Psychological Safety is Insufficient

By Karen Natzel, Business Therapist, K Communications

As a culture cultivator, I am buoyed by leaders’ growing awareness of psychological safety’s role in fostering healthy team dynamics. In the same breath, I feel I need to offer a cautionary tale about how it gets nurtured in the workplace, lest it turn into an unintentional liability.

Let’s start with what it actually means to have a psychologically safe workplace. Dr. Amy Edmonson, Harvard Business School Professor and pioneer of the concept defines it as “a belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes, and that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking.”

In her research, teams that had psychological safety as their backdrop were more likely to take initiative, be innovative, and bring out the best in each other. A psychologically safe workplace can help mitigate inherent power dynamics between leaders and their direct reports so that candid conversations can take place. It can foster a learning environment with a mindset of continuous improvement – emphasizing lessons learned over mistakes made.

Social scientist Timothy Clark outlines the following stages in his book, The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety:

Stage 1: Safety to connect – “Can I be myself?”

The journey starts with belonging. People need to know they are accepted and respected for who they are, regardless of background, role, or difference. Without it, people mask parts of themselves, and collaboration suffers.

Stage 2: Safety to learn – “Can I grow?”

Once people feel included, they want to develop. Learner safety is about giving permission to ask questions, experiment, and make mistakes without fear. Errors are reframed as opportunities to learn. Curiosity is encouraged, not criticized.

Stage 3: Safety to contribute – “Can I make a difference?”

Inclusion and learning pave the way for contribution. Here, individuals feel safe to use their skills, ideas, and strengths to make a tangible impact. Contributions are welcomed and recognized. Everyone’s perspective is seen as valuable. Leaders create space for people to step forward and add their voice.

Stage 4: Safety to challenge – “Can I challenge the status quo?”

The final stage is about courage. Challenger safety allows individuals to question assumptions and spark debate. Dissent is seen as healthy, not disruptive. Leaders invite contrarian voices, even when it’s uncomfortable. Teams become adaptable, resilient, and forward-thinking.

This is where true transformation happens — when people feel safe to question the way things are and imagine how they could be better.

Red Flags

Where it gets messy is when psychological safety is misconstrued, deployed purely rhetorically, or even weaponized, thereby eroding the very trust it is meant to establish.

What Psychological Safety is NOT:

1.     A shield for accountability. “While people should always be inherently valued, there’s no diplomatic immunity from delivering results in the workplace.”*

2.     A justification for the avoidance of hard conversations.

3.     Coddling. “Psychological Safety means respecting your humanity, not increasing your fragility.”*

4.     Consensus decision-making. Psychological safety gives people a voice, but it does not change decision-making authority.

5.     Unearned autonomy. Psychological safety can increase influence and contribution, but there is still oversight and approval in the mix.

6.     Placating. If you merely say the words but fail to live it in spirit, your culture will grow more toxic, not less.     

* Timothy Clark, The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety

Pitfall: Confusing safety with comfort

Psychological safety is not about making work comfortable. It’s about making honesty possible. When honesty is possible, teams learn faster, solve problems earlier, and hold each other accountable with far less drama and communication breakdowns. 

Hard conversations, tough feedback, and mistakes will naturally bring up challenging emotions that create discomfort. Growth comes from leaning into discomfort with a desire to improve and a curiosity to understand what happened so those mistakes are not made again.

Disagreements can be a sign of healthy, robust problem solving. A disagreement doesn't have to equate to defensiveness - it may simply be a difference of perspective or opinion.

The Psychological Safety [PS] + Accountability Matrix

1. Apathy Zone: [Low PS/Low Accountability] Disengagement, minimal effort, low initiative, check the box

Lack of direction, avoidance of difficult conversations, little recognition or feedback, Energy here feels flat. Innovation and ownership rarely appear.

2. Anxiety Zone: [Low PS / High Accountability] This environment pushes for results but punishes mistakes.

Fear of speaking up, risk avoidance, blame when things go wrong, defensive communication. People may work hard, but creativity and honesty shrink. Teams in this zone often hide problems until they become large.

3. Comfort Zone: [High PS/High Accountability] This is where the misinterpretation of psychological safety often lands.

Friendly relationships, avoidance of tough feedback, low performance pressure, lots of support but little stretch. The culture is pleasant but not very productive. Teams may protect harmony rather than challenge each other.

4. Learning Zone: [High PS/High Accountability] This is where strong teams live.

There is open dialogue, constructive challenge, clear expectations, rapid learning from mistakes, and ownership for results

Leadership Behaviors that Foster the Learning Zone

Leaders can create a sense of safety by admitting their own mistakes. When leaders model vulnerability and authenticity, they set the tone for learning.

They can also cultivate the learning zone by asking for people’s perspective and advice and thanking them when they raise concerns. When leaders are confident enough to solicit and reward feedback, this encourages employees to say what they really think and to be willing to hear the opinions of others in return.

Wouldn’t you want people to feel safe enough to tell you what they really think, rather than what they think you want to hear? There is nothing safe about wondering what other people really think or where you stand!

Additionally, leaders can increase their team’s capacity to embrace accountability by setting clear expectations, clarifying roles and ownership, following through on commitments, and addressing performance gaps directly and promptly.

When people feel safe, and when there is clear and healthy accountability, people don’t just show up — they raise their game.

Make Space for the Case - Manage for the Results

I first heard that business idiom, “Make space for the case, Manage for the results”, while working at a creative marketing agency a few decades ago. It came from a boss who had a business coach guiding him on how to get results out of his staff. At first glance, I thought it was simply a way to placate an employee while pushing a corporate agenda. Hence, I was slow to adopt the practice. It felt manipulative and insincere.

Fast forward, and a deeper dive into the philosophy and its nuances, and I have embraced it. I see how it has the potential to generate a more informed and reasoned approach. It suggests a focus on understanding the context and evidence behind decisions, rather than just outcomes.

When we are strictly focused on outcomes and pushing our agenda, we fail to bring others along and we fail to see the validity of their concerns. On the other hand, when we get mired down in all the reasons why something can’t be done, we can start believing them.

Making space for the case.

What does this mean? And what does it look like in practice?

Creating space to truly listen to a team member’s perspective – their concerns, reasons, frustrations, and even resistance, is a valuable discovery process. They bring a unique viewpoint that might astutely inform your decision and its ultimate rollout. Let’s face it, whether you are officially in sales or not, you need to enroll others in decisions, changes, and initiatives for them to bear fruit.

You want to create the kind of culture where people can respectfully contribute their opinion, especially if it is dissenting. They might just help you mitigate a risk you didn’t anticipate. If it fosters a robust dialogue, then you can have increased confidence in an idea being better vetted.

If your decision or approach shifts as a result of their willingness to chime in, then they will know their voice matters. Even if you do not change course, but acknowledge their position, you have demonstrated respect by hearing them out. Either way, you are creating space – and an expectation - to collaborate.

Being willing to invite the opinion of naysayers into a constructive conversation takes some skill. First, you want to genuinely hear what they have to say. Second, you want to listen for what they are not saying. You likely will need to ask follow up questions – preferably open-ended – to get to a shared and meaningful understanding of the situation. What discomfort or fear do they have? What obstacles do they name that you might be instrumental in helping them remove? By naming the true resistance we get to the heart of the matter, and we don’t need to get caught up in the swirl of drama – excuses, finger pointing, blaming, and victimhood.

You can validate (make space for the case), without giving up on the desired results.

Validating is recognizing and affirming a person and their feelings and opinions as valid or worthy. Invalidating is when we deny, reject, or dismiss someone’s feelings, thereby sending the message that their subjective emotional experience is somehow inaccurate, insignificant or unacceptable.

Validating is NOT agreeing with someone. It is not placating, coddling, or manipulating. It is slowing down the conversation enough to hold space for another’s reality, without judgment.

In a coaching session today, a client and I were navigating the issue of her direct report’s tendencies to slip into commiserating with his team instead of guiding them to a collaborative solution. In the direct report’s desire to be helpful, he is unintentionally sabotaging the change the organization is trying to implement. My client shared that her direct report, “allows the conversation to sit in the negative for too long. He needs to learn how to shift it into a collaboration.”  He would benefit from the art of making space for the case, while managing for the results.

What results are you seeking? And why do they matter?

Having clear goals and focused priorities can be an aligning tool for a team. They help people focus their limited resources and understand what is expected of them.

Results with Context. If you can explain the desired results in the context of why it matters and how it will benefit the various stakeholders, you’ll likely have more impact. “Because I said so” might (sometimes) work with kids, but not an ideal approach with professionals!

Shepherding Change. If the results you want, for example, involve creating more efficiencies in your operations, or improving quality of work, you are asking people to do things differently. Behavioral change can take time to shift. It can feel awkward, even threating. People can be concerned about their continued value and worth. One can acknowledge the discomfort of change without changing the action needed to be taken.

Create a road map. Any decision or initiative that you are committed to advancing will benefit from a clear plan of action. If that road map speaks to what will change and how team members will be a part of that change – it will increase the organization’s capacity to drive the results it needs to thrive. It can also mitigate the fears because it anchors the conceptual into the tangible. Suddenly, what was impossible, is happening.

As a leader, your ability to make space for the case is an expression of care. And to manifest your vision, you may need to guide people past their self-limiting beliefs and their undeveloped skills in enrolling others in change.

Bringing others along takes patience and persistence, but the cultural shifts that come with it will bolster your organization’s capacity to navigate change and growth.

“Make space for the case ~ Manage for the results” can be change the entire conversation into one that is collaborative, constructive, and actionable.