust decision-making and innovation; one where ideas are dismissed or ridiculed leads to stagnation.
Trust Fuels Collaboration: As Google found, psychological safety is the foundation upon which trust is built. When team members trust that they can voice their thoughts without retribution, they are more likely to work together effectively and creatively.
Psychological Safety Benefits Everyone: Google’s research showed that psychologically safe teams were not only more productive but also more satisfied in their work. Creating this environment is a win-win for both the organisation and the individual.
Moving Forward: How to Build a Psychologically Safe Environment
Fostering psychological safety takes deliberate effort and continuous attention. Here are some ways to build it:
Encourage open dialogue: Leaders and team members should actively encourage and model open communication, ensuring that everyone feels comfortable sharing their thoughts.
Embrace vulnerability: When leaders and team members admit mistakes and uncertainties, it sets the tone that imperfection is acceptable, promoting a culture of openness.
Seek and act on feedback: Leaders should regularly seek feedback from their teams and, crucially, act on it. This demonstrates that feedback is valued and drives real change.
Acknowledge and celebrate contributions: Recognising and celebrating diverse viewpoints and contributions can reinforce the value of psychological safety.
Conclusion
Psychological safety is not a “nice-to-have” but a necessity for effective team functioning. Google's Project Aristotle clearly demonstrates that teams with high psychological safety consistently outperform those without it, underscoring its importance. My personal experience in a team lacking this safety reinforced how damaging its absence can be to morale, innovation, and collaboration.
For organisations looking to thrive, fostering psychological safety is essential. It empowers teams to take risks, voice concerns, and innovate, leading to greater success and satisfaction for everyone involved.
