Vince Morales is a mindset, self-image, and resilience coach. In addition, he is skilled in leadership consultation and development. From April 2016 to June 2017, Vince was a homeless veteran in San Diego, CA. While homeless he made a powerful decision to change his thinking and mindset launching into life coaching.
Psychological safety, a concept popularized by Amy Edmondson, refers to a work environment where individuals feel safe to express their thoughts and ideas without fear of retribution or humiliation (Edmondson, 1999). This environment fosters innovation, collaboration, and overall well-being within teams and organizations. This article explores ten significant benefits of psychological safety and ten detrimental effects when lacking.
Positive results of psychological safety
Increased innovation: When team members feel safe, they are more likely to propose new ideas and solutions, driving innovation within the organization (Edmondson & Lei, 2014).
Enhanced team performance: Teams that operate in a psychologically safe environment tend to perform better due to increased collaboration and open communication (Frazier et al., 2017).
Improved employee engagement: Psychological safety boosts employee engagement by fostering a sense of belonging and respect (Kahn, 1990).
Higher job satisfaction: Employees are more satisfied when they feel psychologically safe, leading to lower turnover rates (Baer & Frese, 2003). “When the values of employees become incongruent with organizational values, employees fail to find meaningfulness of the job or organizational mission. The tsunami of employee dissatisfaction grows exponentially to the point where it is virtually impossible to stop, and that problem directly reflects leadership.” – Vince Morales
Better learning and development: A safe environment encourages continuous learning and professional growth, as employees are not afraid to admit mistakes and seek feedback (Carmeli et al., 2009).
Reduced stress levels: Psychological safety reduces stress and anxiety, contributing to better mental health among employees (Liang et al., 2012).
Stronger organizational commitment: Employees are likelier to remain committed to the organization when they feel their voices are heard and valued (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006).
Enhanced problem-solving: Teams in a safe environment are more effective at problem-solving due to the free exchange of ideas and diverse perspectives (Edmondson, 1999).
Increased trust: Psychological safety fosters trust among team members, essential for effective teamwork and collaboration (Frazier et al., 2017).
Greater inclusivity: A psychologically safe workplace promotes inclusivity by ensuring all voices are heard, regardless of rank or background (Edmondson & Lei, 2014).
Negative repercussions of lacking psychological safety
Reduced innovation: Without psychological safety, employees are less likely to propose new ideas, stifling innovation and creativity (Edmondson, 1999).
Poor team performance: Teams struggle with performance issues due to a lack of open communication and collaboration (Frazier et al., 2017).
Lower employee engagement: Engagement levels drop when employees feel they cannot express themselves freely, leading to disengagement and reduced productivity (Kahn, 1990).
Increased job dissatisfaction: A hostile work environment leads to higher job dissatisfaction and increased turnover rates (Baer & Frese, 2003).
Hindered learning and development: Fear of making mistakes or seeking feedback hampers continuous learning and professional development (Carmeli et al., 2009).
Elevated stress levels: Lack of psychological safety contributes to higher stress and anxiety among employees, affecting their mental health (Liang et al., 2012).
Ineffective problem-solving: Teams are less effective at solving problems due to a lack of open dialogue and diverse perspectives (Edmondson, 1999).
Eroded trust: The absence of psychological safety erodes trust among team members, which is critical for teamwork and collaboration (Frazier et al., 2017).
Decreased inclusivity: A non-inclusive environment where only certain voices are heard undermines diversity and inclusion efforts (Edmondson & Lei, 2014).
Psychological safety is a foundational element for the success and well-being of teams and organizations. Organizations can drive innovation, enhance performance, and build a committed and engaged workforce by fostering an environment where employees feel safe to express their ideas and concerns. Conversely, the absence of psychological safety can lead to significant negative repercussions, including reduced innovation, poor performance, and high levels of stress and dissatisfaction. Therefore, leaders must prioritize and cultivate psychological safety within their teams.
For more info, follow me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, and visit my website!
Read more from Vince Morales
Vince Morales, Performance Mindset Coach & Leadership Consultant
Vince Morales is a mindset, self-image, and resilience coach. In addition, he is skilled in leadership consultation and development. From April 2016 to June 2017, Vince was a homeless veteran in San Diego, CA. While homeless, he made a powerful decision to change his thinking and mindset, launching into life coaching. He developed a niche for resilience and mindset coaching. The growth of his business ultimately led to the end of his homelessness. Vince is the Founder of Validus Coaching & Consulting, formerly Zoe Transformation. His story has been featured in online articles and online news outlets all over the U.S. He is a certified John Maxwell Team Coach, Trainer, & Speaker, as well as a motivational speaker. In 2021, Vince earned his Master's degree in Psychology of Leadership from Penn State University and is currently a doctoral student pursuing a Ph.D. in Performance Psychology. He is a 2020 inductee into The National Society of Leadership and Success.
References:
Baer, M., & Frese, M. (2003). Innovation is not enough: Climates for initiative and psychological safety, process innovations, and firm performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 45-68.
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. E. (2009). Learning behaviours in the workplace: The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 26(1), 81-98.
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 23-43.
Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta-analytic review and extension. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 113-165.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.
Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J. L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71-92.
Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), 941-966.
