In today's working world, which is characterized by rapid change and increasing complexity, creating a positive team climate is becoming ever more important. A key aspect of this climate is psychological safety. But what exactly does psychological safety mean and why is it crucial for teams?
What is psychological safety?
Psychological safety describes a climate within a team where members feel safe to openly express their thoughts, ideas and concerns without fear of negative consequences or judgment. The term was popularized by the research of Amy Edmondson, a professor of leadership at Harvard Business School. She defines psychological safety as “a shared sense of confidence that the team provides a safe environment in which to take risks”.
Why is psychological safety important?
Promoting innovation: In a safe environment, team members are more willing to share creative ideas and take risks. This leads to more innovative solutions and products.
Improved communication: Psychologically safe teams encourage open communication. Employees feel comfortable asking questions or voicing concerns, which reduces misunderstandings and improves collaboration.
Error culture: In an environment with high psychological safety, mistakes are not punished but seen as learning opportunities. This promotes a culture of continuous learning and improvement.
Employee retention: When employees feel safe and valued, their job satisfaction increases. This leads to greater loyalty to the company and reduces turnover.
Team performance: Ultimately, research shows a clear link between psychological safety and team performance. Teams with high psychological safety achieve better results and are more effective in their work.
Special cultural challenge - the culture of error
Psychological safety is not a luxury, but a necessity in the modern working world. Companies should actively work to create an environment in which employees can feel safe - be it through training to promote open communication or through managers setting an example of a positive error culture.
Considering the German cultural standards as described by Alexander Thomas and Sylvia Schroll-Machl, I see the focus on transforming the error culture. In German-speaking countries, a critical approach to mistakes is often cultivated. German perfectionism is deeply opposed to actively allowing mistakes. Traditionally, the aim was/is to first develop an error-free theoretical construct before embarking on practical implementation - consider the costs that can arise if you engage in a haphazard, trial-and-error approach. This intolerance of mistakes is deeply rooted in German culture. Even if the management level exemplifies a tolerant error culture, this is often viewed skeptically by employees.
On a subtle level, however, people still pride themselves on being innovative and making as few mistakes as possible. This is often done by anticipating and excluding many possible mistakes in their thought processes. This creates an informal competition for the “most error-free innovation”. And this perpetuates a fear of making mistakes, which ultimately damages the psychological safety of the team and limits the ability to innovate. In order to prevent this, management, as the culture driver, should be particularly reflective here and constantly check whether it itself feels recognition for the old patterns and expresses this in some form.
Kommentarer