Psychological safety

Welcome to the Working on Well-Being podcast, presented by the World Well-Being Movement. This podcast serves as a platform for insightful discussions with leading experts in the field of well-being. In this episode, the focus is on the concept of psychological safety, which is increasingly recognized as a crucial element for fostering workplace well-being, promoting diversity and inclusion, enhancing learning, and facilitating effective teamwork. The episode features insights from Professor Amy Edmondson, a renowned expert on psychological safety and author of the best-selling book "The Fearless Organization."

Professor Edmondson begins by highlighting the significance of defining psychological safety, as the term has become widely used but often misunderstood. She defines psychological safety as the belief that one’s work environment is safe for interpersonal risks, such as speaking up with ideas, admitting mistakes, asking for help, or pointing out errors made by others. This belief is essential for creating an atmosphere where individuals feel comfortable engaging in challenging behaviors without fear of negative repercussions, such as rejection or disapproval from colleagues.

Edmondson recounts her journey into the realm of psychological safety, which was sparked by a research failure during her PhD studies. Initially interested in learning organizations, she joined a team investigating medication errors in healthcare. Her goal was to demonstrate that better teamwork correlates with lower error rates. However, the data revealed a surprising trend: higher-performing teams reported more errors. This led her to realize that these teams were more open about discussing mistakes, which was a critical insight that eventually shaped her research on psychological safety. She discovered that different teams within the same organization could exhibit varying levels of psychological safety, which in turn influenced their learning behaviors and overall performance.

As the conversation progresses, the host emphasizes the importance of creating environments where employees feel safe to fail and learn from their mistakes. Edmondson elaborates on the benefits of psychological safety, noting that in its absence, team leaders may only receive good news, hindering their ability to make informed decisions. Research has shown that psychological safety is a significant predictor of team performance, as evidenced by Google’s Project Aristotle, which studied 180 teams and found that psychological safety was the most effective predictor of team success.

Edmondson also discusses the relationship between psychological safety and employee well-being, particularly in light of increasing burnout rates. She explains that the absence of psychological safety creates a stressful environment where employees feel anxious about speaking up or sharing concerns. Conversely, a psychologically safe workplace fosters open communication, leading to better learning outcomes and improved performance. This connection between psychological safety and mental health is an emerging area of research, as organizations increasingly recognize the importance of employee well-being.

The conversation then shifts to the current economic climate, where layoffs and job insecurity are prevalent. Edmondson provides guidance for leaders and employees on nurturing psychological safety during these challenging times. She emphasizes the importance of discussing productive fears, such as concerns about job security or competition, rather than interpersonal fears that can stifle communication and collaboration. Leaders are encouraged to create an environment where employees feel safe to express their worries and contribute to problem-solving discussions.

Edmondson highlights the need for managers to actively promote psychological safety, especially during uncertain times. This involves acknowledging the challenges faced by employees and encouraging open dialogue about fears and concerns. She stresses that organizations should value those who take interpersonal risks, such as voicing dissenting opinions or raising issues, as these individuals are vital for navigating uncertainty and driving innovation.

As the discussion continues, the host and Edmondson explore the impact of remote and hybrid work on psychological safety. Edmondson notes that while remote work offers flexibility, it can also hinder the spontaneous interactions that foster connection and communication among team members. She advocates for thoughtful approaches to remote work that prioritize both employee well-being and the needs of the organization. This includes recognizing the importance of face-to-face interactions, even in virtual settings, to maintain a sense of connection and collaboration.

Edmondson also addresses the critical role of psychological safety in promoting diversity, inclusion, and belonging within organizations. She explains that while diversity refers to the representation of different identity groups, inclusion involves ensuring that all voices are heard and valued in decision-making processes. Psychological safety is essential for fostering an inclusive environment where individuals feel comfortable sharing their unique perspectives. Furthermore, belonging is a subjective experience that can only be achieved in a psychologically safe environment, where employees feel accepted and valued for who they are.

In her book, Edmondson outlines a leader’s toolkit for creating psychological safety, which includes setting the stage for open communication, inviting diverse voices, and responding positively to feedback and concerns. She emphasizes the importance of framing work as complex and uncertain, which encourages team members to share their insights and ideas. Asking good questions and actively inviting input from team members can help break down barriers to communication and foster a culture of collaboration.

Edmondson also discusses the importance of how leaders respond when team members raise concerns or provide feedback. A productive response is characterized by appreciation and a forward-looking approach, which encourages ongoing dialogue and collaboration. By acknowledging the courage it takes for employees to speak up, leaders can reinforce a culture of psychological safety and support continuous improvement.

As the conversation wraps up, the host and Edmondson reflect on the challenges of measuring psychological safety within organizations. While formal measures, such as surveys, can provide valuable insights, Edmondson encourages leaders to develop a self-discipline in assessing the communication dynamics within their teams. This involves being attuned to the ratio of positive to negative feedback and recognizing the importance of silence as a potential indicator of underlying issues.

Finally, Edmondson shares her vision for the future of psychological safety in the workplace. She hopes to see a world where psychological safety is a given, much like the necessity of breathing. This would signify a cultural shift where organizations prioritize open communication and collaboration, ultimately leading to healthier, more productive work environments.

In conclusion, the episode provides a comprehensive exploration of psychological safety and its critical role in fostering well-being, diversity, and inclusion in the workplace. Professor Amy Edmondson’s insights offer valuable guidance for leaders and organizations seeking to create environments where employees feel safe to speak up, learn from mistakes, and contribute to collective success. The conversation underscores the importance of psychological safety as a foundational element of effective teamwork and organizational performance.

The transcript does explain the concept of interpersonal risk within the workplace context, primarily through the lens of psychological safety. Professor Amy Edmondson defines psychological safety as a belief that the work environment is safe for interpersonal risks. These risks include actions like:

• Speaking up with ideas: Employees may hesitate to share innovative suggestions due to fear of judgment or backlash.
• Admitting mistakes: Acknowledging errors can be seen as a sign of weakness, leading to a reluctance to own up to missteps.
• Asking for help: Employees might fear that seeking assistance could reflect poorly on their competence.
• Pointing out others’ errors: There is often fear that highlighting a colleague's mistake could damage relationships or lead to retaliation.

Edmondson emphasizes that these behaviors are challenging because they carry a risk of social rejection or conflict. However, she argues that engaging in such interpersonal risks is crucial for team learning and performance. When team members feel safe to share their thoughts and concerns, it fosters an environment where knowledge is freely exchanged, mistakes are acknowledged and learned from, and overall team effectiveness increases. This willingness to take interpersonal risks leads to higher innovation and adaptability, as teams can address issues openly rather than suppress them.

• [02:30] "I Define psychological safety as a belief that the environment the climate that you work in is safe for interpersonal risks like speaking up with an idea like admitting a mistake or asking for help..."
• [03:05] "...psychological safety describes an environment where you just believe those risks are absolutely doable not that they’re easy or fun but that they’re absolutely doable."

The transcript clearly distinguishes psychological safety from merely being nice, avoiding disagreement, or creating a comfort zone. Professor Amy Edmondson articulates that psychological safety is not about fostering a comfort zone where conflict is avoided or where niceness prevails at the expense of authenticity. Instead, it involves creating an environment where team members can engage in candid discussions and share critical feedback without fear of retaliation or judgment.

Edmondson notes that simply being nice can lead to a superficial harmony that does not facilitate team learning or innovation. In a truly psychologically safe environment, team members are encouraged to challenge ideas constructively and express dissenting opinions. This openness is vital, especially when facing complex tasks where multiple perspectives can lead to better solutions.

She further emphasizes that psychological safety includes the permission for candidness—where team members feel they can voice concerns or uncertainties. This is crucial as it allows for a richer dialogue that can address potential issues before they escalate, thus enhancing overall team performance. In contrast, an environment that prioritizes comfort over honesty can stifle creativity and problem-solving, ultimately undermining the team's effectiveness.

• [08:05] "...it’s different to be honest nobody likes to fail and it’s really difficult to say ah my bad I didn’t do this right it went wrong..."
• [24:21] "...it’s one thing to be around the table it’s another to believe sincerely that your voice is welcome..."

The transcript discusses the importance of leaders openly acknowledging their own mistakes, uncertainties, or limitations, which greatly impacts team dynamics. Professor Amy Edmondson indicates that when leaders demonstrate vulnerability by admitting their own errors or uncertainties, it has a profound effect on team members’ willingness to speak up or be transparent. Such behaviors signal to the team that it is safe to share their own mistakes and uncertainties.

This openness helps to create a culture where employees feel empowered to take interpersonal risks, such as admitting mistakes or asking for help, without the fear of negative repercussions. Edmondson states that psychological safety thrives in environments where leaders model these behaviors. When leaders are transparent, it encourages team members to reciprocate, fostering an atmosphere of trust and open communication.

Moreover, this dynamic can lead to better team performance. As team members feel safe to voice their concerns and share their insights, the team can learn from mistakes collectively, adapt strategies accordingly, and innovate more effectively. This cycle of transparency and learning is essential for high-performing teams, particularly in complex and rapidly changing work environments.

• [07:19] "...the discovery or the interest in psychological safety was quite by accident..."
• [12:34] "...when leaders go out of their way to be thoughtful if there are to be layoffs..."

The transcript emphasizes the significance of leaders asking questions, inviting input, and admitting that they do not have all the answers, which is intrinsically linked to psychological safety. Professor Amy Edmondson explains that when leaders actively seek input from their team members and demonstrate curiosity by asking questions, they create an environment where team members feel their contributions are valued and necessary.

This practice of inquiry encourages team members to share their thoughts and ideas openly, reducing the fear associated with speaking up. Edmondson notes that simply setting the stage for open dialogue is not enough; leaders must also be willing to listen and respond positively to the input they receive. By doing so, they reinforce the notion that diverse perspectives are welcomed and that every team member's voice matters.

Moreover, when leaders admit their limitations and uncertainties, it fosters a culture of honesty and vulnerability. This behavior allows team members to feel more secure in expressing their own uncertainties and concerns, knowing that their leaders are not perfect and do not have all the answers. This mutual understanding facilitates a more collaborative and innovative team environment, ultimately enhancing team performance and well-being.

• [26:40] "...you’re responsible for the questions not the answers..."
• [29:11] "...how do you respond when someone disagrees with you or asks for help or brings bad news..."

The transcript discusses the balance between maintaining high psychological safety and high performance expectations or accountability without allowing fear to dominate. Professor Amy Edmondson highlights that in the absence of psychological safety, leaders may only hear favorable news, which can hinder their ability to make informed decisions and lead effectively.

Edmondson suggests that fostering an environment of psychological safety is crucial for enhancing team performance. In such an environment, team members feel safe to share both good and bad news, which allows leaders to understand the complete picture and address any underlying issues proactively. This transparency is essential for accountability, as it encourages team members to take ownership of their work while feeling secure enough to discuss challenges openly.

She also emphasizes that it is possible to uphold high standards while ensuring that team members do not feel threatened by the prospect of failure. This can be achieved by framing challenges as opportunities for learning and growth, rather than as punitive measures. When leaders articulate that mistakes are part of the learning process, it instills a sense of shared responsibility and encourages team members to strive for excellence without the paralyzing fear of repercussions.

• [09:01] "...you won’t be hearing what’s really going on right so you won’t be hearing the bad news..."
• [10:00] "...there's now research that shows a variety of desired outcomes...including just team performance..."

The transcript outlines a significant relationship between employees remaining silent and various negative outcomes in the workplace, particularly those that hinder innovation and learning opportunities. Professor Amy Edmondson emphasizes that in environments lacking psychological safety, team leaders may only receive positive feedback, missing out on critical information regarding challenges and errors. This lack of open communication leads to a distorted view of reality, where only the 'good news' is shared, leaving leaders ill-equipped to make informed decisions.

Specifically, she notes that when team members are hesitant to speak up, the organization suffers from a lack of innovation and missed learning opportunities. Without open dialogue, employees cannot admit mistakes, share ideas, or seek help, which are essential for fostering a culture of learning and adaptability. Furthermore, this silence can lead to preventable errors and poorer decision-making because teams fail to address underlying issues or misunderstandings that may arise. The inability to communicate effectively, therefore, directly correlates with reduced overall performance and less efficient problem-solving within teams.

Edmondson's insights highlight the importance of creating a work environment where employees feel safe to voice their concerns and perspectives, as this not only enhances team dynamics but also drives organizational success.

• [08:13] "...you won’t be hearing what’s really going on right so you won’t be hearing the bad news..."
• [10:12] "...and as a result, given how dependent we are on information and knowledge, you have better performance."
• [02:30] "I define psychological safety as a belief that the environment... is safe for interpersonal risks..."

The transcript discusses several challenges that remote or hybrid work creates for psychological safety. Professor Amy Edmondson identifies that with the shift to virtual work environments, the dynamics of communication have significantly altered, impacting employees' willingness to engage in open dialogue. One of the primary challenges mentioned is the loss of spontaneous interactions that typically occur in a physical office setting. In-person conversations allow for quick exchanges of ideas and informal discussions that can lead to innovation and problem-solving.

Edmondson points out that when teams are geographically dispersed, subtle cues such as eye contact and body language are often absent, making it more challenging to gauge reactions and feelings. This lack of non-verbal communication can create an atmosphere of uncertainty, where employees might feel less inclined to express their thoughts or concerns. Video calls and written communication also pose difficulties; for instance, expressing disagreement or sharing bad news can feel more daunting when it requires drafting an email or scheduling a formal meeting, which can lead to further delays in communication.

Additionally, Edmondson notes that the structure of virtual meetings can feel less engaging, making it harder for individuals to feel connected and heard. As a result, the overall psychological safety within teams may diminish, leading to increased anxiety and reluctance to share ideas or raise concerns.

• [17:38] "I think the answer is yes it is... psychological safety does take a hit because you’re missing some... subtle cues that... keep us feeling connected."
• [19:00] "...we’re losing some of the spontaneous connectedness that... keeps us feeling both connected to each other..."
• [18:57] "...it often does feel quite awkward to kind of you know send you a message..."

The transcript suggests several approaches that remote teams can utilize to build trust, connection, and informal psychological safety despite reduced in-person interactions. Professor Amy Edmondson emphasizes the importance of intentional efforts to maintain a sense of community and open communication in a hybrid work environment.

One key practice she mentions is to facilitate regular opportunities for open discussions, where team members can share ideas, concerns, and feedback. This could involve structured check-ins or informal coffee chats designed specifically to foster candid conversations. By creating a routine where team members feel encouraged to share their experiences, leaders can help cultivate a culture of psychological safety even in a virtual setting.

Moreover, Edmondson highlights the need for leaders to frame the work environment as one that embraces uncertainty and challenges. By openly acknowledging that tasks may be complex and that input from all team members is valued, leaders can help set the stage for open dialogue. Asking thoughtful questions can also stimulate discussion and ensure that team members feel their contributions are acknowledged and important.

Additionally, leaders should actively seek feedback and demonstrate appreciation for team members who voice their thoughts. Recognizing the courage it takes to speak up in a virtual environment reinforces positive behavior and encourages others to follow suit. By implementing these practices, remote teams can enhance their level of trust and connection, ultimately supporting a healthier work environment.

• [12:27] "...it’s productive to be afraid of... trying to do a good job..."
• [12:45] "...it’s productive to be afraid of the competitors... because these are all fears... that are discussable..."
• [29:14] "...it’s you know it’s um honestly appreciative of the sense of... Courage that were involved in your team members speaking up..."

The transcript does indicate that psychological safety can differ among individuals and groups, particularly in terms of backgrounds, roles, and levels of seniority. Professor Amy Edmondson notes that within the same organizational culture, teams can exhibit varying degrees of psychological safety, which can significantly impact their performance and learning behaviors.

She emphasizes that the variance in psychological safety across different groups within the same organization is predictive of team learning and performance. This suggests that some teams may thrive in environments where open communication is encouraged, while others may struggle due to a lack of such an environment. Groups within the same organization can have distinctly different interpersonal climates, which can affect their ability to innovate and adapt.

Edmondson also highlights the importance of recognizing that psychological safety is not uniformly experienced by all individuals. Factors such as a person's role, seniority, or demographic background can influence their perception of safety in expressing concerns or ideas. For instance, minority groups or individuals in less authoritative positions may feel less inclined to voice their opinions, impacting the overall team dynamics and limiting the potential for diverse perspectives to emerge. Thus, understanding the nuances of psychological safety is crucial for leaders aiming to foster an inclusive and high-performing work environment.

• [06:56] "...teams can vary in psychological safety and that variance is predictive of Team learning behaviors and team performance..."
• [07:10] "...the discovery or the interest in psychological safety was quite by accident..."
• [12:55] "...it’s productive to be afraid of... trying to do a good job..."

The transcript discusses methods for measuring and assessing psychological safety within teams and organizations. Professor Amy Edmondson explains that there is a formal measure available, which is a seven-item survey she developed for her seminal paper published in 1999. This survey is designed to gauge various aspects of psychological safety within a team, and it can be found at fearlessorganization.org. Using this survey allows teams to not only obtain quantitative data on psychological safety but also prompts discussions about the findings, fostering an environment of transparency and openness.

In addition to formal assessments, Edmondson suggests a more informal approach for leaders to reflect on the dynamics within their teams. She advises leaders to consider the ratio of good news to bad news they receive. If leaders notice that they are predominantly hearing positive reports, it may indicate that team members are hesitant to share challenges or failures, which is a red flag for psychological safety. This self-reflection can help leaders identify gaps in communication and areas that may need improvement.

Edmondson emphasizes the importance of recognizing silence as a significant indicator of psychological safety. She encourages leaders to train themselves to notice the absence of communication and to consider what ought to be happening in terms of team interactions. This mindful approach can help organizations better understand the psychological climate and address any issues that may hinder open communication.

• [31:22] "...a seven-item survey that I developed for that 1999 paper..."
• [31:57] "...there is the self-discipline of asking yourself... what is the ratio... of the sort of good news to bad that I’m hearing..."
• [32:41] "...it’s just it’s so much harder to notice things that aren’t happening..."

[00:00] welcome to the working on well-being
[00:03] podcast by the world well-being movement
[00:06] the podcast that allows you to be a fly
[00:09] on the wall during conversations with
[00:11] the world's leading well-being experts
[00:15] in today's episode we'll explore the
[00:17] concept of psychological safety
[00:19] and we'll find out why it's so critical
[00:22] to drive workplace well-being diversity
[00:25] inclusion and belonging learning
[00:28] effective teamwork and so much more
[00:31] and we'll hear tips from the world's
[00:34] leading expert on how to boost
[00:36] psychological safety in the workplace
[00:39] [Music]
[00:46] I'm so honored to introduce today's
[00:50] guest
[00:51] um many of you when I say the term
[00:54] psychological safety will automatically
[00:57] think of this incredible woman's name
[01:00] um so I couldn't be more thrilled to
[01:03] welcome
[01:04] um author of the best-selling book The
[01:06] Fearless organization and Novartis
[01:09] professor of leadership and management
[01:10] at Harvard Business School and winner of
[01:13] countless Awards Professor Amy Edmondson
[01:16] you are so welcome
[01:19] thank you so much for the invitation I'm
[01:22] I'm truly delighted to be here I
[01:24] mentioned of course that when I say the
[01:27] name uh Amy Professor Amy Edmondson
[01:30] there's sort of a name Association
[01:31] people will immediately go ah
[01:33] psychological safety
[01:35] um and what's incredible is since your
[01:38] work I believe it was 1999 when you
[01:40] published your your first paper and the
[01:42] seminal paper on this topic the phrase
[01:45] psychological safety is now used in a
[01:47] commonplace way in workplaces and
[01:50] actually even in your book in chapter
[01:51] two there's a graph and it shows a steep
[01:54] rise in the media mentions of
[01:56] psychological safety um which is
[01:58] incredible so I do think many of our
[02:01] listeners will already be familiar with
[02:02] the concept but some may not and I think
[02:05] it's important to bring everybody
[02:06] listening to that common understanding
[02:08] so can I ask you please to provide a
[02:11] definition for us
[02:13] sure and you know the other reason I
[02:15] think it's important to start that way
[02:17] and start with the definition is that
[02:19] the term has as you said become quite
[02:21] familiar but that doesn't necessarily
[02:24] mean everyone has an accurate definition
[02:26] of the term and we can talk about that a
[02:28] little more if you wish but I Define
[02:30] psychological safety as a belief that
[02:33] the environment the climate that you
[02:35] work in is safe for interpersonal risks
[02:39] like speaking up with an idea like
[02:42] admitting a mistake or asking for help
[02:44] or pointing out someone else's error
[02:46] those are all interpersonally risky or
[02:50] challenging behaviors those are the
[02:52] kinds of behaviors that people
[02:55] um feel in an intuitive risk that they
[02:58] might make people not like them or
[03:00] reject them in some way and so
[03:03] psychological safety describes an
[03:05] environment where you just believe those
[03:08] risks are absolutely doable not that
[03:11] they're easy or fun but that they're
[03:13] absolutely doable
[03:14] thank you before I dive into it but more
[03:18] I'd love to understand how you ended up
[03:20] coming to this domain of research was
[03:23] there a sort of pivotal moment in time
[03:25] for you that brought you to study
[03:27] psychological safety
[03:30] yeah there absolutely was and it was a
[03:34] it was a mistake or or actually a
[03:36] mistake is the wrong word it was a
[03:37] failure it was a research failure so my
[03:40] broad interest coming into my PhD
[03:43] program and you know making that shift
[03:45] in my career to becoming a researcher my
[03:48] broad interest was
[03:49] learning organizations right how can we
[03:52] better help organizations learn and
[03:55] adapt and innovate in a world that keeps
[03:58] changing but that's what that's what
[03:59] interested me I knew enough about
[04:01] organizations from the you know the work
[04:04] the job I had had to know that it's not
[04:07] easy for organizations to sort of to
[04:09] change and learn and so I I didn't know
[04:12] exactly how I would study that but when
[04:14] I was invited in my first year of a PhD
[04:17] program to join a team of medical
[04:20] researchers looking at medication errors
[04:23] and the adverse drug events that
[04:25] sometimes happen as a result I I agreed
[04:29] for two reasons one I needed to do
[04:30] something you need to do research and
[04:32] you need to learn how to do research
[04:34] um and this seemed like a project that
[04:37] was sort of already set up and I could
[04:39] become part of the team and learn a lot
[04:41] but the other important reason was
[04:43] I'd always seen a connection between
[04:46] error and learning as if that's not a
[04:48] unique thought right everybody everybody
[04:49] kind of knows the connection between
[04:51] error and learning and so I thought it's
[04:54] not entirely unrelated in fact it's
[04:56] quite closely related to my core
[04:58] interests so so that's it I really
[05:02] wanted to show and I wanted to be able
[05:04] to show with the data available to me in
[05:06] that study that better teamwork was
[05:10] associated with lower error rates or
[05:12] fewer errors
[05:14] and unfortunately with the data seemed
[05:17] to suggest once I had it right in front
[05:20] of me and was analyzing it was yes there
[05:23] was a significant correlation but no it
[05:25] was in the wrong direction in other
[05:27] words the data suggested that better
[05:29] teams according to a validated team
[05:32] survey diagnostic instrument
[05:35] were having had higher error rates right
[05:39] that doesn't make sense or at least it
[05:41] didn't seem to make sense to me and I I
[05:44] thought and thought and it occurred to
[05:47] me you know suddenly sort of a blinding
[05:49] Flash
[05:51] that may be the better teams were more
[05:54] able and willing to talk about the
[05:57] errors that did happen right that they
[05:59] didn't they didn't have that they didn't
[06:01] have as much of the natural human desire
[06:03] to uh not talk about them or to be
[06:05] afraid that if you talk about them
[06:07] you'll get punished in some in some way
[06:09] which of course is very human and very
[06:11] normal in organizations so
[06:15] that having that Insight was a far cry
[06:17] from proving it and that's what the the
[06:20] next next few years were about was sort
[06:22] of proving the possibility that
[06:25] different groups within the same
[06:27] organizational settings and I did this
[06:29] in healthcare and I've done this in in
[06:31] in manufacturing organizations and other
[06:33] other organizations
[06:35] that different groups you know within
[06:37] the same organizational culture can have
[06:40] wildly different interpersonal climates
[06:43] yes and turns out that that's
[06:46] demonstrably true that groups can vary
[06:48] and I didn't it wasn't until several
[06:50] years later that I called this
[06:52] psychological safety but teams can vary
[06:54] in psychological safety and that
[06:56] variance is predictive of Team learning
[07:00] behaviors and team performance and that
[07:03] now has been
[07:05] shown in study after study to be the
[07:08] case so the discovery or the interest in
[07:10] psychological safety was quite by
[07:12] accident
[07:13] but once once seen you know it couldn't
[07:17] be unseen and it and it became something
[07:19] that seemed worthy of follow-up and you
[07:23] know for me this is so important
[07:26] um and I suppose Amy in my own
[07:28] background I'm you know currently
[07:29] leading the world well-being movement
[07:31] and hosting obviously our podcast but I
[07:33] I previously have um a corporate career
[07:35] and I've worked in various leadership
[07:36] positions and creating that environment
[07:39] where we used to talk about at failsmart
[07:42] um and what we mean by fail smart is you
[07:45] know fail quickly but take the learnings
[07:48] from those failures so that you can get
[07:49] closer to doing it right the next time
[07:51] and I think you know when I read your
[07:54] work I think about his children we're
[07:56] afraid to get in trouble so if we do
[07:58] something wrong we'll sweep it under the
[07:59] carpet and we take those behaviors into
[08:01] the workplace
[08:03] um so but it's difficult it's different
[08:05] to be honest nobody likes to fail and
[08:08] it's really difficult to say ah my bad I
[08:11] didn't do this right it went wrong so
[08:13] it's not an easy thing I I'd love to
[08:16] hear from you a little bit more about
[08:18] the benefits of creating that
[08:20] environment of psychological safety and
[08:22] you've already talked about some of the
[08:24] challenges in the absence of
[08:26] psychological safety but if you could
[08:27] elaborate on that it would be fantastic
[08:30] yeah I think you know in the in the
[08:33] absence of psychological safety what
[08:35] happens is especially if you're a team
[08:37] leader or project manager or a branch
[08:40] leader of some kind you know bank branch
[08:43] or something restaurant in a chain uh in
[08:47] the absence of psychological safety
[08:49] you won't be hearing what's really going
[08:52] on right so you won't be hearing the bad
[08:54] news you'll only be hearing the the sort
[08:57] of the the good news the the reports of
[08:59] all that's going well so you're not
[09:01] actually able to do your job as well as
[09:04] you otherwise would because you don't
[09:06] have all the data
[09:07] um and and in the presence of
[09:10] psychological safety there's now
[09:11] research that shows a variety of of
[09:14] desired outcomes you know including just
[09:18] team performance right and that that was
[09:19] famously shown
[09:21] um in you know in a study that got a lot
[09:23] of attention at Google called project
[09:24] Aristotle studied 180 teams and found
[09:27] that the most
[09:30] effective predictor of team performance
[09:33] this Google was psychological safety
[09:36] again at the team level
[09:39] um you have
[09:41] um some research that shows in fact
[09:43] better better
[09:45] um
[09:46] um lower burnout
[09:49] um you know in in at least one sort of
[09:51] better medical outcomes again because
[09:53] people are more able to catch and
[09:55] correct so you could put all of this
[09:57] under the bucket of of learning there's
[10:00] more there's more learning there's more
[10:02] sharing of information and as a result
[10:04] given how dependent we are on
[10:07] information and knowledge as a result
[10:09] you have better performance
[10:12] and you talk about burnout of course
[10:14] you know we're seeing increasing rates
[10:16] of of burnout
[10:18] um I would have to understand more about
[10:20] the links be what research tells us
[10:23] about the impact of psychological safety
[10:26] on our well-being on our Mental Health
[10:30] yeah so I think that's a relatively new
[10:33] field of inquiry because it's become so
[10:35] very important recently so I can't
[10:38] um I can't cite Oodles of studies but
[10:40] it's certainly consistent with with what
[10:43] we know
[10:45] um and there at least are a couple of
[10:46] studies I'm aware of that the link
[10:48] psychological safety to lower burnout
[10:50] and makes sense right because not having
[10:53] psychological safety is stressful I mean
[10:55] it's kind of normal but it's stressful
[10:57] normal because you're you um
[11:01] you're in this state of of sort of
[11:03] anxiety about the things you see and
[11:06] you're trying to think you know can I
[11:07] say that can I speak up about that you
[11:10] find various workarounds because you
[11:12] have you're conscientious you know and
[11:14] you feel you can't quite speak up about
[11:16] that thing but you can you work around
[11:18] it and maybe there's a one-on-one
[11:20] meeting later you can bring something up
[11:22] all of that
[11:24] takes time and effort and and and takes
[11:27] its toll on on well-being right so with
[11:30] psychological safety I'm not saying
[11:32] psychological safety is descriptive of a
[11:34] sort of easy comfortable environment it
[11:36] isn't but it at least takes you away
[11:40] from that second guessing which I think
[11:43] is a
[11:44] um is a stressful thing too
[11:47] um you know to live through I mean it
[11:50] really really is and this concept of an
[11:54] absence of fear it sounds so much
[11:56] simpler than it is and we're living in a
[11:59] very unique time
[12:00] um one of the fears one of the employee
[12:02] fears that you talk about a bit in the
[12:03] book is is the the basic fear of losing
[12:06] your job
[12:06] um and in today's world that's a very
[12:09] very real fear over the past year we've
[12:13] seen numerous announcements of layoffs
[12:15] from some of the biggest companies
[12:16] across the globe at a time when cost of
[12:19] living is rising I would love to hear
[12:22] your advice
[12:23] um to leaders and to employees on you
[12:27] know how to nurture psychological safety
[12:30] during this time yeah it's it's um you
[12:34] know I I heard a piece a few years ago
[12:37] um in the after right you know soon
[12:39] after the Fearless organization came out
[12:41] because I realized sometimes people will
[12:43] have this reaction to like Fearless that
[12:46] that sounds like Reckless or you know or
[12:49] it's or unrealistic for a human to be
[12:51] without fear and that's right and so I
[12:53] wrote this little article
[12:55] um for Duke Magazine on on um productive
[12:59] fear versus counterproductive fear or
[13:01] unproductive fear just to try to be
[13:03] super clear about this and it is
[13:07] um you know especially this was sort of
[13:09] in the time of of the peak of covid you
[13:11] know it is productive to be afraid of
[13:14] that virus right you should be afraid of
[13:15] it
[13:16] um it is productive to be afraid of you
[13:20] know sort of losing your job and trying
[13:21] to do you know trying to do a good job
[13:24] as as a result now you don't always have
[13:26] control in fact more often than not you
[13:29] don't have very high level of control
[13:31] over who is laid off and who isn't but
[13:33] come back to that but
[13:35] um you know it's productive to be afraid
[13:37] of the competitors in a sort of stealing
[13:41] market share from you right because
[13:42] these are all these are all fears the
[13:44] reason why the main reason why they're
[13:46] productive is that they're discussable
[13:48] there's nothing embarrassing or shameful
[13:51] about going yeah this is a this is a
[13:53] real worry that we have you could talk
[13:55] about it and you can team up to mitigate
[13:59] the negative effects of those
[14:03] frightening things on on you and your
[14:06] team whereas the interpersonal fear I
[14:09] would argue is almost never productive
[14:11] right because interpersonal fear leaves
[14:14] you alone it leaves you sort of
[14:17] unable to talk about it by its very
[14:20] nature and and and so you
[14:23] are second guessing yourself you're
[14:25] wondering whether it's okay to say
[14:26] something or to ask for help or this or
[14:29] that so it's it just and in a in a
[14:31] uncertain complex you know
[14:33] interdependent world
[14:35] that leaves you vulnerable to not
[14:38] getting the information you need not
[14:40] getting the support you need not sharing
[14:42] uh the important things that you see
[14:44] with colleagues to help to help them and
[14:47] to help the projects and and the work go
[14:49] well so I you know there's no easy
[14:53] answer to how do we sort of um as W
[14:56] Edwards Deming said Drive fear out of
[14:59] the organization but when we work
[15:03] together on it it really is doable right
[15:07] it's powerful right if it's it's so long
[15:10] as we do our very best not to be
[15:13] um to remind ourselves that each other
[15:16] are not what we should be afraid of you
[15:19] know we should be afraid of these
[15:20] external forces and in good
[15:22] organizations now I know they're not all
[15:25] good but in good organizations
[15:28] um
[15:28] managers go out of their way to be
[15:32] thoughtful if there are to be layoffs
[15:34] which are you know never never a happy
[15:36] outcome to be thoughtful about
[15:40] um who and how and you know under what
[15:43] conditions those layoffs will occur and
[15:46] the last thing they would do would be
[15:49] lay off the people who are taking
[15:51] interpersonal risks like like speaking
[15:53] up with a concern I mean or a dissenting
[15:56] view those are the those are the people
[15:58] we need you know in uncertain times
[16:01] I think that's a really important point
[16:03] to to highlight that it's a positive to
[16:06] speak up it's a positive yeah yeah and
[16:09] managers need to make sure they are
[16:10] clear about the fact that it's a
[16:13] positive right they they need to go out
[16:15] of their way to say these are
[16:16] challenging times and we don't know what
[16:20] will happen
[16:21] um and we need to hear from you more
[16:24] than ever and and those who are quiet or
[16:28] um at greater risk than those who are
[16:31] sort of leaning in to try to to solve
[16:34] the problems we have yeah and you give a
[16:36] couple of really good examples in the
[16:37] book of disasters really that could have
[16:39] been avoided
[16:41] um the uh nuclear power plant in in
[16:43] Japan and also the
[16:45] um the one of the I think was the
[16:47] Challenger uh explosion with NASA do you
[16:49] want to talk to Colombia actually the
[16:51] Challenger counts too okay it's another
[16:53] story that I do sometimes talk about but
[16:55] not as much in this book of course we've
[16:58] seen a very very radical change to to
[17:01] the workplace in the past few years
[17:03] particularly post pandemic so we're now
[17:06] in a situation where a lot of teams are
[17:08] geographically um dispersed so I might
[17:10] be working in a London office or a
[17:13] Dublin office and I'm going to have
[17:15] fellow teammates in Mumbai and Singapore
[17:18] in San Francisco my manager might be in
[17:20] a completely different time zone even if
[17:23] we're in the same location chances are
[17:25] at least some of your colleagues are
[17:27] working remotely and most are working
[17:29] hybrid is it more challenging to create
[17:32] an environment a psychological safety in
[17:35] this sort of dispersed world that we're
[17:37] now living in
[17:38] I think the answer is yes it is now as I
[17:42] say that I think data are likely being
[17:45] collected as we speak you know to to be
[17:48] able to talk about this more
[17:50] specifically and precisely but my my
[17:53] qualitative observation and I think that
[17:55] of many others as well over the last
[17:57] couple of years is that
[17:59] um with greater distance or more more
[18:03] virtual
[18:04] relationships at work
[18:07] um psychological safety does take a hit
[18:09] because you're missing some of the the
[18:12] sort of natural and subtle Hues that
[18:18] I'm interested in what you have to say
[18:20] like I'll make eye contact with you or
[18:22] I'll lean in in ways that are quite hard
[18:24] to see on the screen and even even more
[18:27] it's the the
[18:29] um the serendipitous interactions that
[18:31] don't happen right I see you in the
[18:33] hallway and I say oh you know there's
[18:35] been something I've been meaning to ask
[18:36] you but it would feel it often does feel
[18:39] quite awkward to kind of you know send
[18:42] you a message to say could we set up a
[18:45] zoom call or teams call or you know
[18:48] WebEx call and and you know it's like it
[18:51] doesn't feel worthy of that kind of
[18:54] structure and organization so I sort of
[18:57] Let It Go so we're losing some of the
[19:00] the spontaneous connectedness that that
[19:03] keeps us feeling
[19:05] um both connected to each other and more
[19:07] able to just lean in and speak up about
[19:12] things that we wonder about and worry
[19:15] about or ideas that we might have that
[19:18] might lead toward an innovation uh
[19:20] Downstream so I think this is something
[19:22] I'm not saying it's you know don't do it
[19:24] I'm saying let's do it thoughtfully
[19:27] meaning don't do remote work let's do it
[19:29] thoughtfully let's do it carefully let's
[19:31] figure out more than anything else not
[19:34] what people need which is super
[19:35] important and the core idea of your
[19:38] podcast but but what the work needs
[19:41] right what the work needs from us to be
[19:44] done really really well and how we're
[19:46] going to organize that and how we're
[19:47] going to do that and I think that feeds
[19:51] back into well-being because I think
[19:54] most people maybe everybody
[19:56] wants to be
[19:58] wants to matter right we want to be
[20:01] doing something that matters to the
[20:03] world you know whether it's the
[20:06] you know contributing to the production
[20:08] of products and services that make
[20:10] people's lives better or whether it's
[20:12] you know doing health care that
[20:14] literally affects Health
[20:17] um or or
[20:18] writing you know entertaining
[20:20] programming I mean you know that we we
[20:22] want to think that what we do matters it
[20:25] doesn't just land out there with a thud
[20:29] yeah no absolutely and everything you're
[20:31] saying really resonates and it resonates
[20:33] with what I've seen firsthand in the
[20:35] workplace and the research I'm I'm
[20:37] reading as well
[20:39] um and you know when you talk about
[20:41] speaking up speaking up is hard enough
[20:44] and if you're in the room physically you
[20:47] might be able to pluck a courage to say
[20:49] gosh I disagree I don't think that's a
[20:52] good idea but to then have to as you say
[20:55] either put it in an email that's very
[20:58] tough how do I word it with my email
[21:00] you're missing all of those body
[21:02] language cues all of those tone of voice
[21:04] cues and it's so ripe for
[21:07] misinterpretation
[21:08] um and as you say scheduling is a zoom
[21:10] call or a team's call to say I disagree
[21:13] is a bit difficult um and certainly all
[21:15] the research we're seeing sort of
[21:17] indicates that for multiple reasons
[21:19] hybrid working really is the way forward
[21:21] because of course our social connections
[21:24] are key flexibility is key right but so
[21:27] are social connections yeah I think we
[21:30] have we um because we were able during
[21:33] the pandemic when when if you had a job
[21:35] that allowed that and was conducive to
[21:38] working from home we were able to do it
[21:40] like we pulled it off
[21:42] um
[21:43] that doesn't mean that's an ideal way to
[21:46] work right either from a mental health
[21:48] perspective or from a quality of work
[21:50] perspective it's it's um it's much like
[21:54] um you know we were in lifeboats
[21:56] um and we got you know we we lived
[21:59] through the the Shipwreck but it's not
[22:01] to say you want to spend the rest of
[22:03] your life in a Lifeboat it it doesn't
[22:05] you know it's not optimal I I hear you I
[22:09] hear you I'd love to read a quick quote
[22:11] from your book if I may um I'll just
[22:14] find the page but you talk about
[22:17] um uh psychological safety as being the
[22:20] missing ingredients to achieving
[22:23] diversity inclusion and belonging and of
[22:25] course it's been proven that inclusion
[22:28] and belonging are key drivers of
[22:31] workplace well-being and that stands to
[22:33] reason so the quote which I thought was
[22:35] really really interesting you said
[22:37] psychological safety may be playing an
[22:40] especially crucial role for minorities
[22:42] in in creating engagement and fee and a
[22:45] feeling of being valued at work can you
[22:49] talk more about how psychological safety
[22:52] can really help Drive diversity
[22:54] inclusion and belonging well first of
[22:57] all I do want to underline the word may
[22:58] right because this is this is
[23:00] theoretical speculative work rather than
[23:03] data driven findings at this at this
[23:06] point although I think we that's another
[23:07] topic for which data are being collected
[23:10] not not by me but by by others but
[23:13] um so let's when we think about
[23:17] um sort of the progression from
[23:19] diversity to inclusion to belonging
[23:24] um where diversity means we have an
[23:26] arguably objectively more diverse
[23:28] Workforce
[23:30] than say before or you know we can we
[23:33] can sort of point to people from
[23:35] different identity groups being hired
[23:38] um that's a kind of um well obviously a
[23:41] minimum standard and then to get to
[23:44] inclusion you really are asking
[23:45] yourselves the question of yes and are
[23:49] the the diverse groups that we have
[23:51] hired equally included in the decision
[23:54] making that matters you know in the
[23:56] roles that matter right is there is
[23:58] there and this is a somewhat subjective
[24:02] and somewhat objective right we can we
[24:04] can point to it and
[24:07] to let's say you go from diversity to
[24:09] inclusion a higher standard of inclusion
[24:12] that's a little bit dependent on
[24:15] psychological safety because it's one
[24:16] thing to be around the table it's
[24:18] another to believe sincerely that your
[24:21] voice is welcome right that people like
[24:23] me have a say around here whether that
[24:26] be women or people of color or people
[24:29] from different countries that are less
[24:31] well represented in your organization
[24:33] Etc right so so it's a lot easier to
[24:38] offer your unique perspective if there's
[24:41] an environment of psychological safety
[24:43] now when we shift even further to the
[24:45] topic of belonging now we're asking the
[24:49] question of does does everyone feel
[24:52] equally like I belong here people like
[24:56] me have are perfectly welcome have a
[24:59] perfect right to be here in this
[25:01] Workforce and that's an entirely
[25:04] subjective standard and it's not it's
[25:06] not so easy to point to the objective
[25:09] criteria by which you'd measure that and
[25:12] that I would argue is even more
[25:14] dependent on psychological safety
[25:16] because when you don't have the
[25:18] experience of of psychological safety
[25:20] again permission for Candor at work
[25:23] um then that feeling of belonging that
[25:26] others might enjoy just naturally
[25:29] um is is not yours
[25:31] thank you and I I couldn't agree more
[25:34] obviously
[25:35] um and when I think about not having
[25:37] psychological safety
[25:39] for me that means I don't have the
[25:40] confidence I don't have the confidence
[25:42] you know as you say to share your view
[25:43] to share your expertise to shine maybe
[25:46] in some ways and how on Earth can you
[25:49] get promoted if you can't shine so it
[25:53] really stands to reason and
[25:55] hopefully we'll see a lot more research
[25:57] in this area as we move forward but I
[25:59] want to get to one of my favorite parts
[26:01] of your book because a lot of the
[26:03] listeners of this podcast are Business
[26:05] Leaders who really want to improve you
[26:08] know actually something we tend not to
[26:10] get enough training on is how to be
[26:13] effective people managers you know
[26:15] people are diverse people have different
[26:18] personalities there's a lot to manage
[26:21] um and I think every manager would agree
[26:23] that they'd love more training and what
[26:26] I love about this book in chapter seven
[26:28] for anybody who's interested is you lay
[26:31] out a Leader's tool kit to explain how
[26:35] leaders can create that environment of
[26:38] psychological safety would you be able
[26:40] to give a summary of some of the key
[26:42] tips there please good so the key tips I
[26:46] I you know I think of it as a table
[26:49] setting or stage setting you know real
[26:52] time action and responses to things that
[26:56] happen and in the in the stage setting
[26:58] one thing that maybe I don't emphasize
[27:01] enough but I think when you keep coming
[27:05] back to the purpose of the team you know
[27:08] the the why it matters why the work we
[27:10] do matters even when you think it's
[27:12] utterly obvious like patient care right
[27:15] it's it turns out that it still matters
[27:17] it's very powerful and enabling to just
[27:20] remind people that the work we do
[27:22] matters
[27:23] they matter right but but uh more
[27:26] importantly so that's kind of reminding
[27:27] reminding of purpose and and
[27:31] bringing us back reminding to what
[27:34] really matters but the part of stage
[27:37] setting that I think is so important is
[27:39] framing the work and nearly all work
[27:41] today has some degree of uncertainty or
[27:44] complexity or novelty and just calling
[27:48] attention to that even again
[27:51] though you think it's obvious right gee
[27:53] we've never done a project like this
[27:54] before you know it's an innovation
[27:55] project saying it aloud
[27:59] sets the rationale for why it actually
[28:02] makes sense that you want to hear from
[28:04] other people right if if you are
[28:07] inadvertently in implying that you have
[28:10] all the answers why would you actually
[28:12] even be interested in what anyone else
[28:13] has to say right and you may not know
[28:15] that you're inadvertently implying that
[28:17] but if you don't override it explicitly
[28:21] like I might miss something I need to
[28:23] hear from you statements like that are
[28:24] just so so powerful and then the second
[28:27] bit which is pretty easy to explain is
[28:29] just ask good questions right invite
[28:31] voice like you might have set the stage
[28:33] beautifully
[28:35] but there still can be a hesitation for
[28:37] people to just speak up
[28:39] but you know if if you ask as you're
[28:42] doing throughout this time together
[28:43] you're asking me questions and even if I
[28:46] felt inclined to kind of hold back I
[28:48] can't I have to you know it's it's a
[28:50] it's a human
[28:52] um requirement to answer a question so I
[28:55] answer right and you're hearing my voice
[28:57] and hopefully honest voice because
[28:59] you've made it
[29:01] clear that you really do value that and
[29:03] third how do you respond you know when
[29:06] someone disagrees with you or asks for
[29:08] help or brings bad news and I describe
[29:11] something I call a productive response
[29:13] which is appreciative and
[29:14] forward-looking you know not fake nice
[29:16] or or
[29:18] um you know fake anything but just
[29:21] genuinely thank you for that clear line
[29:22] of sight right that's how can I help so
[29:25] it's you know it's it's um honestly
[29:27] appreciative of the sense of the little
[29:29] bits of Courage that were involved in
[29:32] your uh in your your team members
[29:34] speaking up and then always you know
[29:36] forward-looking like where do we go from
[29:38] here how can I help
[29:40] I I think it's it's really important
[29:42] advice and thank you and I think anybody
[29:45] who has been in a people manager
[29:46] position we've all made mistakes
[29:49] um and certainly when I first became a
[29:52] people manager you think you're supposed
[29:54] to know everything and I think that
[29:56] somehow you're failing if you go gosh I
[29:58] don't know the answer does anybody know
[29:59] but actually the whole point is the
[30:02] reason you have a team is you've
[30:04] assembled people whose skill set and
[30:06] expertise complements yours and that's
[30:09] why you want to draw on their expertise
[30:11] and supplement your own you're
[30:14] responsible for the questions not the
[30:16] answers you know you're responsible for
[30:18] creating the conditions whereby people
[30:20] can coordinate to do great work not you
[30:24] know controlling and commanding and and
[30:27] you know having having all the knowledge
[30:29] that's needed as you say if you've done
[30:31] a good job selecting a team or been
[30:33] given a good team
[30:35] um their expertise is is is really
[30:38] relevant and and that's you know that's
[30:41] that's why you're there to you're the
[30:43] process architect not the not the um
[30:47] provider of answers now you talked
[30:50] earlier about
[30:51] um diversity inclusion particularly
[30:52] belonging being subjective and difficult
[30:54] to measure but it strikes me that
[30:56] psychological safety is quite difficult
[30:58] to measure and in some ways how do you
[31:01] measure silence how do you even notice
[31:03] silence how do you identify the people
[31:05] who aren't speaking up is there a way if
[31:08] Business Leaders read chapter seven and
[31:10] start implementing your advice how do
[31:13] they track progress how do they see
[31:15] Improvement
[31:17] well I guess there's a formal and an
[31:19] informal answer to that and the formal
[31:21] answer is there is a measure and it's
[31:22] publicly available a seven item survey
[31:26] that I developed for that 1999 paper
[31:30] that's a quite a robust measure and you
[31:34] can find it at fearlessorganization Dot
[31:37] org I think or maybe it's.com I'm not
[31:40] sure but it's a free measure that you
[31:41] know you can use with your team and you
[31:44] know you could track it and I I tend to
[31:46] think of it as a useful tool you know
[31:49] not forgetting the answer but for
[31:50] provoking discussion
[31:52] um but but in the absence of that more
[31:54] formal uh measure
[31:57] there is the self-discipline of asking
[32:01] yourself
[32:02] now what is the ratio of the sort of
[32:05] good news to bad that I'm hearing or the
[32:08] successes to failures or the all's well
[32:10] versus requests for help and you know if
[32:13] you're a little too you know if what
[32:16] you're hearing is a little too Rosy and
[32:18] you're working in an uncertain complex
[32:21] novel environment the chances are you're
[32:24] not there's they're things you're not
[32:26] hearing it's just that that sort of
[32:28] self-discipline to just reflect on the
[32:31] ratio and I'm not saying there's a right
[32:33] answer for what the ratio should be but
[32:35] that um train yourself to listen for the
[32:40] dog that didn't bark is the famous
[32:41] Sherlock Holmes story
[32:44] um puts it right it's just it's it
[32:46] because as you say it's it's
[32:48] um it's so much harder to notice things
[32:50] that aren't happening
[32:52] um but remind yourself of the things
[32:55] that ought to be happening
[32:57] I love the bumps in the road the the dog
[33:00] that didn't bark I love that I'll have
[33:02] to look up that Sherlock Holm at home's
[33:04] reference
[33:05] um so when it comes to workplace
[33:07] well-being and indeed to creating an
[33:09] environment of psychological safety
[33:11] there's so many factors that are such a
[33:15] part of of the workplace that they can
[33:17] either either boost psychological safety
[33:19] or or destroy it
[33:21] um and one of those I think is the
[33:23] performance review process now this is a
[33:25] bit of a loaded question because it is a
[33:28] personal bug bear of mine
[33:31] um but I would love to know what changes
[33:34] you would like to see within that
[33:37] performance review process to really
[33:38] boost psychological safety
[33:41] you know there's there is an implicit
[33:45] idea baked into most performance review
[33:48] processes that that the job of the
[33:51] manager is to evaluate the performance
[33:55] of the of the employee and that they are
[33:58] able to do that right that they have
[34:00] omniscience or or you know full
[34:02] knowledge about whether or not and to
[34:05] what degree the the employee's
[34:07] performance was was up to expectations
[34:09] it's a faulty assumption right because
[34:12] they don't have all missions they have a
[34:14] partial view of what happened they have
[34:16] their perspective on what happened but
[34:18] the employee also has a valid and
[34:21] important and valuable perspective on
[34:24] what happened so I am a huge fan of of a
[34:29] book on this topic I just recommend so
[34:32] highly called get rid of the performance
[34:34] review by UCLA Professor Sam Colbert
[34:37] it's
[34:39] um the the title is um you know more
[34:42] more strident than than a he really
[34:45] means what he says is you got to get rid
[34:48] of the
[34:49] broken assumptions embedded in the
[34:52] performance review that creates these
[34:54] very faulty Dynamics and and basically
[34:57] makes the whole
[34:59] activity quite ineffective at doing what
[35:02] it's supposed to do which is to you know
[35:04] enable good performance and he says
[35:06] you've got to replace the performance
[35:08] review with and he uses this wonderful
[35:11] term a performance preview where both
[35:15] metaphorically and in some cases
[35:17] literally we sit on the same side of the
[35:20] table looking forward right we the the
[35:22] manager and the subordinate look forward
[35:24] at what has to happen this year now we
[35:27] can use data and experience from last
[35:30] year to inform this conversation in fact
[35:32] I think we should
[35:33] um we should do that but the there is a
[35:37] clear understanding of a mutual
[35:40] responsibility
[35:41] that we both own for ensuring great work
[35:46] next year so I have let's say I'm your
[35:49] manager I have some ideas about what I
[35:51] need from you but I also need you to
[35:54] tell me what you need from me to be able
[35:56] to deliver on this very challenging
[35:58] assignment right and and by the way if
[36:01] things don't go well it's at least as
[36:04] much my responsibility as yours because
[36:06] I'm I'm the manager right they pay me
[36:09] more than they pay you it's my job to
[36:12] help you be effective so what's really
[36:14] wrong with performance
[36:16] review process in most organizations is
[36:19] that it's it's based on a sort of a a
[36:22] set of faulty assumptions
[36:24] um that
[36:25] inevitably leads to bad outcomes that
[36:29] are not intended by anyone yeah and how
[36:32] you describe that really does take the
[36:34] fear out of it actually
[36:36] um which is so important just really
[36:38] having that manager support knowing that
[36:40] your manager has your back that's
[36:42] exactly the type of conversation which
[36:44] will help me to be honest and it will
[36:46] help me to say and you know what I'm
[36:48] struggling with this I have you any
[36:50] advice
[36:51] um which is fantastic one of the things
[36:53] I'd also love to see with the
[36:55] performance review process is
[36:58] um it bugs me when I see maybe a
[37:00] brilliant sales person get promoted
[37:02] because they've over achieved all their
[37:04] targets but in doing so they've been
[37:06] belittling their colleagues and they've
[37:07] been making the types of comments which
[37:10] will absolutely destroy psychological
[37:12] safety because if I'm struggling with my
[37:14] confidence and if one of my colleagues
[37:17] is belittling me taking credit for my
[37:19] work I'm going to shrink a little bit
[37:21] more
[37:22] um so in a previous company I worked for
[37:24] they had the at the CEO coined the term
[37:28] decency quotient
[37:31] um so which I love decency quotient is
[37:33] all about
[37:35] um how we treat others do we treat
[37:36] others with respect
[37:38] um and it can also be about do we do
[37:40] well by doing good do we you know use
[37:42] our volunteer days there's so much to
[37:45] this concept of decency quotient but
[37:47] what I loved was in that performance
[37:49] review process that came into the
[37:52] conversation so it wasn't just did Bob
[37:54] hit all his sales targets but rather in
[37:58] doing so did Bob display decency
[38:02] um and I feel like there's changes like
[38:04] this that could be made that will also
[38:06] help
[38:07] um you know psychological safety thrive
[38:10] been good performance in in well-run
[38:13] organizations is that combination of
[38:16] decency and sort of you know whatever
[38:19] objective metrics of of output but but
[38:23] in order for this You Know Better
[38:26] Learning oriented more effective style
[38:29] of management to take hold the man a
[38:32] manager has to truly want to help yes
[38:36] the subordinate you have to want to help
[38:38] the subordinate more than you want to
[38:41] judge and feel Superior too like it and
[38:44] that's often a
[38:46] an internal shift
[38:49] that you can't assume is present right
[38:52] so to be a people manager you have to be
[38:55] in that role because you want to help
[38:57] others I can do well and it's not about
[39:01] you right it's it's about them but if
[39:03] your primary goal is to lower your power
[39:05] over others or to judge others
[39:08] um You probably won't do as good a job
[39:10] in that role yeah so true
[39:13] um I mean I'd love to go into what I
[39:15] like to call the rapid fire round
[39:18] great
[39:20] what do you do
[39:22] um to work on your well-being on a daily
[39:24] basis daily or weekly basis
[39:27] well I I think the easiest answer and
[39:30] it's it's a true answer is I really do
[39:32] try to get enough sleep I know I mean
[39:34] some people in my
[39:36] environment boast about how little sleep
[39:40] they get I'm I'm the opposite I I really
[39:43] need sleep I think it's without it I
[39:45] don't think is clearly
[39:47] um I don't feel as good so sleep matters
[39:50] to me and and exercise does as well and
[39:52] I'm not saying I'm out there running
[39:53] marathons I'm not but I do like to run
[39:56] and I do like the feeling of you know
[39:58] just getting out there and and working a
[40:01] little harder at something
[40:04] um physical and of course all the
[40:06] science tells us to get out in nature
[40:08] but then we get so overwhelmed with
[40:10] workloads that we leave that good advice
[40:12] at the door so it's so important to
[40:14] remember that and I also want to pick up
[40:16] on the busyness busyness status that you
[40:19] brought up we need to overcome this
[40:22] um boasting about I'm busier than you
[40:25] are is not going to help Society in any
[40:27] way so you know isn't it great to start
[40:30] boasting about I got a full eight nine
[40:33] hours sleep last night you know right
[40:35] right and people you know it's the new
[40:38] oh how are you I mean you know exactly
[40:40] what the answer is going to be busy yes
[40:42] and I'm guilty guilty is charged and and
[40:45] you know busyness I think busyness isn't
[40:48] something to be proud of even though you
[40:51] know again I get I do um live in a glass
[40:54] house here but it's it's often that
[40:56] you're not prioritizing well enough
[40:59] right not picking and choosing the
[41:01] things where either you can really add
[41:03] value or you really get joy or meaning
[41:06] and and you know doing your your very
[41:09] best to say no which is an act of
[41:12] kindness really you know do yourself and
[41:15] others because if you do if you say yes
[41:17] and then you do them with resentment
[41:18] that's no good right so it's it's trying
[41:21] to trying to um think about the the the
[41:25] best uh use of your time the the power
[41:28] of saying no and we had uh Dr Kelly
[41:31] Harding on a previous episode and Kelly
[41:33] and I bonded over the fact that we
[41:35] realized we were both people Pleasers
[41:36] and we're both trying to become reformed
[41:38] people Pleasers so we're setting up
[41:40] informally PPA people please
[41:44] [Music]
[41:50] it may become official very soon it may
[41:53] we need badges and everything
[41:55] um the next question I had for you
[41:59] you had a really interesting graph
[42:01] showing again I mentioned at the
[42:03] beginning the increase in the media
[42:06] mentions of psychological safety over a
[42:08] period of 25 years now if you could hop
[42:11] into a time machine and you could travel
[42:13] 25 years in the future what is the
[42:16] change that you would like to see
[42:18] well wow that's a good question well
[42:21] first of all I mean you're you're right
[42:22] I do publish that graph and that's
[42:24] before the book even came out so the the
[42:26] and I haven't done that analysis
[42:29] recently but the chances are it's gone
[42:31] way up although I I think 25 years in
[42:35] the future I'd like to see it go way
[42:36] down because it becomes just a given
[42:39] it's like talking about
[42:42] um you know breathing you don't you
[42:44] don't need to talk about breathing uh
[42:46] very often because you have to breathe
[42:47] right so if you know if it became sort
[42:50] of commonplace that everybody understood
[42:52] that work environments need to feel like
[42:55] you have permission for Candor then we
[42:57] wouldn't see lots and lots of articles
[42:58] about it because you wouldn't need to
[43:00] what a brilliant answer
[43:02] um and and on that note Jamie I just
[43:05] want to say a huge thank you I have
[43:07] thoroughly enjoyed this conversation
[43:08] I've learned so much and I think you've
[43:11] given such brilliant advice to all of
[43:13] our listeners
[43:15] well you're very kind thank you for
[43:17] having me
[43:19] foreign

The concept of psychological safety often carries misconceptions, leading to a misunderstanding of its true essence. Many equate it with the idea of creating a space where disagreement is not tolerated or where accountability for mistakes is absent. However, psychological safety is fundamentally about fostering an environment characterized by shared trust and demonstrated respect among team members. This environment encourages individuals to take interpersonal risks, such as voicing dissenting opinions, proposing innovative ideas, and discussing failures openly. The ability to speak up without fear of negative repercussions is crucial for personal and team growth, as it allows for learning from mistakes and enhancing overall team performance.

It is essential to emphasize both trust and respect when discussing psychological safety. Simply spending time together, such as going golfing or bowling, does not inherently build trust. The real test comes when team members take risks by sharing their ideas or admitting failures. Leaders play a pivotal role in this dynamic; their responses to such risks significantly impact whether team members feel respected and heard. Even if a leader does not agree with a proposed idea, acknowledging it and engaging in a constructive dialogue is vital. This approach fosters an atmosphere where team members feel safe to express themselves, knowing they will not be judged harshly for their contributions or mistakes.

The discussion also touches on generational dynamics, particularly the millennial demographic, which has been raised in an environment that emphasizes respect and positive reinforcement. This upbringing leads millennials to default to trust more readily than previous generations, who may have been conditioned to "earn" their voice over time. Consequently, millennials and even Gen Z individuals may present bold ideas early in their tenure at a company. How leaders respond to these ideas can either reinforce or undermine this trust. It is crucial for leaders to listen and provide constructive feedback, ensuring that younger employees feel valued and respected, which in turn encourages ongoing participation and innovation.

Moreover, the transcript highlights the detrimental effects of low psychological safety on interdepartmental relationships. A culture lacking in shared trust often breeds judgment and an "us versus them" mentality between divisions. When mistakes occur in one department, it can lead to negative assumptions about their competence, which further erodes trust. To combat this, organizations must prioritize respectful communication, especially during disagreements. Leaders should model respectful behavior and strive to understand differing perspectives, which is essential for cultivating a culture of psychological safety across the organization.

In conclusion, psychological safety is not merely about creating a comfortable environment devoid of conflict; it is about establishing a foundation of trust and respect that empowers individuals to share ideas and learn from mistakes. Leaders must actively foster this environment through their actions and responses, ensuring that all team members feel safe to contribute and grow, ultimately leading to a more innovative and resilient organization.

The transcript provides a nuanced understanding of interpersonal risk within the workplace context. Interpersonal risks are defined as the potential challenges and uncertainties that individuals face when they choose to express dissenting opinions, propose new ideas, or acknowledge mistakes. The speaker emphasizes that such risks are essential for fostering an environment of psychological safety, which is characterized by shared trust and demonstrated respect among team members.

Several examples illustrate what these interpersonal risks may look like:

• Speaking Up: An employee might express disagreement with the prevailing consensus on a particular issue, which requires courage and the willingness to challenge the status quo.
• Sharing New Ideas: Proposing a novel approach to tackle a project can be intimidating, especially if the idea deviates from traditional practices.
• Acknowledging Mistakes: Discussing personal failures or errors is another significant interpersonal risk. The speaker notes that even high performers make mistakes, and addressing these can lead to collective learning.

Taking such risks is vital for team learning and performance because it cultivates a culture where individuals feel comfortable sharing insights that could drive innovation and improvement. Furthermore, creating a safe environment for open dialogue encourages team members to learn from their experiences, thereby enhancing overall team strength. This process not only benefits individual growth but also reinforces the team's ability to adapt and thrive in a dynamic work environment.

• [00:28] "What that does is it encourages people to take interpersonal risks."
• [01:06] "And you can only do that inside a psychologically safe environment, an environment of shared trust and demonstrated respect."
• [02:10] "Most importantly, let’s talk about how we can make sure this doesn’t happen again."

The transcript clearly distinguishes psychological safety from the concepts of simply being nice, avoiding disagreements, or establishing a comfort zone. The speaker articulates that psychological safety is not about creating an environment where everyone agrees on everything or where mistakes are overlooked to maintain harmony. Instead, it revolves around fostering shared trust and demonstrated respect, which are critical for effective team dynamics.

In explaining this distinction, the speaker argues that:

• Accountability: True psychological safety involves holding individuals accountable for their actions and performance. It does not imply a lack of accountability or letting underperformers remain unchecked.
• Encouragement of Disagreement: It is essential for team members to feel empowered to voice dissenting opinions, which can lead to constructive discussions rather than a superficial agreement.
• Respectful Engagement: When someone takes an interpersonal risk—such as proposing a new idea or admitting a mistake—the response from leaders and team members should be one of respect and consideration, rather than dismissal or ridicule.

This distinction is crucial because it highlights that psychological safety is about creating a robust framework for honest communication and growth, rather than merely a pleasant or conflict-free atmosphere. By fostering an environment where challenging ideas and acknowledging mistakes are welcomed, teams can enhance their overall effectiveness and innovation.

• [00:06] "No, that’s not what we’re talking about."
• [02:21] "This combination of trust and respect is what builds that sense of psychological safety on a team."
• [01:12] "...it encourages people to take interpersonal risks."

The transcript does not explicitly mention leaders openly acknowledging their own mistakes, uncertainties, or limitations. However, it does emphasize the importance of demonstrating respect when team members share their failures. The speaker highlights that when individuals feel safe to discuss their mistakes, it promotes a culture of learning and transparency within the team.

Moreover, the speaker suggests that leaders have a crucial role in modeling this behavior. By showing respect for team members who admit their errors, leaders can create an environment where everyone feels comfortable being transparent about their own challenges. This can lead to several positive outcomes:

• Increased Trust: When leaders are willing to admit their own mistakes, it fosters a culture of trust, where team members feel more secure in sharing their own vulnerabilities.
• Encouragement of Learning: Acknowledging mistakes can lead to discussions on how to avoid similar issues in the future, driving collective improvement.
• Enhanced Psychological Safety: When leaders demonstrate that mistakes are a part of growth, it reinforces the team's sense of psychological safety.

Thus, while the speaker does not directly state that leaders should acknowledge their own mistakes, the implications of such behavior are clear. Respecting team members who are open about their failures serves to enhance overall team dynamics and encourages a healthy, transparent communication culture.

• [01:53] "When someone shares a failure, do they feel like the whole team's going to take a negative opinion of them?"
• [02:20] "...demonstrating when people mess up that you’ve got that sense of respect?"
• [02:09] "Let’s talk about how we can help each other."

The transcript does address the behavior of leaders asking questions, inviting input, and admitting that they do not have all the answers, though it does not provide explicit examples of leaders doing so. The speaker emphasizes that leaders play a pivotal role in fostering psychological safety by responding appropriately when team members take interpersonal risks, such as sharing new ideas or feedback. This behavior is closely connected to the concept of psychological safety because it reinforces a supportive environment where individuals feel valued and heard.

Key points related to this connection include:

• Encouragement of Dialogue: When leaders invite input and ask questions, it signals to team members that their thoughts and opinions are important, promoting open dialogue.
• Validation of Ideas: Acknowledging that they do not have all the answers allows leaders to demonstrate humility, making it clear that collaborative problem-solving is valued.
• Fostering Trust: Such behaviors contribute to building trust between leaders and team members, as individuals feel more comfortable expressing their ideas and concerns without fear of judgment.

Thus, while the transcript does not provide detailed scenarios of leaders engaging in these practices, it emphasizes the significance of such behaviors in creating a psychologically safe workplace. By fostering an environment of inquiry and collaboration, leaders can enhance team dynamics and performance.

• [04:29] "...they're going to default to trusting sooner than previous generations would."
• [04:41] "...the worst thing we can do is not hear them out."
• [04:59] "...modeling respectful behavior when there are disagreements."

The transcript does address the challenge of maintaining both high psychological safety and high performance expectations or accountability without allowing fear to become predominant. The speaker emphasizes that psychological safety and accountability are not mutually exclusive; rather, they can coexist in a well-functioning team environment.

To achieve this balance, several important points are made:

• Modeling Respectful Behavior: Leaders must model respectful behavior during disagreements. This means responding to mistakes or differing opinions in a constructive manner, which fosters a culture of trust rather than judgment.
• Encouraging Growth Mindset: Leaders should help their teams cultivate a growth mindset, where mistakes are viewed as opportunities for learning and development. This approach encourages team members to acknowledge errors without fear of retribution.
• Holding Individuals Accountable: While maintaining a psychologically safe environment, leaders still need to enforce accountability for performance. This can be done through constructive feedback and support rather than punitive measures.

By combining these elements, teams can create an environment where individuals feel safe to take risks and share their thoughts while still being held accountable for their contributions. The speaker notes that relying solely on social activities, such as team outings, will not suffice in building trust; rather, it is the modeling of respectful behavior in challenging situations that truly fosters psychological safety.

• [05:35] "...modeling respectful behavior when there are disagreements."
• [05:31] "...unless we start modeling respectful behavior..."
• [05:07] "...we see this as a lot of judgment, a lot of us versus them."

The transcript highlights a significant relationship between employees' reticence to voice their opinions and the potential for negative outcomes within an organization. The speaker emphasizes that psychological safety—defined as a culture of shared trust and demonstrated respect—encourages individuals to take interpersonal risks. These risks include speaking up when they disagree with prevailing opinions, sharing innovative ideas, and discussing mistakes or failures openly.

When employees remain silent due to fear of judgment or backlash, the organization misses out on valuable insights and perspectives that could drive innovation. The speaker points out that even high performers within a team make mistakes, and addressing these errors constructively can lead to growth and learning opportunities. Without a psychologically safe environment, individuals may hesitate to discuss these mistakes, leading to repeated errors and stagnation in team performance.

Furthermore, the absence of open dialogue can culminate in poorer decision-making as fewer voices contribute to the conversation. The speaker illustrates this by stating that when someone shares a failure, their fear of being labeled an underperformer can stifle their willingness to contribute in the future. This cycle of silence not only undermines trust but can also diminish the overall effectiveness of the team.

• [01:10] "You can only do that inside a psychologically safe environment, an environment of shared trust and demonstrated respect."
• [02:10] "Most importantly, let's talk about how we can make sure this doesn't happen again."
• [04:01] "You need to have that organizational savvy that we talk about."

The transcript does not mention specific challenges that remote or hybrid work creates for psychological safety, such as issues related to video calls, written communication, digital meeting dynamics, or reduced spontaneous interaction. Instead, the focus is primarily on the broader concepts of psychological safety, trust, and respect within teams, without delving into how these elements may be impacted by the dynamics of remote work.

• [05:05] "One of the things that happens in a in a culture of low psychological safety or low shared trust is that in between different divisions we have we see this as a lot of judgment, a lot of us versus them."
• [05:14] "...and all of a sudden we're thinking, 'Oh yeah, but they're just they're totally incompetent. They don't understand how things really work, etc.'"
• [05:22] "...but it happens inevitably. And it's not because we just think, oh, we just need to grow the trust."

The transcript lacks specific suggestions on how remote teams can foster trust, connection, or informal psychological safety in the absence of in-person interactions. While the speaker discusses the importance of shared trust and respect in creating a psychologically safe environment, there are no direct recommendations for practices or approaches tailored for remote work scenarios.

• [05:29] "No amount of golf outings or family feud or whatever, excuse me, friendly feud or whatever is going to grow that unless we start modeling respectful behavior when there are disagreements."
• [05:39] "Modeling respectful behavior in those stressful moments, understanding why they're thinking the way they're thinking, and then responding with..."

The transcript does not explicitly discuss whether psychological safety differs among individuals or groups based on backgrounds, roles, seniority, or areas of expertise. The focus remains on the general principles of fostering shared trust and respect within teams, rather than addressing variations in psychological safety across different demographics or organizational hierarchies.

• [03:43] "We talk about a group that's received far more positive feedback than negative feedback in their upbringing, far more respect."
• [04:02] "...but they're also going to speak up right away with some interesting things, right?"

The transcript does not mention any specific methods, questions, indicators, or follow-up actions related to measuring, assessing, or monitoring psychological safety within a team or organization. The conversation centers around the qualitative aspects of fostering psychological safety, such as encouraging open dialogue and trust, rather than providing quantitative metrics or evaluation strategies.

[00:00] I like to think of it a lot of times we
[00:01] have a lot of baggage around this term
[00:02] psychological safety because we think it
[00:04] might mean safe spaces where no one
[00:06] hears anything they disagree with. No,
[00:07] that's not what we're talking about. We
[00:09] think it might be a scenario where no
[00:11] one is held accountable for their
[00:12] consistent mistakes where somebody is
[00:14] underperforming in their role and we
[00:16] just have to let it be because we don't
[00:17] want to threaten psychological safety.
[00:18] No, that's not what we're talking about.
[00:20] When we say psychological safety, we're
[00:21] talking about shared trust and
[00:24] demonstrated respect. We're going to
[00:26] talk about both of those in a moment.
[00:28] What that does is it encourages people
[00:31] to take interpersonal risks. Risks like
[00:34] speaking up because I disagree with
[00:36] where the consensus is on this issue.
[00:38] Risks like sharing a new idea and know
[00:40] the new idea can't be let's never wear
[00:42] eye protection. Risks like a new idea
[00:44] like hey here's a way we could tackle
[00:45] this project and it might seem out of
[00:47] the box but might help us on the
[00:49] innovation front. Risks like talking
[00:51] about mistakes and failures. I mean the
[00:55] reality is even the highest performers
[00:57] on your team, even everyone in this room
[00:59] has made a mistake at some point. And
[01:02] then we have to think about how do we
[01:04] grow and learn from that mistake and
[01:06] make the team stronger, our own
[01:07] experiences stronger. And you can only
[01:08] do that inside a psychologically safe
[01:11] environment, an environment of shared
[01:12] trust and demonstrated respect. And I
[01:15] think it's really important to hit both
[01:17] of those points because we think about
[01:19] psychological safety or shared trust and
[01:20] all we tend to think about is like, hey,
[01:22] let's all just go golfing together.
[01:24] Let's go bowling. Let's just spend more
[01:26] time together and we'll trust each other
[01:27] more. And that's true in a sense. It's
[01:30] true right up until the moment when
[01:33] someone takes that interpersonal risk.
[01:36] And then once they take that risk and
[01:37] they share their new idea, how do you
[01:40] respond as a leader? They need to feel
[01:43] respected and heard. You don't
[01:45] necessarily have to agree with their
[01:48] idea, but oh, that's interesting. Okay,
[01:50] let's think through that idea. You have
[01:51] to hear them out. When someone shares a
[01:53] failure, do they feel like the whole
[01:55] team's going to take a uh a negative
[01:56] opinion of them because of that failure?
[01:58] Do they feel like the whole team's going
[02:00] to just say, "Oh, that I always knew you
[02:01] were an underperformer. This is always
[02:03] why I hate working with this department,
[02:04] this division." Or do they say, "Okay,
[02:07] well, let's talk about that. Let's talk
[02:09] about how we can help each other. Most
[02:10] importantly, let's talk about how we can
[02:12] make sure this doesn't happen again. Can
[02:15] you as a leader help your team tap into
[02:16] the growth mindset that learns from
[02:18] mistakes or not by demonstrating when
[02:20] people mess up that you've got that
[02:21] sense of respect? This combination of
[02:24] trust and respect is what builds that
[02:26] sense of psychological safety on a team
[02:28] across teams in through leadership. And
[02:31] you know, we heard it said this morning
[02:33] from um from Osai in the culture moment
[02:35] that the largest group of uh
[02:37] individuals, largest demographic inside
[02:40] our organization is millennials. Well,
[02:42] if it feels like those millennials
[02:45] always want the trophy and what have
[02:46] you, I get you. One of the things that
[02:49] happened is that they grew up in a time
[02:51] inundated with respect. I mean,
[02:54] everything they did, they were the
[02:56] absolute best at. I get it. I am a
[02:59] millennial. I totally get that. I'm
[03:01] actually I'm that borderline between Gen
[03:03] X and millennial. You know what I'm
[03:05] talking about. Um, one of my friends
[03:06] calls us geriatric millennials,
[03:09] right? Or elder millennials or zenials,
[03:12] right? Okay, I've already found you in
[03:13] the room. I already know who you all
[03:14] are. And it's really weird because we
[03:16] take on the cultural distinctions of
[03:17] each demographic. Like, so, for example,
[03:20] my millennial self wants to be
[03:21] celebrated for the unique contribution
[03:22] to the world that my existence provides,
[03:27] and my Gen X self just wants to be left
[03:29] alone. I just my favorite thing in the
[03:32] world is when plans get cancelled.
[03:34] That's my Gen X self, right? So, we we
[03:37] talk about and we we just I won't even
[03:38] single out millennials because I think
[03:40] we can we can factor Gen Z in this, etc.
[03:42] We talk about a group that's received
[03:43] far more positive feedback than negative
[03:46] feedback in their upbringing, far more
[03:48] respect. Here's what's fun. They're
[03:50] going to default to trusting sooner than
[03:53] previous generations would. They've had
[03:56] far few fewer people in their life tell
[03:58] them, "You just need to sit down and pay
[03:59] your dues and earn your way into
[04:01] speaking up." So, they're going to speak
[04:02] up right away, but they're also going to
[04:04] speak up right away with some
[04:05] interesting things, right? They're going
[04:06] to come in and say, "Oh, yeah. I know.
[04:08] I've got some amazing ideas for how we
[04:10] can transform the company." Transform
[04:11] the company? You've been here for a
[04:12] week,
[04:14] right? And I know it sounds weird, but
[04:18] how we respond in that moment determines
[04:21] whether or not they continue to trust.
[04:24] And again, you don't have to agree with
[04:25] them, but think about the fact that
[04:28] since they've been respected, they're
[04:29] defaulting to that shared trust. And you
[04:31] don't want to diminish that and make
[04:33] them feel less safe to bring up ideas
[04:35] before. Cuz I know that idea might sound
[04:37] a little crazy, but the next one might
[04:38] be amazing. And the worst thing we can
[04:41] do is not hear them out. Now, we can
[04:43] still tell them, hey, you probably need
[04:44] a little more time to understand how
[04:46] things work here. You need to have that
[04:47] organizational savvy that we talk about.
[04:49] We can say that. That's that's no
[04:51] problem. But we have to make sure that
[04:54] again we hear them out, we correct them
[04:55] in a way that makes them feel like they
[04:57] can continue to trust in the future. I
[04:59] think this is just important uh
[05:00] laterally as well. One of the things
[05:02] that happens in a in a culture of low
[05:05] psychological safety or low shared trust
[05:07] is that in between different divisions
[05:09] we have we see this as a lot of
[05:11] judgment, a lot of us versus them, a
[05:13] mistake is made over in this department
[05:14] and all of a sudden we're thinking, "Oh
[05:16] yeah, but they're just they're totally
[05:17] incompetent. They don't understand how
[05:18] things really work, etc."
[05:20] And that's not exactly a respectful
[05:22] response that grows levels of trust, but
[05:23] it happens inevitably. And it's not
[05:26] because we just think, oh, we just need
[05:27] to grow the trust. No amount of golf
[05:29] outings or family feud or whatever,
[05:31] excuse me, friendly feud or whatever is
[05:34] going to grow that unless we start
[05:35] modeling respectful behavior when there
[05:37] are disagreements. Modeling respectful
[05:39] behavior in those stressful moments,
[05:41] understanding why they're thinking the
[05:43] way they're thinking, and then
[05:44] responding with

Introduction to Psychological Safety

Omid Fuhi, a social psychologist at the University of Pittsburgh's Learning Research and Development Center, introduces the concept of psychological safety as a critical element for fostering environments conducive to both academic and personal growth. He emphasizes that psychological safety is not merely a buzzword but a foundational aspect that enables individuals to thrive.

Defining Psychological Safety

Psychological safety encompasses both internal and external conditions that contribute to an individual's sense of security. It allows individuals to express ideas, ask questions, and acknowledge mistakes without the fear of negative repercussions. This concept has been extensively studied, particularly through the work of Dr. Amy Edmonson at Harvard Business School, who has identified key factors that create secure environments for students to engage fully in their learning experiences.

Impact on Learning and Performance

In educational settings, psychological safety is crucial as it encourages students to participate actively, even when they are uncertain about their answers. Edmonson's research, particularly her studies on team dynamics, highlights that psychological safety is a significant determinant of successful group performance. This notion was further validated by Google's Project Aristotle, which found psychological safety to be the most critical factor in team success.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

Fuhi connects psychological safety to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, illustrating that after physiological needs, the need for safety is paramount for optimal functioning. When individuals are preoccupied with threats to their safety—whether physical or psychological—they cannot perform at their best. He identifies three cognitive reasons for this inability to function: increased stress, cognitive burden, and heightened vigilance. Each of these factors detracts from an individual's ability to learn and perform effectively.

Research Findings

Studies from institutions such as the University of Michigan and the University of California, Berkeley, provide empirical support for the benefits of psychological safety. Classrooms where students report higher levels of psychological safety demonstrate better academic outcomes, increased engagement, and lower dropout rates. Furthermore, students in these environments experience reduced stress and improved mental health, which enhances their resilience in facing academic challenges.

Strategies to Foster Psychological Safety

Fuhi outlines practical strategies for educators to cultivate psychological safety in their classrooms:

• Model Vulnerability: Educators should openly admit when they do not know something or when they have made mistakes. This openness fosters a culture where students feel safe to express their uncertainties.
• Encourage Open Dialogue: Creating an environment where all voices are heard is essential. Techniques such as round-robin participation and anonymous question submissions can ensure that every student has an opportunity to contribute.
• Provide Constructive Feedback: Feedback should focus on effort and learning rather than solely on outcomes. This approach helps students view mistakes as opportunities for growth, promoting a more resilient learning environment.

Conclusion

Fuhi concludes by encouraging educators and students alike to contribute to a psychologically safe environment. He emphasizes that actions taken to support peers and foster open communication can significantly impact individual success and the collective success of the classroom. For further information on psychological safety, viewers are directed to additional resources provided in the video.

The transcript does not explicitly explain the concept of interpersonal risk in a workplace context. Instead, it focuses primarily on the broader concept of psychological safety and its implications for learning and well-being within educational settings. While the terms interpersonal risk and psychological safety are related, the transcript does not delve into specific examples of interpersonal risks that employees might face in a workplace.

However, it does emphasize the importance of creating an environment where individuals feel safe to express their ideas, ask questions, and admit mistakes without fear of negative consequences. This atmosphere is crucial for fostering engagement and participation, particularly in academic settings. The implications for team learning and performance are indirectly suggested through the discussion of the impact of psychological safety on student outcomes. For instance, students who feel psychologically safe are noted to be more engaged and likely to participate in class discussions.

Moreover, the transcript highlights research findings that suggest environments characterized by psychological safety correlate with better academic outcomes, increased engagement, and a lower likelihood of dropping out. Therefore, while interpersonal risk is not explicitly mentioned, the underlying principle that taking risks—such as voicing opinions or admitting uncertainties—is essential for learning and success is implicitly conveyed through the emphasis on psychological safety.

•  
  • [03:17] "...deprive our mental and emotional resources, and corrode our sense of trust of the environment."
  • [04:01] "When students feel psychologically safe, they are more likely to take on challenges, persist through difficulties, and ultimately achieve higher academic success."

The transcript indeed distinguishes psychological safety from merely fostering a pleasant environment characterized by niceness, avoidance of disagreement, or the establishment of a comfort zone. It articulates that psychological safety is about creating an environment where individuals feel secure enough to express their ideas, ask questions, and admit mistakes without the fear of negative consequences. This nuanced definition implies that psychological safety transcends the superficial aspects of friendliness and encompasses deeper interpersonal dynamics that facilitate genuine engagement and learning.

Dr. Amy Edmonson's research is referenced as a foundational element in understanding psychological safety, particularly in educational contexts. The transcript notes that psychological safety is crucial for students’ engagement in learning activities, even when they are uncertain about correct answers. This emphasis on engagement highlights that psychological safety is not about avoiding discomfort or disagreement; rather, it is about fostering an environment where such discomfort can be navigated productively.

Furthermore, the transcript discusses the detrimental effects of a lack of psychological safety, such as increased stress and cognitive burden, which can undermine performance and well-being. By comparing the importance of psychological safety to basic physiological needs outlined in Maslow's hierarchy, it becomes evident that achieving psychological safety is fundamentally about creating conditions that support not only comfort but also the potential for growth and achievement.

•  
  • [00:41] "Psychological safety refers to both a set of conditions that are internal and external that contribute to the feeling that one is safe."
  • [01:40] "...psychological safety is a key factor in successful group performance."

Yes, the transcript discusses the importance of leaders openly acknowledging their own mistakes, uncertainties, and limitations. This behavior is presented as a powerful method to enhance psychological safety within teams. By modeling vulnerability, leaders can set a tone that encourages team members to do the same. This openness fosters an environment where individuals feel comfortable admitting their own errors or uncertainties without fear of judgment or reprisal.

When leaders admit their mistakes or acknowledge that they do not have all the answers, it significantly impacts team dynamics. As mentioned in the transcript, this practice creates a culture where seeking help and expressing doubts are acceptable. This is crucial because it encourages team members to share their thoughts and concerns openly, thereby enhancing communication and collaboration.

Furthermore, the transcript cites research demonstrating that teachers who share their own learning experiences, including struggles, see increased student participation and engagement. This reflects the broader implication that when leaders and educators model vulnerability, it not only humanizes them but also builds trust within the team or classroom, ultimately leading to improved performance and a sense of belonging among team members.

•  
  • [04:32] "...one of the most effective ways to build psychological safety is by modeling vulnerability."
  • [04:47] "...creating a culture where it’s okay to be imperfect."

The transcript does mention leaders asking questions and inviting input, particularly through the concept of creating an environment of psychological safety. While it does not explicitly detail leaders' behaviors in this regard, it implies that such actions are essential components of fostering an atmosphere where team members feel safe to contribute. By inviting input and acknowledging that they do not have all the answers, leaders demonstrate humility and a willingness to learn, which can significantly enhance psychological safety.

This behavior is crucial because it signals to team members that their perspectives are valued. When leaders ask questions and seek feedback, it encourages a culture of open dialogue, where individuals feel empowered to share their thoughts without fear of negative repercussions. The transcript emphasizes that classrooms that actively promote open dialogue see significant improvements in student engagement and academic performance. This suggests that similar practices in workplace settings could yield positive outcomes as well.

Furthermore, the ability of leaders to admit their limitations and uncertainties fosters a culture of transparency. This transparency is essential for psychological safety, as it allows team members to feel less isolated in their struggles and more connected to each other. Overall, the relationship between inviting input from team members and psychological safety is underscored by the notion that such practices lead to better engagement, collaboration, and ultimately, improved performance.

•  
  • [05:01] "...encourage open dialogue. Creating an environment where all voices are heard is essential."
  • [05:20] "...saw a 25% increase in student engagement and a corresponding improvement in academic performance."

The transcript does not explicitly discuss how to maintain both high psychological safety and high performance expectations or accountability without fear becoming dominant. However, it does provide insights into the foundational elements that could contribute to achieving this balance. The speaker emphasizes the importance of creating a psychologically safe environment where individuals feel comfortable to express their vulnerabilities and mistakes.

By fostering an atmosphere of psychological safety, educators and leaders can encourage team members to take risks and pursue high-performance standards without the overriding fear of negative consequences. This concept aligns with the idea that accountability and performance do not have to be at odds with psychological safety. When team members feel safe, they are more likely to engage fully in their roles and strive for excellence.

Additionally, the transcript references research that highlights the positive outcomes associated with psychological safety, such as improved engagement and resilience among students. These outcomes suggest that when individuals feel secure, they are better equipped to meet high expectations and navigate challenges effectively. Furthermore, the speaker mentions that psychological safety fosters a sense of belonging, which is crucial for well-being and overall performance.

Ultimately, while the transcript does not provide a direct answer to the balance of maintaining high standards alongside psychological safety, it implies that creating a culture of openness and support can facilitate an environment where both can coexist and thrive.

•  
  • [04:12] "...psychological safety also fosters a sense of belonging, which is crucial for students’ well-being."
  • [02:21] "...when a person is worried about their physiological or psychological safety in a particular environment."

The transcript does not explicitly describe a relationship between employees remaining silent and negative outcomes such as reduced innovation, missed learning opportunities, preventable errors, or poorer decisions. However, it does emphasize the importance of psychological safety in fostering an environment where individuals feel comfortable expressing their ideas, asking questions, and admitting mistakes without fear of negative consequences. This underlying principle suggests that when individuals are not psychologically safe, they may choose to remain silent, which could lead to missed opportunities for learning and innovation.

Moreover, the failure to engage in open communication can compromise overall group performance, as highlighted by Dr. Amy Edmonson's research on team dynamics. In a psychologically unsafe environment, individuals may avoid sharing their thoughts or concerns, leading to deficiencies in teamwork and potentially resulting in preventable errors. This silence can create a cycle where the lack of communication leads to poorer decisions, as team members are not sharing critical insights or feedback that could enhance the group's problem-solving capabilities.

Additionally, the transcript mentions how students in safe environments are more willing to engage, participate, and take academic risks, which indirectly points to how silence stemming from a lack of psychological safety could hinder innovation and learning. The evidence suggests that active participation is crucial for success, and silence can be detrimental to both individual and collective outcomes.

• [01:08] "Psychological safety is a key factor in successful group performance."
• [04:12] "When students feel psychologically safe, they are more likely to take on challenges, persist through difficulties, and ultimately achieve higher academic success."

The transcript does not address the challenges that remote or hybrid work environments create for psychological safety specifically. There is no mention of issues such as video call dynamics, written communication challenges, digital meeting interactions, or the reduction of spontaneous interaction that can often occur in remote settings. The focus is primarily on the general concept of psychological safety and its benefits within traditional classroom settings and organizational dynamics.

While it is acknowledged that psychological safety is crucial for optimal performance and well-being, the transcript does not delve into the unique challenges faced by remote teams, which could include difficulties in fostering communication and collaboration when team members are not physically present. Such challenges are relevant in modern work environments, where many employees find themselves navigating a blend of in-person and virtual interactions.

Furthermore, the discussion revolves around creating an inclusive environment for learning and engagement without specifically tailoring the conversation to the nuances of remote work. Thus, the lack of mention about remote or hybrid work challenges indicates that the transcript does not cover this area.

• [00:20] "Psychological safety is more than just the buzzwords. It's a crucial element in fostering an environment where people can thrive academically and personally."
• [01:43] "When we look at Maslo's hierarchy of needs, we begin to understand why psychological safety is so crucial for optimal performance."

The transcript does not provide specific practices or approaches that remote teams can adopt to build trust, connection, or informal psychological safety in the absence of in-person interactions. It primarily focuses on strategies for enhancing psychological safety in classroom and organizational settings without delving into remote work dynamics. The absence of discussions regarding virtual team-building activities, informal check-ins, or strategies for fostering connections through digital platforms suggests that the speaker did not address how remote teams can maintain psychological safety.

While the importance of psychological safety is highlighted, especially in contexts where individuals feel empowered to share their thoughts, the transcript does not offer tailored solutions for remote or hybrid teams. This is particularly relevant in today’s work environment where many teams operate virtually and may face challenges in maintaining a culture of openness and trust.

Given the omission of specific tactics for remote teams, readers looking for actionable insights on fostering psychological safety in a virtual context may find the transcript lacking in this regard. The focus remains on general principles rather than adaptable strategies for remote interactions.

• [04:29] "According to Edmonson's research, one of the most effective ways to build psychological safety is by modeling vulnerability."
• [05:01] "Second strategy, encourage open dialogue. Creating an environment where all voices are heard is essential."

The transcript does not discuss whether psychological safety differs between individuals or groups, including those with varying backgrounds, roles, seniority levels, or areas of expertise. The focus is primarily on defining psychological safety and its significance in educational and organizational contexts without exploring the nuanced differences that may exist among diverse groups.

While the speaker, Omid Fuhi, emphasizes the importance of creating a psychologically safe environment for all students and team members, there is no mention of how this concept might manifest differently depending on individual factors such as cultural background, professional experience, or hierarchical position within an organization. The absence of this discussion leaves a gap in understanding how psychological safety can vary and how tailored approaches may be necessary to address the unique needs of different individuals.

The general observations made in the transcript regarding psychological safety suggest a one-size-fits-all approach, which may not adequately account for the complexities of diverse teams. Therefore, readers looking for insights on how psychological safety may differ across various groups will find that the transcript does not provide this information.

The transcript does not mention any methods, questions, indicators, or follow-up actions for measuring, assessing, or monitoring psychological safety within a team or organization. The discussion remains centered around the concept of psychological safety, its importance, and strategies for fostering a safe learning environment without delving into the metrics or tools that could be used to evaluate psychological safety.

While it is acknowledged that psychological safety plays a crucial role in enhancing academic success and well-being, the lack of specific references to assessment methods suggests that the speaker did not focus on evaluation techniques. Organizations and educators interested in understanding the state of psychological safety within their teams would need to look beyond the information provided in this transcript for actionable insights.

In summary, the absence of discussion regarding assessment practices indicates a gap in the content concerning how psychological safety can be quantified or evaluated, limiting the applicability of the insights shared in the transcript for organizations seeking to implement systematic measures.

[00:11] Hello, my name is Omid Fuhi and I'm a
[00:14] social psychologist working with the
[00:16] learning research and development center
[00:18] here at the University of Pittsburgh.
[00:20] Psychological safety is more than just
[00:22] the buzzwords. It's a crucial element in
[00:24] fostering an environment where people
[00:25] can thrive academically and personally.
[00:29] In this video, we'll unpack the science
[00:30] behind psychological safety, explore its
[00:33] direct impact on learning and
[00:35] well-being, and provide practical
[00:36] strategies that you can implement in
[00:38] your classrooms and institutions.
[00:41] Psychological safety refers to both a
[00:43] set of conditions that are internal and
[00:45] external that contribute to the feeling
[00:47] that one is safe. This means that a
[00:50] person believes that they are able to
[00:52] express ideas, ask questions, and admit
[00:55] mistakes without fear of negative
[00:57] consequences. This concept has been
[00:59] extensively researched for decades with
[01:01] some research advances stemming from Dr.
[01:03] Amy Edmonson at Harvard Business School
[01:06] that reveal the crucial factors for
[01:08] creating environments where students
[01:09] feel secure enough to engage fully in
[01:12] their learning. In a classroom,
[01:15] psychological safety means students feel
[01:17] comfortable participating even when
[01:18] they're not entirely sure of the correct
[01:20] answer. Edmonson's research,
[01:23] particularly her work on team dynamics
[01:25] in organizations, demonstrates that
[01:27] psychological safety is a key factor in
[01:29] successful group performance. Her
[01:32] findings have been supported in numerous
[01:34] contexts, including at Google's project
[01:36] Aristotle, which identified
[01:38] psychological safety as the most
[01:40] significant determinant of team success.
[01:43] When we look at Maslo's hierarchy of
[01:45] needs, we begin to understand why
[01:47] psychological safety is so crucial for
[01:49] optimal performance. Nestled right after
[01:52] our most primal need for physiological
[01:54] needs is our need for safety. Along with
[01:57] our physiological needs, our need for
[01:59] safety is essential for normal
[02:01] functioning. When a person is seriously
[02:03] injured or starving, we don't expect
[02:06] them to be able to focus and deliver at
[02:08] their top performance. The same is true
[02:10] if a person is worried about their
[02:11] physiological or psychological safety in
[02:14] a particular
[02:15] environment. The reason we can't
[02:17] function at our full potential when our
[02:19] need for psychological safety is
[02:21] threatened is due to three cognitive
[02:23] functional reasons. First one, increased
[02:27] stress. Any experience of threat
[02:30] activates a physiological arousal which
[02:32] if sustained for long periods can lead
[02:35] to emotional fatigue. This in turn
[02:38] prevents us to be in a calm state
[02:41] necessary to be able to process and
[02:43] learn. Second, cognitive burden. In
[02:46] addition to the emotional toll, there is
[02:48] a cognitive tax that is placed on
[02:51] individuals when navigating potentially
[02:53] threatening situations. Because their
[02:55] mind is trying to understand the cause
[02:57] of that stress, they aren't able to
[02:59] focus on the task at hand, such as
[03:01] learning or performing. Third, increased
[03:04] vigilance. Psychological threat also
[03:07] increases vigilance which robs us of our
[03:10] ability to focus on the learning in the
[03:12] classroom. These forces undermine
[03:15] performance, compromise well-being,
[03:17] deprive our mental and emotional
[03:19] resources, and corrode our sense of
[03:22] trust of the environment. The reverse
[03:25] can also be true. In a study conducted
[03:27] by researchers at the University of
[03:29] Michigan, classrooms where students
[03:32] reported higher levels of psychological
[03:34] safety saw significantly better academic
[03:38] outcomes. These students were more
[03:40] engaged, participated more in class
[03:42] discussions, and were less likely to
[03:44] drop out. Another study by the
[03:47] University of California, Berkeley,
[03:48] found that students in psychologically
[03:50] safe environments had lower stress
[03:52] levels, better mental health outcomes,
[03:55] and were more resilient in the face of
[03:57] academic
[03:58] challenges. The evidence is clear. When
[04:01] students feel psychologically safe, they
[04:03] are more likely to take on challenges,
[04:05] persist through difficulties, and
[04:08] ultimately achieve higher academic
[04:10] success. But the benefits don't stop
[04:12] there. Psychological safety also fosters
[04:16] a sense of belonging, which is crucial
[04:18] for students well-being. When students
[04:20] feel that their voices matter, they are
[04:23] less likely to experience anxiety,
[04:24] depression, or other mental health
[04:26] challenges. According to Edmonson's
[04:29] research, one of the most effective ways
[04:30] to build psychological safety is by
[04:32] modeling vulnerability. As educators,
[04:35] you can set the tone by admitting when
[04:37] you don't know something or when you've
[04:39] made a mistake. This openness encourages
[04:42] students to do the same, creating a
[04:44] culture where it's okay to be imperfect.
[04:47] For example, in a study published in the
[04:49] Journal of Educational Psychology,
[04:51] teachers who share their own learning
[04:53] experiences, including their struggles,
[04:55] saw a significant increase in student
[04:57] participation and
[04:59] engagement. Second strategy, encourage
[05:01] open
[05:02] dialogue. Creating an environment where
[05:04] all voices are heard is essential.
[05:07] Techniques like roundroin participation
[05:10] or using anonymous question submissions
[05:12] can help ensure that everyone has a
[05:14] chance to contribute. In a study by the
[05:18] University of Oxford, they found that
[05:20] classrooms that actively encouraged open
[05:22] dialogue saw a 25% increase in student
[05:25] engagement and a corresponding
[05:27] improvement in academic
[05:29] performance. Third strategy is to
[05:31] provide constructive feedback. Feedback
[05:34] is critical, but it must be delivered in
[05:37] a way that encourage encourages growth.
[05:40] Focus on the effort and the learning,
[05:42] not just the outcome. This approach
[05:45] helps students see mistakes as an
[05:46] opportunity for learning rather than
[05:48] failures. Research by my colleagues,
[05:51] Drs. Jeffrey Cohen, David Joerger,
[05:53] Valerie Pivons, and others shows that
[05:56] students who received constructive
[05:57] feedback emphasizing growth showed
[06:00] greater academic improvement and were
[06:02] more likely to take risks in their
[06:04] learning. A student from a recent study
[06:07] shared this. When I felt safe to ask
[06:09] questions, I started to learn more. I
[06:11] wasn't as afraid of making mistakes, and
[06:13] I realized that that's where the real
[06:15] learning happens. As you go through your
[06:17] classes, think about how you can
[06:19] contribute to a psychologically safe
[06:20] environment. Are you encouraging your
[06:23] peers? Are you speaking up when you need
[06:24] help? Your action can make a big
[06:26] difference in your own success and the
[06:28] success of those around you. To learn
[06:31] more about psychological safety, see the
[06:33] information below.

Introduction
The webinar begins with an introduction by Jonathan, who expresses gratitude to attendees for joining the session featuring Dr. Tim Clark, the author of "The Four Stages of Psychological Safety." Jonathan emphasizes the importance of Dr. Clark's insights for companies and leadership, particularly regarding the creation of a productive, inclusive, and innovative workforce that ultimately leads to high productivity within organizations.

Overview of Psychological Safety
Dr. Clark starts by discussing the concept of psychological safety, which he defines as the ability to be oneself in a social setting without fear of negative consequences. This encompasses emotional, social, political, and economic dimensions. When psychological safety is high, individuals feel comfortable expressing themselves, leading to greater engagement. Conversely, when it is low, individuals may self-censor, retreating into self-preservation and avoiding risks. Dr. Clark highlights that fear within organizations can significantly alter behavior, creating a culture that stifles innovation and inclusion.

Historical Context
The concept of psychological safety dates back to 1965, with early research by Edgar Schein and Warren Bennis at MIT. Although the notion has existed for centuries, recent years have seen a surge in empirical research supporting the idea that fear can inhibit behavior and creativity within organizations. Dr. Clark notes that understanding the mechanisms behind psychological safety is crucial for fostering an environment conducive to innovation.

Self-Censorship and Organizational Culture
Dr. Clark introduces the idea of self-censorship, which occurs when individuals feel that expressing themselves could lead to negative consequences. He illustrates this with a visual representation of a spectrum ranging from psychological safety to fear. When fear dominates an organization's culture, it activates the self-censoring instinct, leading to a culture that is detrimental to innovation and engagement. He cites Peter Drucker's famous quote, "Culture eats strategy for breakfast," and extends it to assert that culture also consumes innovation for lunch and dinner. This highlights the significant role that organizational culture plays in either facilitating or obstructing innovation.

Reflection and Self-Examination
Dr. Clark encourages attendees to engage in self-reflection regarding their own experiences with psychological safety. He poses a series of questions aimed at prompting introspection about feelings of exclusion, fear of asking questions, and experiences of being ignored or interrupted. These questions serve to illustrate common experiences that trigger self-censorship and highlight the need for leaders to examine their own behaviors that may contribute to a culture of fear.

Agenda of the Webinar
The agenda for the webinar includes a discussion on human behavior, the four stages of psychological safety, and strategies for increasing psychological safety within organizations. Dr. Clark emphasizes that fostering psychological safety is both a moral and strategic imperative for leaders.

Consequences of Low Psychological Safety
Dr. Clark presents findings from a 12-year study conducted at Harvard University, revealing the significant costs associated with low psychological safety. Key statistics include that 48% of employees intentionally reduce their work effort in fear-laden environments, and 25% admit to taking frustrations out on customers. These statistics underscore the detrimental impact of a lack of psychological safety on organizational performance and employee well-being.

Vulnerability in Organizations
The discussion shifts to the importance of vulnerability in fostering psychological safety. Dr. Clark explains that vulnerability must be rewarded rather than punished for psychological safety to thrive. He introduces the concept of a "blue zone," where acts of vulnerability are encouraged, leading to increased openness, creativity, and collaboration. Conversely, in a "red zone," where vulnerability is punished, employees may withdraw, hoard information, and engage in avoidance behaviors, ultimately stifling productivity and innovation.

The Four Stages of Psychological Safety
Dr. Clark outlines the four stages of psychological safety, which are essential for creating an environment where individuals feel safe to engage, learn, contribute, and challenge the status quo:

• Inclusion Safety: This foundational stage requires individuals to feel included and accepted within a social unit. It addresses the basic human need for belonging and acceptance.
• Learner Safety: At this stage, individuals feel safe to engage in the learning process without fear of ridicule or embarrassment. They can ask questions, give and receive feedback, and experiment without the threat of negative consequences.
• Contributor Safety: This stage allows individuals to contribute their skills and knowledge fully. It emphasizes collaboration and the importance of applying what has been learned to create value.
• Challenger Safety: The final stage represents the highest level of psychological safety, where individuals feel safe to challenge the status quo. This stage is critical for fostering innovation and constructive dissent.

Mechanisms of Psychological Safety
Dr. Clark elaborates on the mechanisms that underpin psychological safety, emphasizing the roles of respect and permission. He explains that psychological safety is a function of both respect (vertical axis) and permission (horizontal axis). The progression through the stages of psychological safety is akin to navigating a bowling lane, where organizations must avoid the extremes of paternalism and exploitation.

Strategies for Increasing Inclusion Safety
To enhance inclusion safety, Dr. Clark offers three practical recommendations:

• Invite: Actively invite individuals to participate and share their perspectives.
• Ask: Sincerely inquire about individuals' backgrounds, interests, and experiences to foster connection.
• Share: Leaders should share their own experiences and viewpoints to create a culture of openness and familiarity.

Building Learner Safety
The second stage, learner safety, is built upon the foundation of inclusion safety. Dr. Clark stresses the importance of disconnecting failure and mistakes from fear, allowing individuals to engage in the learning process without anxiety. He shares examples, including a high school calculus teacher who successfully nurtured a safe learning environment, and highlights the emotional aspect of learning, which is often overlooked.

Fostering Contributor Safety
In the third stage, contributor safety, individuals are encouraged to apply their learning and contribute meaningfully to the team. Dr. Clark emphasizes the need for leaders to provide direction, encouragement, and autonomy to facilitate this process. He notes that individuals have an inherent desire to make a difference, and leaders must recognize and support this need.

Achieving Challenger Safety
The culminating stage, challenger safety, is where individuals feel empowered to challenge the status quo. Dr. Clark explains that this stage requires the highest level of psychological safety, as it involves significant personal risk. Leaders must provide "air cover" to encourage candor and constructive dissent, which are essential for innovation. He emphasizes that organizations must create an environment where challenging discussions can occur without fear of retribution.

Intellectual Bravery
Dr. Clark introduces the concept of intellectual bravery, defined as the willingness to disagree or challenge the status quo despite potential social, emotional, or political risks. He argues that fostering intellectual bravery is crucial for creating an incubator of innovation within organizations. Leaders must cultivate an environment that encourages open dialogue and merit-based discussions, free from the constraints of hierarchy.

Addressing the Impact of the Pandemic
As the webinar progresses, Dr. Clark addresses the implications of the pandemic on psychological safety, particularly in virtual work environments. He highlights the need for leaders to pay attention to nonverbal cues and to foster deeper connections in virtual interactions. The pandemic has created an opportunity for organizations to reassess and improve their cultures, particularly regarding psychological safety.

Conclusion and Q&A
The webinar concludes with a Q&A session, where Dr. Clark responds to questions from attendees. He emphasizes the importance of modeling behavior that fosters psychological safety and encourages leaders to take ownership of their roles in creating inclusive environments. He also discusses the significance of emotional intelligence in enhancing psychological safety within teams.

Final Thoughts
Dr. Clark's insights into psychological safety provide a comprehensive framework for leaders seeking to cultivate inclusive and innovative workplaces. By understanding the four stages of psychological safety and implementing strategies to enhance inclusion, learning, contribution, and challenge, organizations can create environments that foster engagement, creativity, and ultimately, success.

The transcript does not explicitly define the term interpersonal risk within the workplace context. However, it discusses the concept of psychological safety extensively, which is closely tied to the notion of interpersonal risk. The speaker, Dr. Timothy Clark, explains that psychological safety allows individuals to be themselves in a social setting without fear of negative consequences. When interpersonal risks are minimized, team members can engage more openly, share ideas, and contribute to discussions without the fear of ridicule or retaliation.

Dr. Clark provides several examples of experiences that can trigger self-censoring instincts in individuals, suggesting that fear of exclusion or embarrassment can lead to a reluctance to speak up. For instance, he asks the audience to reflect on whether they have ever felt excluded in a social setting, been afraid to ask a question, or felt targeted by negative stereotypes. These examples illustrate the interpersonal risks that can manifest in workplace dynamics, highlighting the importance of a psychologically safe environment for team learning and performance.

By fostering psychological safety, organizations can cultivate an atmosphere where team members feel encouraged to take interpersonal risks, which are essential for innovation and problem-solving. This is critical because when team members are free to express their thoughts and ideas, it fosters a culture of collaboration and creativity, ultimately enhancing overall team performance.

•  
  • [08:41] "These are common everyday experiences that people have that trigger the self censoring instinct and push them into a mode of self-preservation and risk management."
  • [10:45] "If fear is prevalent in the organization that is the first sign of weak leadership..."

The transcript makes a clear distinction between psychological safety and merely being nice or avoiding disagreement. Dr. Timothy Clark emphasizes that psychological safety is about the freedom to express oneself and engage authentically without fear of negative repercussions. He notes that psychological safety means it is not expensive to be oneself in a social setting—emotionally, socially, politically, or economically. This contrasts with a superficial understanding of a friendly workplace, which might prioritize comfort over genuine engagement.

Dr. Clark elaborates on this distinction by indicating that a culture where disagreement is avoided or where individuals feel pressured to be nice can stifle innovation and creativity. He articulates that psychological safety is fundamentally linked to the ability to voice concerns, challenge the status quo, and engage in candid discussions. This environment of openness is essential for fostering effective teamwork and high performance, as it allows for constructive dissent and critical conversations that can drive organizational improvement.

Furthermore, the speaker points out that leaders must create conditions where vulnerability is rewarded rather than punished. This aligns with the idea that psychological safety is not just about creating a comfort zone but rather about encouraging a culture of candidness and healthy debate, which is essential for a thriving organizational culture.

•  
  • [03:00] "Psychological safety means that it’s not expensive to be yourself in a social setting."
  • [08:28] "If we’re triggering that self censoring instinct then we are siphoning off productive capacity and we’re just wasting it."

The transcript does not specifically mention leaders openly acknowledging their own mistakes, uncertainties, or limitations. However, the concept is implicitly connected to the overall theme of fostering psychological safety. Dr. Clark discusses how leaders need to create an environment where team members feel safe to speak up and share their thoughts without fear of ridicule or negative consequences. This inherently requires leaders to model vulnerability and openness.

While the transcript does not provide direct examples of leaders admitting their mistakes, it does emphasize the importance of leaders being approachable and fostering a culture of transparency. Dr. Clark explains that when leaders push the fear button, it activates the self-censoring instinct in team members, which can hinder their willingness to engage or admit to challenges. Therefore, if leaders were to acknowledge their own shortcomings, it could alleviate some of the fears associated with sharing personal vulnerabilities among team members.

In essence, while the transcript does not explicitly address leaders acknowledging their own mistakes, it highlights the critical role that leadership behavior plays in establishing psychological safety. By exhibiting vulnerability, leaders can encourage their teams to be more open and transparent, thereby creating a more engaged and innovative work environment.

•  
  • [06:11] "It’s an obstacle to inclusion and innovation is the culture."
  • [11:00] "If fear is prevalent in the organization that is the first sign of weak leadership."

The transcript discusses the importance of leaders actively engaging with their teams by asking questions and inviting input. Dr. Clark emphasizes that this behavior is essential for fostering psychological safety within an organization. When leaders ask for feedback or admit that they do not have all the answers, it creates an environment where team members feel valued and empowered to contribute their insights.

For example, Dr. Clark notes that leaders must monitor both content and interpersonal dynamics during discussions, especially when vulnerability is present. He encourages leaders to be aware of how team members react during discussions and to facilitate an atmosphere where questions are welcomed. This practice not only reinforces the idea that all voices matter but also helps to normalize the process of seeking input and feedback.

Dr. Clark further illustrates the connection between these behaviors and psychological safety by stating that when vulnerability is rewarded, individuals are more likely to engage, share ideas, and take necessary interpersonal risks. In contrast, if leaders fail to invite input or create an atmosphere of fear, team members may retreat into silence or avoid sharing their thoughts altogether. Therefore, leader behavior in asking questions and seeking input is crucial in developing a culture of psychological safety and ensuring team members feel safe to express themselves openly.

•  
  • [08:14] "Have you ever had a boss who asked for feedback but didn’t really want it?"
  • [18:10] "Psychological safety is a function of two things: respect and permission."

The transcript addresses the challenge of maintaining both high psychological safety and high performance expectations or accountability without fear dominating the workplace. Dr. Clark emphasizes that a key aspect of psychological safety is creating an environment where individuals feel safe to express themselves and take risks without fear of negative consequences. He notes that when fear is prevalent in an organization, it is indicative of weak leadership, which can stifle innovation and engagement.

To achieve this balance, Dr. Clark outlines the importance of leaders fostering a culture that rewards vulnerability. He asserts that when leaders create conditions where team members can express concerns, challenge the status quo, and engage in candid discussions, it leads to higher levels of innovation and performance. He also mentions the concept of intellectual bravery, which is the willingness to disagree or challenge the status quo despite potential risks involved.

Dr. Clark suggests that leaders must model the behavior they wish to see by being open to feedback and actively inviting input. This not only helps in building a psychologically safe environment but also reinforces accountability, as team members feel more inclined to contribute and take ownership of their work. By doing so, leaders can create a workplace culture where high performance expectations are met without instilling a culture of fear, thus ensuring that both psychological safety and accountability coexist effectively.

•  
  • [10:05] "...it’s a moral imperative and it’s a strategic imperative for every leader in every organization."
  • [41:12] "If you don’t have a demonstrated track record of creating and sustaining psychological safety with your colleagues you are ineligible to become a manager."

The transcript highlights a significant relationship between employees' silence and negative organizational outcomes, particularly regarding innovation, learning opportunities, and decision-making. Dr. Tim Clark emphasizes that when individuals feel excluded or fear retribution, they are more likely to remain silent. This silence can lead to a range of detrimental effects within an organization.

When employees do not voice their ideas or concerns, they miss opportunities for learning and collaboration. Dr. Clark outlines several common experiences that trigger this silence, such as feeling ignored in discussions or facing retaliation for challenging the status quo. These experiences can activate what he describes as the self-censoring instinct, leading individuals to prioritize self-preservation over engagement.

Furthermore, the lack of psychological safety fosters a culture where innovation is stifled. Dr. Clark notes that “culture eats innovation for lunch and dinner”, indicating that a fear-laden environment is a primary barrier to creativity and problem-solving. In essence, when employees are hesitant to share their thoughts, organizations not only lose out on innovative ideas but also dilute their capacity for effective decision-making. Therefore, fostering a psychologically safe environment is crucial for enabling open communication, which ultimately enhances productivity and creativity.

•  
  • [06:40] "If that self-censoring instinct is activated, we retreat into a mode of personal risk management, pain avoidance, and self-preservation..."
  • [10:31] "Fear-stricken employees... will give you their hands, they’ll give you some of their head, but they will give you none of their heart."
  • [11:24] "...when psychological safety is low, when fear is high... 48% of employees intentionally decrease their work effort."

The transcript addresses the challenges that remote or hybrid work environments pose for psychological safety. Dr. Tim Clark points out that the transition to remote work has necessitated a heightened focus on nonverbal cues and effective communication strategies, as many traditional forms of interaction are diminished in virtual settings.

One of the major challenges mentioned is that remote interactions often lack the full sensory experience that face-to-face communication provides. As a result, nonverbal cues—which are critical for gauging emotional responses and fostering connection—can be missed during video calls. Dr. Clark emphasizes the need to pay attention to these cues, as they are essential for ensuring that team members feel understood and included.

Furthermore, Dr. Clark highlights that superficial interactions can become the norm in virtual environments. For instance, during quick check-ins, people may ask, “How are you doing?” but not genuinely pursue an answer. This superficiality undermines the deeper connections necessary for psychological safety, leading to disengagement among employees. Thus, he advocates for leaders to move beyond surface-level interactions to foster a culture of authenticity and openness where employees feel safe to express their thoughts and emotions.

•  
  • [48:30] "...we have to pay even more attention to nonverbal cues and body language because we’re not having a full sensory face-to-face experience..."
  • [49:02] "...we’ve got to go to another level of familiarity and another level of tolerance for candor in a virtual environment..."
  • [49:24] "Creating and maintaining psychological safety is an extra challenge in a virtual environment..."

In the transcript, several practices are suggested to help remote teams build trust, connection, and informal psychological safety when in-person interactions are limited. Dr. Tim Clark emphasizes the importance of creating meaningful interactions that go beyond mere professional obligations.

One effective approach is to invite genuine conversation. Dr. Clark suggests that leaders should actively encourage team members to ask about each other's personal experiences, backgrounds, and interests. This practice fosters a sense of belonging and inclusion, which is crucial for psychological safety.

Another key recommendation is for leaders to model vulnerability by sharing their own experiences and challenges. When leaders share their stories, it creates an environment where team members feel safe to open up about their own experiences, thus nurturing a culture of authenticity and trust.

Additionally, Dr. Clark recommends that team leaders encourage collaboration and shared learning. By inviting team members to teach others, it not only enhances their learning experiences but also builds a sense of community within the remote team. When team members feel valued and recognized for their contributions, it strengthens interpersonal bonds and promotes a psychologically safe working environment.

•  
  • [30:05] "The more you invite, the more inclusion safety that you’re creating."
  • [30:12] "...ask sincerely, ask genuinely about the person, ask about background, ask about interests..."
  • [30:27] "Share your point of view, share your background, share your opinions..."

The transcript discusses the notion that psychological safety may differ across individuals and groups, particularly among those with varying backgrounds, roles, and levels of seniority. Dr. Tim Clark emphasizes that the experiences of psychological safety are not uniform; rather, they can be influenced by social dynamics and individual perceptions.

Dr. Clark mentions the common experiences that trigger self-censorship, such as feeling ignored, being interrupted, or facing negative stereotypes. These experiences often vary based on one’s role within the organization or their cultural background, which can lead to different levels of comfort in expressing opinions or ideas.

Furthermore, he highlights that individuals in positions of lower seniority may feel a greater sense of vulnerability, making them more susceptible to fear-based reactions in environments lacking psychological safety. This disparity indicates that leaders must be particularly mindful of how different team members may perceive and experience psychological safety based on their unique circumstances.

In conclusion, fostering psychological safety requires leaders to understand and acknowledge these differences and to actively work to create an environment where all team members—regardless of their background or position—feel valued and empowered to contribute without fear of negative consequences.

•  
  • [09:18] "...ask yourself, am I doing any of these things to trigger the self-censoring instinct in the people with whom I work...?"
  • [10:52] "...if fear is prevalent in the organization, that is the first sign of weak leadership..."
  • [28:43] "...we need to create and sustain psychological safety with your colleagues..."

The transcript suggests methods for measuring and assessing psychological safety within teams and organizations. Dr. Tim Clark emphasizes the importance of monitoring behaviors and dynamics in meetings to gauge the level of psychological safety present.

One method he recommends is for leaders to act as dual monitors during discussions. They should not only pay attention to the content being discussed but also observe interpersonal dynamics. This includes watching for nonverbal cues and emotional reactions, which can indicate whether team members feel safe to voice their opinions or whether they are retreating into silence due to fear.

Additionally, Dr. Clark points out that asking reflective questions can be an effective way to assess psychological safety. For example, leaders might ask team members how they feel about sharing their ideas or whether they feel their contributions are valued. By creating space for dialogue, leaders can gather insights into the team's perception of psychological safety and identify areas that need improvement.

Finally, Dr. Clark mentions the use of surveys, like the four stages team survey, which can quantify the levels of psychological safety and provide prescriptive analytics to guide organizations in fostering a healthier and more inclusive work environment.

•  
  • [42:30] "...the level of challenger safety that you have on a team is the ultimate bellwether for the overall health of that team."
  • [56:06] "...the primary enabling skill of psychological safety is emotional intelligence..."
  • [01:01:30] "...we have the four stages team survey... it gives you survey data for each stage of psychological safety..."

[00:00] I want to thank everybody for attending
[00:05] this webinar with dr. Tim dr. Tim Clark
[00:11] so thanks again for coming and I'd like
[00:15] to introduce you to dr. Timothy our
[00:18] Clark dr. Clark will be talking about
[00:22] his new book the four stages of
[00:26] psychological safety hi Tim good morning
[00:31] good morning Jonathan I'm doing great
[00:35] okay hey no problem listen now what I
[00:38] discuss is incredibly important for all
[00:42] companies and all leadership everywhere
[00:46] to to to learn and I think that your new
[00:52] book really nails it when it comes to
[00:57] comes to you know the ability to create
[01:01] productive and inclusive innovative
[01:06] workforce and of course that translates
[01:09] out to to a highly productive company
[01:12] now from here and we're all looking
[01:16] forward to your talk okay fantastic
[01:20] thanks Jonathan
[01:22] and thanks everybody for joining us and
[01:25] so let me just point your attention to
[01:29] your chat box so please use your chat
[01:32] box and feel free to make comments or
[01:34] ask questions and Jonathan will help
[01:37] monitor questions as they come in if
[01:39] there's something that we that we want
[01:41] to try to answer so please feel free
[01:45] let's try to make this as interactive as
[01:47] we can as Jonathan said we're going to
[01:52] talk about the four stages of
[01:54] psychological safety which is a book
[01:56] that was just recently released a few
[02:00] weeks ago and I want to just mention
[02:03] right at the beginning that we're going
[02:05] to do a giveaway and so here's how
[02:08] here's how the giveaway works so for the
[02:11] first after the webinar for the
[02:13] first 10 attendees who post a comment
[02:17] about the webinar tagging leader Factor
[02:20] and including the hashtag psychological
[02:23] safety we will send you a digital copy
[02:25] of the book so if you're interested then
[02:29] stay with us and post right after and we
[02:34] will be happy to send a code to you for
[02:38] a digital couple well let's get into the
[02:42] topic the topic is psychological safety
[02:46] most of you have probably heard of the
[02:49] topic where you know something about it
[02:51] some of you may be diligent students of
[02:54] the topic and so let me begin with a
[02:57] very basic definition of psychological
[03:00] safety psychological safety means that
[03:02] it's not expensive to be yourself in a
[03:07] social setting now what do I mean by
[03:09] that I mean emotionally socially
[03:12] politically economically it's not
[03:16] expensive and when it's not expensive
[03:19] what we do we are comfortable being
[03:22] ourselves it's easy to be ourselves we
[03:25] engage so that we love those terms of
[03:28] engagement if it is expensive then what
[03:33] do we do we're not ourselves and so what
[03:37] the research literature has shown here
[03:39] over several years the primary research
[03:43] finding is that fear in organizations
[03:47] changes people's behavior now let me
[03:51] trace a little history for you
[03:52] psychological safety as a concept came
[03:56] into the research in 1965 the earliest
[04:01] research citation for the concept of
[04:05] psychological safety was by a couple of
[04:10] scholars at MIT Edgar Schein and Warren
[04:14] Bennis and they wrote a book on personal
[04:17] and organizational change and they put
[04:19] just a little paragraph on the topic of
[04:22] psychological safety so it goes all the
[04:24] way back to 1965
[04:26] but the concept is not new the concept
[04:30] is as old as the first human interaction
[04:33] but since 1965 the research has been
[04:37] building slowly on this topic in the
[04:40] last in the last couple of years in
[04:43] particular it's exploded we now have a
[04:46] lot of empirical data that support the
[04:50] print supports the the premise here that
[04:53] fear changes behavior but we didn't
[04:56] understand the extent to which this was
[04:58] true we're finally just starting to
[05:01] comprehend how profound the implications
[05:05] are so let me show you how this works
[05:07] with a little bit of a visual every
[05:10] human has what we call a self censoring
[05:14] instinct at some point in an
[05:17] organization you have a culture in an
[05:19] organization and that culture has either
[05:25] some level of psychological safety at
[05:27] one end of the spectrum or if you go to
[05:30] the other end of the spectrum as you can
[05:32] see on the slide we move into the
[05:34] territory of fear at some point if
[05:39] leaders are pushing the fear button that
[05:43] fear activates the pain centers of the
[05:46] brain and triggers what we call the self
[05:49] censoring instinct and every human has a
[05:52] self censoring instinct and so what do
[05:55] we do if that self censoring instinct is
[05:58] activated we retreat into a mode of
[06:03] personal risk management pain avoidance
[06:06] and self-preservation and so it's
[06:11] obstacle to inclusion and innovation is
[06:15] the culture now we like to we like we
[06:19] like to repeat the quote from Peter
[06:20] Drucker right that culture eats strategy
[06:22] for breakfast well culture eats
[06:26] innovation for lunch and dinner
[06:28] it is the single biggest obstacle to
[06:31] innovation in any organization we are
[06:34] now starting to understand how that
[06:37] works what is the mechanism
[06:40] that blocks innovation that blocks
[06:43] engagement that blocks the creative
[06:45] capacity of the organization it's the
[06:49] lack of psychological safety if we're
[06:51] triggering that self censoring instinct
[06:53] then we are siphoning off productive
[06:56] capacity and we're just wasting it
[06:59] that's what's happening okay so in this
[07:02] webinar I want you to take the
[07:06] opportunity to crack yourselves open and
[07:09] take a look inside and do a little
[07:13] self-examination a little self inventory
[07:15] to see how you're doing
[07:17] and whether you are fostering and
[07:20] cultivating psychological safety in your
[07:23] respective organizations so let me begin
[07:26] by sharing some questions and I want you
[07:29] to reflect this okay here's some
[07:32] questions number one have you ever felt
[07:35] excluded in a social setting have you
[07:39] ever been afraid to ask a question have
[07:42] you ever remained silent when you knew
[07:45] the answer to a problem have you ever
[07:48] had someone steal credit for something
[07:50] you did have you ever been ignored in a
[07:55] discussion have you ever been rudely
[07:57] interrupted in a meeting have you ever
[08:01] felt that you were the target of a
[08:03] negative stereotype have you ever faced
[08:07] retaliation for challenging the status
[08:10] quo have you ever had a boss who asked
[08:14] for feedback but didn't really want it
[08:18] have you ever been publicly shamed or
[08:21] made fun of have you ever been punished
[08:24] for making an honest mistake and finally
[08:28] have you ever been have you ever been
[08:31] made have you ever been made to feel let
[08:36] me get that right have you ever been
[08:37] made to feel inferior these are common
[08:41] everyday experiences that people have
[08:44] that trigger the self censoring instinct
[08:48] and push them into a mode of self ment
[08:53] of pushing them into a mode of
[08:56] self-preservation and risk management so
[09:01] with that I want you to reflect on that
[09:03] because chances are your hands in the
[09:05] air and you can say oh yeah that
[09:06] happened to me
[09:08] it's happened to all of us but what I'd
[09:11] like you to do is to reflect on your own
[09:13] behavior in your own patterns and ask
[09:15] yourself am i doing any of these things
[09:18] to trigger the self sensory and instinct
[09:21] in the people with whom I work and the
[09:24] people with whom I associate that's the
[09:26] question that we need to ponder today so
[09:28] here's the agenda for today we want to
[09:33] talk about how the human family behaves
[09:36] and we've just given a lot of examples
[09:39] unfortunately of patterns that we see in
[09:42] organizations that trigger the self
[09:44] censoring instinct so welcome to the
[09:46] human family we're all part of that
[09:47] family
[09:48] we're gonna talk about the four stages
[09:50] of psychological safety and what the
[09:52] progression looks like empirically how
[09:55] we move from stage to stage and finally
[09:58] we're going to talk about increasing
[09:59] psychological safety how do we do that
[10:02] because that is an imperative it's a
[10:05] moral imperative and it's a strategic
[10:08] imperative for every leader in every
[10:11] organization now here's what we know
[10:15] fear-stricken
[10:17] employees they give you their hands
[10:20] they'll give you their hands they'll
[10:23] give you some of their head but they
[10:26] will give you none of their heart and
[10:28] that's the problem it's also the
[10:31] opportunity for organizations that are
[10:35] able to cultivate high levels of
[10:37] psychological safety you're going to get
[10:39] hands you're going to get head and
[10:40] you're going to get heart for
[10:42] organizations that don't you are
[10:45] handicapped you are at a significant
[10:48] disadvantage to your competitors because
[10:52] of this fact if fear is prevalent in the
[10:56] organization that is the first sign of
[11:00] weak leadership what that means is that
[11:04] leaders are abdicating their leadership
[11:07] they're pushing the fear button which
[11:09] means that they're not leading anymore
[11:11] and that's something that we have to
[11:14] overcome in many organizations now what
[11:17] are the consequences and I should say
[11:21] unintended consequences of low
[11:24] psychological safety this is what we're
[11:27] trying this is what we're finally
[11:29] starting to figure out we're starting to
[11:31] figure out the full breadth and depth of
[11:33] the of the tacks that we impose on our
[11:37] organizations when psychological safety
[11:39] is low when fear is high now let me just
[11:44] show you some here now this is based on
[11:45] a 12-year study coming out of Harvard
[11:47] University and I won't slog through all
[11:49] that all of the all of the data points
[11:52] but take a look at a couple because the
[11:56] costs are enormous for example take a
[12:00] look at bullet number one 48% of
[12:03] employees intentionally decrease their
[12:07] work effort if psychological safety is
[12:09] low and fear is high go all the way down
[12:12] to the last bullet 25% of employees
[12:16] admit to taking their frustrations out
[12:19] on customers that's the price we pay
[12:23] when psychological is low it's
[12:25] incredible so as I said the research
[12:29] literature is now starting to understand
[12:33] the full list of unintended consequences
[12:39] the burden that we bear if psychological
[12:42] safety is not high in the organization
[12:45] what it comes down to is whether on your
[12:48] team or in your organization
[12:51] vulnerability is rewarded or punished
[12:55] and these are the patterns that you need
[12:58] to pay attention to so the next time
[13:00] you're in a meeting I want you to be a
[13:02] dual monitor and I want you to monitor
[13:05] content what is being said but I also
[13:09] want you to monitor monitor
[13:11] interpersonal dynamics what is going on
[13:14] non verbally and emotionally and
[13:17] socially and politically in the
[13:20] when there's an active vulnerability in
[13:23] the room for example someone makes a
[13:26] suggestion someone asks a question right
[13:30] these are acts of vulnerability someone
[13:34] states a point of view that may not be
[13:36] consistent with the prevailing point of
[13:39] view that's an act of vulnerability pay
[13:43] attention to acts of vulnerability are
[13:45] they being rewarded or punished when
[13:50] vulnerability is punished social
[13:53] interaction becomes expensive and so it
[13:56] changes people retreat they recoil they
[14:00] curl up that's what happens so we have
[14:03] names for these where psychological
[14:07] safety is high where acts of
[14:09] vulnerability are rewarded we call this
[14:11] a blue zone okay so let me let me just
[14:16] ask you and use your chat box for those
[14:19] of you that are with us today so we've
[14:21] got a lot of you what else when you are
[14:25] in a blue zone when that vulnerability
[14:27] is being rewarded what do people tend to
[14:30] do what else do people tend to do put it
[14:33] in your chat box and let's see if we can
[14:35] get some comments here so how do people
[14:37] behave in what we call a blue zone go
[14:42] ahead and and okay fantastic they open
[14:45] up they relax they think creatively they
[14:50] talk to others the velocity of
[14:54] information increases the the productive
[14:59] output goes up the feedback goes up
[15:02] right okay the belong fantastic
[15:06] belongingness increases the cross
[15:09] training cross pollenization increases
[15:12] okay fantastic right so what we're
[15:15] trying to do is we're trying to reduce
[15:18] the expense of social interaction
[15:22] look these are great the culture here
[15:24] comes cohesive there's a higher
[15:27] tolerance for candor do you see these
[15:31] implications do you see the concept
[15:33] winces okay now let's go let's go to the
[15:36] other side and let's just flesh this out
[15:38] a little bit if you're in a red zone
[15:42] psychological safety is low
[15:44] vulnerability is being punished what are
[15:48] the behavioral consequences hit your
[15:51] chat box let's take a look okay silence
[15:56] people withdraw people shut down people
[16:01] engage in avoidance there's more anxiety
[16:05] I'm just reading your list here they
[16:08] give you the bare minimum they hoard
[16:12] information they sabotage fantastic
[16:17] productivity goes down innovation goes
[16:21] down okay this is so good the meetings
[16:27] aren't the real meetings anymore right
[16:29] the meetings become the charade and you
[16:32] have the real meeting after the meeting
[16:34] okay and this is fantastic so Ross just
[16:38] said eventually it starts to impact
[16:40] mental health it's absolutely true what
[16:43] did we say if fear triggers the self
[16:46] censoring instinct it's also activating
[16:49] the pain centers of the brain so the
[16:53] ramifications are profound all right now
[16:57] let's dig a little deeper by the way
[16:59] your comments are brilliant let's dig a
[17:02] little deeper into the construct of
[17:06] psychological safety now I said at the
[17:09] outset that it means it's not expensive
[17:12] to be yourself but let's go deeper
[17:15] because there's there's a lot of depth
[17:17] to the construct of psychological safety
[17:20] here's the here's what we've seen in the
[17:22] empirical research psychological safety
[17:25] means that you can do four things number
[17:27] one you can feel included in the social
[17:32] unit number two you feel safe to learn
[17:36] number three you feel safe to contribute
[17:39] and finally you feel safe to challenge
[17:43] the status quo and you can do all of
[17:45] these things
[17:46] without fear of being marginalized or
[17:50] humiliated or punished in some way so
[17:54] now we're going to deconstruct the
[17:55] mechanism and the and the stages of
[17:59] psychological safety so let me go a
[18:02] little further and let's put this on a
[18:05] graph so psychological safety is a
[18:10] function of two things number one
[18:13] respect
[18:14] so you'll see respect on the vertical
[18:15] axis and number two permission you see
[18:19] permission on the the horizontal axis
[18:24] right so it's the intersection of these
[18:27] two things now here's how the
[18:28] progression works number one so stage
[18:32] one is inclusion safety you have to feel
[18:35] included this is the foundation and then
[18:38] we move to learner safety and I'm going
[18:41] to get into each of these and a little
[18:43] bit more depth
[18:44] after learner safety comes contributor
[18:47] safety where we are working together or
[18:50] collaborating we're engaged in the value
[18:53] creation process together and then
[18:56] finally the culminating stage is
[18:58] challenger safety where we feel
[19:01] confident enough safe enough to actually
[19:04] challenge the status quo and that is the
[19:08] ultimate level of psychological safety
[19:11] okay now let me show this to you in even
[19:14] a little bit more detail without getting
[19:16] too busy now this is the same graph but
[19:21] it's portrayed a little bit differently
[19:23] but let me just add a couple of things
[19:26] so before we get to stage one which is
[19:30] inclusion safety we have a state of
[19:34] exclusion you have we have to cross a
[19:38] threshold to get to stage one which is
[19:41] inclusion safety before that we are in a
[19:43] state of exclusion some people feel this
[19:48] way on their teams this means that we
[19:51] don't even have the foundation of
[19:53] psychological safety in place and this
[19:57] is you're in a deficit position and
[19:59] you're in a very
[20:00] high-risk position as far as engagement
[20:04] as far as productivity as far as
[20:07] retention right and many other things so
[20:10] then we move through our progression now
[20:12] let me just show you a couple of things
[20:13] that are quite interesting I want you to
[20:17] think about the stages of psychological
[20:19] safety as a bowling lane if you go if
[20:22] you if you go out of bounds right if you
[20:25] leave the lane and you hit the gutter on
[20:28] either the left or the right you're in a
[20:31] you're in a bad place so - to the left
[20:34] upper left is what we call paternalism
[20:38] paternalism means that respect is high
[20:41] but permission is low so this is where
[20:45] we coddle people this is where we pat
[20:48] them on the heads and say don't touch
[20:51] anything
[20:52] that's the benevolent paternalism that a
[20:55] still exists in many organizations now
[20:58] if you go to the lower right it says
[21:01] exploitation exploitation is a
[21:04] combination of high permission in other
[21:07] words we want you to contribute we want
[21:09] you to create value but respect is low
[21:12] so we're exploiting you we want to
[21:15] extract from you all of the value that
[21:17] you can create but we don't respect you
[21:21] inherently so you can see the two
[21:23] gutters of the bowling lane we want to
[21:26] avoid those extremes because they both
[21:28] become very dangerous all right now
[21:31] let's go into a little bit more depth
[21:34] Stage one inclusion safety why do we
[21:38] start with inclusion safety because this
[21:42] is the first level of basic human need
[21:45] if you go into a new social setting and
[21:48] if you watch other people say it's a
[21:50] work school home civic organization team
[21:55] it doesn't matter what is the first
[21:57] thing that people want they want to be
[22:00] included they want to be long they want
[22:03] to be accepted so inclusion safety
[22:06] satisfies the basic human need to be
[22:10] included that's why we start there
[22:13] because that's where humans start so we
[22:16] don't we can't skip this stage we can't
[22:19] plow around it this is the foundation
[22:22] and as we all know we struggle in many
[22:26] social units to just provide inclusion
[22:29] safety now why do we struggle why do we
[22:32] have diversity and inclusion departments
[22:38] in every multinational organization upon
[22:40] the face of the earth now because we're
[22:42] struggling with this we're still
[22:43] struggling with this let me give you an
[22:45] example of why we struggle I have a very
[22:49] old Chevy Suburban with three hundred
[22:53] and nineteen thousand miles on the
[22:55] odometer it has a resale value of about
[22:57] three hundred and seventy-five bucks not
[23:01] too long ago I went to have my old car
[23:05] this this rust bucket serviced and when
[23:09] I went to the to take my car in I was
[23:15] not treated very well and I could tell
[23:18] that I was not treated very well based
[23:21] on the car in which I was driving isn't
[23:23] that interesting
[23:24] isn't that interesting and then I went
[23:28] back in my black sedan not long after to
[23:32] have it serviced and guess what people
[23:35] treated me differently based on the
[23:38] vehicle that I was driving now is that
[23:41] unusual
[23:42] unfortunately it's not unusual so
[23:46] people's behavior changed based on a
[23:49] status an indication or an artifact of
[23:53] status this is how humans behave so let
[24:00] me dig into this a little bit more
[24:01] humans tend we tend to govern ourselves
[24:04] based on junk theories of superiority
[24:07] and I go into this in Chapter two of the
[24:11] book
[24:12] so what we're constantly looking for is
[24:16] some basis on which to justify our
[24:19] superiority and when we come up with a
[24:22] junk theory or
[24:24] soothing story of superiority we try to
[24:28] elevate ourselves and subordinate others
[24:31] that creates difference and then we have
[24:34] a myth of superiority
[24:36] so these myths are based on things like
[24:39] social social and cultural status it
[24:43] could be political or ideological it
[24:45] could be intellectual I'm smarter than
[24:47] you it could be physical appearance I'm
[24:51] I'm better-looking than you I'm a better
[24:53] athlete than you it could be economics I
[24:55] have more money than you
[24:57] it could be ethnic or racial it could be
[25:00] gender-based superiority it could be
[25:02] moral or religious based superiority
[25:05] here's the bottom line these are all
[25:08] myths of superiority these are these are
[25:11] soothing stories that we tell ourselves
[25:14] they're junk theories they're all false
[25:17] and so that's why in the book we have to
[25:21] we have to get this this concept very
[25:24] very clear worth precedes worthiness
[25:28] human beings are inherently worthy so if
[25:32] you're human and you're harmless I have
[25:36] a moral obligation to invite you into my
[25:38] society there is no justification
[25:41] there's no rationale on which I can
[25:44] exclude you except the threat of harm
[25:48] but barring that I have a moral
[25:51] obligation to include you worth precedes
[25:54] worthiness we're talking about worth
[25:58] this is something that we still struggle
[26:00] with mightily and organizations and
[26:02] social units of all kinds and so this is
[26:07] the moral force that's acting on
[26:09] organizations is now bigger than ever
[26:11] now why is this a big deal well think
[26:13] about the Millennials that are flooding
[26:15] into the workforce they're flooding into
[26:18] the workforce and they're looking around
[26:20] and they're saying hey boomer why is it
[26:25] that you have normalized harassment
[26:30] or public shaming behavior why is it
[26:35] that you have normalized bullying
[26:38] behavior why is it that you have
[26:39] normalized manipulation why is it that
[26:42] you have normalized some coercive
[26:44] tendencies so not long ago I went to a
[26:49] new client and I interviewed the
[26:50] executive team and it was very clear to
[26:54] me right off the bat that the CEO had
[26:58] iced them into a mode of silence their
[27:02] self sensory and instinct had been
[27:04] triggered and this is the way they did
[27:06] did business and I said well why why is
[27:09] it that you put up with this this
[27:11] bullying behavior from the CEO and they
[27:13] said well it's okay this is it's just
[27:17] normal around here we've learned to kind
[27:19] of deal with it kind of put up with it
[27:21] do you see what's happened in
[27:23] organization after organization we have
[27:25] normalized unacceptable intolerable
[27:29] behavior the moral force that is that is
[27:33] acting upon organizations today is is
[27:36] becoming even bigger and this is a
[27:39] wonderful thing because we are finally
[27:41] taking self inventory or taking an
[27:45] unsparing unedited view of what we have
[27:48] been doing since the Industrial
[27:50] Revolution and we're saying hey this is
[27:52] not okay
[27:53] and in the organizations that are
[27:57] accelerating here's what we're seeing
[27:59] they are actually incorporating
[28:02] psychological safety as a selection
[28:05] criterion for advancement to management
[28:09] so what does that mean that means that
[28:13] if you don't have a demonstrated track
[28:15] record of creating and sustaining
[28:18] psychological safety with your
[28:20] colleagues you are ineligible to become
[28:24] a manager you are disqualified until you
[28:29] can demonstrate a track record of doing
[28:31] that this is what we are starting to see
[28:33] in the most progressive companies and
[28:36] this is a wonderful thing because
[28:39] inclusion safety is the foundation
[28:43] okay questions or comments okay so I
[28:51] want you to think about now why is
[28:53] inclusion safety let me just I'm just
[28:55] gonna ask this one more time why do we
[28:58] struggle with just the foundation let me
[29:02] offer one more suggestion because the
[29:05] human race universally suffers from
[29:09] insecurity and therefore we continue to
[29:14] create differences and junk theories of
[29:17] superiority because of our own
[29:20] insecurities that is why leadership in
[29:24] this new decade requires a moral
[29:28] capacity to be comfortable in your own
[29:32] skin and to not have to keep telling the
[29:35] world how smart you our how clever you
[29:38] are and hiding behind title position and
[29:43] authority and the artifacts that the
[29:46] organization has given us right so I
[29:49] think we're making progress and that's
[29:52] the good news that's the good news so
[29:55] how do you how do you increase inclusion
[29:59] safety I have three basic three basic
[30:03] recommendations for you number one
[30:05] invite the more you invite the more
[30:10] inclusion safety that you're creating
[30:12] number two ask ask sincerely ask
[30:16] genuinely ask about the person ask about
[30:20] background ask about interests so number
[30:23] two ask number three share share your
[30:27] point of view share your background
[30:29] share your opinions we have most many of
[30:33] us have been deeply socialized to create
[30:37] and maintain professional distance it
[30:40] completely flies in the face of all of
[30:43] the research that's coming out
[30:45] particularly from the MIT human dynamics
[30:48] lab it is familiarity that creates more
[30:52] inclusion safety
[30:54] so this professional distance what does
[30:58] it do it maintains relationships based
[31:00] on superficiality never going to work
[31:03] you're never going to get there you
[31:05] cannot do it you can't sustain inclusion
[31:08] safety if you're abiding by that old
[31:10] Industrial Age concept it doesn't work
[31:14] so invite ask share okay let's go to
[31:18] Steve
[31:22] Stage two now builds on stage one stage
[31:26] two is learner safety learner safety
[31:28] means that you feel free in able to
[31:31] engage in the learning process the
[31:33] discovery process without fear again or
[31:37] of retribution without fear of ridicule
[31:40] without fear of embarrassment what does
[31:42] that mean it means that I can ask
[31:44] questions I can give and receive
[31:46] feedback I can experiment I can even
[31:50] make mistakes and I feel safe in doing
[31:55] that now what what have we learned what
[31:58] if cognitive psychologists learned we've
[32:01] learned that the learning process itself
[32:03] is a combination of the intellectual and
[32:08] the emotional those two tracks are woven
[32:12] together you cannot separate them and so
[32:16] therefore what great leaders great
[32:17] teachers great coaches great parents do
[32:20] is they disconnect failure and mistakes
[32:24] from fear they disconnect those because
[32:28] they are not necessarily associated with
[32:32] each other now unfortunately they are in
[32:36] many organizations but there's not a
[32:38] necessary relationship between those two
[32:41] things and for those of you that read
[32:45] the book you'll read a case study about
[32:48] a high school calculus teacher the most
[32:52] successful high school calculus teacher
[32:54] in America and how he is able to
[32:57] disconnect fear from mistakes and
[33:00] failure that's what leaders have to do
[33:02] in order to cultivate and maintain
[33:04] learner safety so this is stage two let
[33:09] me give you kind of a a sweet example of
[33:13] this so back in 1918 Albert Camus a
[33:19] French philosopher he won the Nobel
[33:22] Prize in Literature and a few days after
[33:26] he won the Nobel Prize he wrote a
[33:28] handwritten note to his elementary
[33:32] school teacher
[33:33] and he said this he said without you
[33:36] without the affectionate hand that you
[33:38] extended to the small poor child that I
[33:42] was without your teaching and example
[33:45] none of this would have happened what is
[33:48] he saying
[33:51] he's saying that this teacher escorted
[33:56] him through the learning process and
[33:58] provided learner safety so that he could
[34:02] engage in that discovery process safely
[34:06] and that's what we all need because
[34:08] every human brings some inhibition and
[34:12] some anxiety to the learning process let
[34:17] me give you another statistic that will
[34:19] blow your mind every 26 seconds in the
[34:23] United States of America a student a
[34:27] high school student drops out every 26
[34:31] seconds is this because they don't have
[34:34] the mental bandwidth to do the work the
[34:38] answer is no barring some legitimate
[34:41] learning disability almost all of these
[34:44] students can do the work the reason that
[34:48] they drop out is because as I said
[34:50] there's the intellectual side and
[34:52] there's the emotional side of learning
[34:54] they are emotionally bruised they are
[34:57] emotionally injured they don't feel the
[35:00] love and the support and the nurturing
[35:03] that they need in the learning process
[35:05] and so they finally give up and they say
[35:08] I'm done they throw in the towel that's
[35:09] what happens and that's a tragedy is it
[35:14] any different in a business organization
[35:16] no it's not the learning process is the
[35:19] same learning will forever be
[35:21] intellectual and emotional and it will
[35:24] forever need to be nurtured by the
[35:27] leader another example of this and you
[35:29] can go back to the episode is when
[35:32] Oprah's fourth grade teacher came on the
[35:35] show as a surprise she didn't know what
[35:37] was gonna happen
[35:38] and Oprah just went to tears and then
[35:42] later explained why she was so emotional
[35:44] because this teacher was the one that
[35:47] nurtured her with a learner safety that
[35:50] built her confidence and that allowed
[35:54] her to accelerate and develop her
[35:59] potential as never before that's what
[36:02] leaders do they nurture that
[36:05] so here's some suggestions how do you do
[36:08] it separate mistakes from fear ask for
[36:13] help
[36:13] you personally need to model the
[36:17] behavior of asking for help and your
[36:20] people need to see you do that because
[36:23] in asking for help you're modeling an
[36:26] act of vulnerability they need to see
[36:29] acts of vulnerability modeled in front
[36:33] of them so that they can do the same and
[36:36] then number three invite everyone to
[36:40] teach it's one thing to learn but if
[36:43] you're inviting others to teach now you
[36:47] really are asking them to accelerate
[36:50] their learning so if you can ask if you
[36:52] can ask them to teach and invite them to
[36:54] teach you're going to take learner
[36:57] safety to a completely different level
[37:00] okay so that's learner safety I wish we
[37:03] had more time to go into it let's go to
[37:08] stage three stage three the third stage
[37:11] of psychological safety is contributor
[37:13] safety contributor safety means that you
[37:16] are now able to contribute as a
[37:20] full-fledged member of the team using
[37:23] all of your skills knowledge ability
[37:26] talent and collaborate in the value
[37:31] creating process now why is this stage
[37:34] three well again it's a very natural
[37:37] sequence after we learn things as human
[37:41] beings what's the instinct what's the
[37:44] natural desire the natural desire is to
[37:46] learn and apply what we have learned to
[37:49] to to apply and use what we have learned
[37:53] so it's the next natural level of human
[37:58] need so to satisfy that basic human need
[38:01] we'll want to take what we've learned
[38:03] and we want to go apply it we want to
[38:04] use it we want to make a difference
[38:07] humans have a deep-seated need to make a
[38:11] difference so what then does the leader
[38:14] do the leader provides direction
[38:17] encouragement guidance autonomy and
[38:21] allows this to happen contributor safety
[38:25] is where we are now engaged in the value
[38:28] creation process okay a little bit about
[38:33] how so this is what you can do explain
[38:38] the how we do things to others delegate
[38:44] the why and then we've got to go deeper
[38:50] as leaders as we are cultivating
[38:54] contributor safety and others we have to
[38:57] help them find that deep Y for
[39:00] themselves that motivates them right
[39:03] they have to gain they have to gain that
[39:06] for themselves if we put them on a short
[39:08] leash and we try to micromanage them we
[39:11] simply are gaining no leverage and we
[39:14] are not releasing the creative and the
[39:17] productive output that people have so
[39:20] recognize as soon as people learn they
[39:22] want to go use and apply and contribute
[39:26] they have a deep need to be able to
[39:28] contribute okay
[39:32] we've got to move quickly because we
[39:35] don't have a lot of time let's move to
[39:37] stage 4 stage 4 is Challenger Safety
[39:41] Stage 4 is the culminating stage it's
[39:43] the ultimate stage it's the final stage
[39:46] it is the highest level of psychological
[39:50] safety now why is that because
[39:53] challenger safety means that you feel
[39:56] safe in challenging the status quo you
[40:01] are now at the highest level of personal
[40:04] risk and vulnerability therefore you
[40:08] need the highest level of psychological
[40:10] safety to protect you in that behavior
[40:13] so here's the social exchange here's the
[40:17] social exchange with challenger safety
[40:20] you as the leader you need to give me
[40:24] air cover in exchange for me giving you
[40:29] and ER that's the social exchange I need
[40:32] air cover in exchange for candor now why
[40:37] do we need this because challenger
[40:40] safety is the stage at which we do most
[40:43] of our innovation innovation by its very
[40:46] nature is disruptive of the status quo
[40:49] it relies so think about it how do we
[40:52] solve problems how do we come up with
[40:54] solutions how do we innovate we need
[40:57] creative abrasion we need constructive
[41:01] dissent we need hard-hitting dialogue
[41:05] we cannot let title position Authority
[41:08] rank get in the way of a merit-based
[41:12] discussion we're going to discuss issues
[41:15] on their merits we can do all of those
[41:17] things those are artificial constraints
[41:20] so if we truly want to to innovate in
[41:24] the organization we need to give people
[41:26] a license to innovate and that license
[41:29] to innovate is that level of
[41:32] psychological safety challenger safety
[41:35] if they don't feel safe and challenge
[41:37] these challenging the status quo then
[41:40] they're not gonna do it because they're
[41:42] risking their personal standing and
[41:44] reputation who's gonna do that right
[41:48] okay now let me ask you a question let's
[41:50] go to your chat box on a scale from one
[41:57] to ten and you can write in the number
[41:59] one is low ten is high how would you
[42:04] rate the level of challenger safety that
[42:06] you personally feel in your organization
[42:10] go ahead and put in a number let's see
[42:13] it
[42:14] okay okay
[42:18] Oh
[42:25] amazing now we do empirical research on
[42:30] this we have our four stages team survey
[42:33] which we use across the world and what
[42:37] we know is that the average for
[42:42] challenger safety is much much lower
[42:45] because this is this is the ultimate
[42:48] test of leadership so you're coming in
[42:51] with an average of about 5.5 right here
[42:56] now some of you are showing a 10 which
[42:58] is incredible the level of challenger
[43:02] safety that you have on a team is the
[43:05] ultimate bellwether for the overall
[43:09] health of that team it is the most
[43:11] important vital sign that captures the
[43:15] essence of the culture so if you have
[43:20] reported an eight or a nine or a ten on
[43:23] that scale you have a a pretty healthy
[43:28] team you're in a good place and you are
[43:31] very fortunate to be working under those
[43:34] conditions most people are not that high
[43:38] and you can see that we have a lot of
[43:40] work to do right so again the key
[43:44] question is is it safe to challenge the
[43:49] status quo is it safe to challenge the
[43:51] status quo
[43:54] now if you can create a team culture and
[43:58] organizational culture or whatever your
[44:01] social unit is and you can get all the
[44:04] way to psychological safety what you're
[44:07] going to create is a pattern of behavior
[44:10] in your people and the pattern of
[44:14] behavior is what we call intellectual
[44:18] bravery intellectual bravery let me give
[44:22] you a definition for intellectual
[44:24] bravery intellectual bravery is a
[44:28] willingness to disagree dissent or
[44:32] challenge the status quo in a setting in
[44:35] which there is social emotional
[44:38] political and economic risk in spite of
[44:41] that risk people are willing to come
[44:44] forward and they're willing to disagree
[44:46] or dissent or challenge the status quo
[44:50] that's what intellectual bravery is this
[44:54] is the most important behavioral pattern
[44:57] for creating an incubator of innovation
[45:02] in any organization you can be
[45:05] exquisitely blessed with everything else
[45:07] in terms of raw intellectual horsepower
[45:11] talent resources guidance directions
[45:14] strategy if you don't have challenger
[45:19] safety to cultivate intellectual bravery
[45:22] you are handicapped you are not going to
[45:27] be able to do it because this is the
[45:28] most important attribute now let me see
[45:31] if I can frame this in a way that may be
[45:34] unique to you you've I think this will
[45:38] make sense so the leaders job is to say
[45:42] there are two kinds of friction
[45:44] interpersonally when we are working
[45:47] together in social units there's
[45:49] intellectual friction and their social
[45:52] friction the leaders job is to
[45:55] simultaneously increase intellectual
[45:59] friction while decreasing social
[46:03] friction
[46:04] this is the this is the key mechanism
[46:07] that creates psychological safety to the
[46:11] level of challenger safety level for
[46:15] Stage four where people now feel real
[46:18] willing to challenge the status quo but
[46:21] this is what we need to understand it's
[46:24] delicate and it's dynamic and it's never
[46:28] done the job is never finished right
[46:31] there's a there's a permanent
[46:34] impermanence to this right so I want you
[46:37] to think about this your job again is to
[46:44] increase intellectual friction and at
[46:47] the same time reduce social friction why
[46:49] is that because humans at the end of
[46:52] every idea suggestion challenge a point
[46:55] of view is a human being and we are very
[46:58] sensitive and so if we allow the social
[47:02] friction to get too high it will shut
[47:05] down the intellectual friction and we
[47:08] will come to a stalemate we will come to
[47:10] impasse we will come to loggerheads and
[47:14] we will not be able to progress in our
[47:18] collaboration so that psychological
[47:21] safety becomes the lubricating oil for
[47:27] this collaboration to happen but it's
[47:31] the leaders job to model this and to
[47:34] protect that intellectual friction okay
[47:39] all right now here's the crew here's a
[47:41] question that has come up that I want to
[47:43] I want to from the chat box and you guys
[47:46] are asking a lot of questions so here's
[47:49] a here's a great question do you think
[47:51] there is psychological safety oh let's
[47:59] see
[48:01] hang on a second you
[48:06] what so what are the implications given
[48:09] the pandemic and the fact that we are
[48:11] now moving we've now moved to virtual
[48:14] we've had this mass migration to virtual
[48:16] teams working from home what are the
[48:19] implications the implications when we
[48:23] could go on and on about this and you
[48:25] can read my article from about three
[48:28] weeks ago in a Harvard Business Review
[48:30] about how to do this but what it means
[48:32] is that we have to pay even more
[48:35] attention to nonverbal cues and body
[48:40] language because we're not having a full
[48:43] sensory face-to-face experience so that
[48:46] is number one number two we have to
[48:50] dispense with the superficialities in
[48:53] the way that we're interacting so for
[48:56] example if we're having them if we're
[48:58] having a quick one-on-one then you need
[49:02] to say Tim so how you doing today and
[49:04] I'm gonna say I'm doing fine how you
[49:07] doing and then you're gonna say no no
[49:09] how are you really doing tell me how
[49:11] it's going that's what has to happen
[49:14] we've got to go to another level of
[49:17] familiarity and another level of
[49:19] tolerance for candor in a virtual
[49:22] environment otherwise we're losing
[49:24] people
[49:25] they're disengaging productivity's going
[49:28] south and we're suffering and so
[49:31] creating and maintaining psychological
[49:33] safety is an extra challenge in a
[49:36] virtual environment but that is what
[49:38] we're faced with right now
[49:39] it truly is it's not easy but that's
[49:43] what's happening we're in that kind of
[49:45] environment and we could go on and on
[49:48] about that okay so let me let me just
[49:52] share a related point that we call the
[49:58] anatomy of culture in any organization
[50:03] there are levels of culture as you know
[50:06] the overall level of culture for an
[50:08] institution the institutional culture is
[50:11] what we call a macro culture and in that
[50:14] macro culture we have certain patterns
[50:17] or prevailing norm
[50:19] if we go down from there we have sub
[50:22] cultures subcultures exist at the level
[50:25] of a business unit a geography a line of
[50:29] business a functional area right
[50:33] we have subcultures and they are
[50:35] materially different than the macro
[50:37] culture they share some of the same
[50:40] attributes and some of the same patterns
[50:41] but then there are differences and then
[50:44] if we go down one more layer we get to
[50:46] what's called the micro culture the
[50:49] micro culture is the fundamental unit of
[50:51] culture and it normally exists at the
[50:53] level of a team the team is the basic
[50:56] unit of performance in this decade in
[51:00] the 2020s it's all about the team so if
[51:04] you want if you're concerned about
[51:06] culture then what do we do we attack
[51:11] culture by design and not by default it
[51:14] is a design about asset and we address
[51:18] it at all levels but the most profound
[51:21] level is what level the micro culture
[51:26] because here's what we know and and we
[51:30] learned this years ago when I was doing
[51:32] my doctorate at Oxford what we know is
[51:36] that this is what we call the culture
[51:38] formation hypothesis the most important
[51:41] factor in the formation of culture is
[51:44] the modeling behavior of the leader
[51:48] period end and so if we want to alter
[51:53] culture we have to change the modeling
[51:57] behavior of the leader at the team level
[52:02] now we can do some other things at the
[52:04] top right top down right we can shift
[52:08] the norms as well we can recast the
[52:10] prevailing norms but the bottom up
[52:13] effort to shift or change or alter the
[52:18] the modeling behavior of frontline
[52:22] managers and team leaders cannot be
[52:25] ignored now let me let me add a related
[52:30] point and that is
[52:32] the pandemic is providing us an
[52:34] incredible opportunity within the
[52:37] calamity and here's the opportunity a
[52:40] crisis does a beautiful thing what a
[52:44] crisis does is it liquefies the status
[52:48] quo and it does it almost suddenly what
[52:55] takes us years when we try to do a
[52:58] cultural transformation in an
[53:00] organization it takes sometimes years to
[53:05] do through an incremental change what a
[53:08] crisis can do is liquify that status quo
[53:11] in a matter of days and that's what
[53:14] kovat 19 has done and so what it does is
[53:17] it presents to you and me this
[53:19] incredible opportunity to recast the
[53:23] prevailing norms of our organizations
[53:26] and so the question for you and for me
[53:29] is are you going to accelerate or Hart
[53:32] or hibernate during this crisis because
[53:36] you have an opportunity that will
[53:39] probably hopefully never come around
[53:42] again it may be a once in a lifetime
[53:44] opportunity to shift the culture and
[53:47] elevate the level of psychological
[53:50] safety on your teams and in your
[53:53] organization at large so I want you to
[53:55] think about that okay now I've gone on
[53:58] too long and I apologize but there's a
[54:00] lot that I wanted to share with you and
[54:02] we've only scratched the surface so
[54:05] let's do a little bit of Q&A between now
[54:07] and the top of the hour so go ahead and
[54:11] send in some questions and let's just do
[54:13] some Q&A so what what questions do you
[54:18] have based on we and I know we've
[54:20] covered a lot of ground we've covered
[54:22] psychological safety we've covered the
[54:24] four stages we've talked about the
[54:27] importance of Crete ill evading
[54:30] intellectual frick reducing social
[54:33] friction Tim Tim I think we have some
[54:38] questions scroll if you scroll down
[54:40] there's some people some questions there
[54:44] okay okay how do you try to affect
[54:49] change when your immediate manager is
[54:52] the problem this is an amazing well
[54:58] unfortunately this is a very common
[55:00] problem the first thing that you want to
[55:03] do is you need to realize that change
[55:06] there's two kinds of change
[55:09] now there's top-down change and this is
[55:12] how enterprise-wide
[55:14] change most often takes place but
[55:16] there's also what we call beachhead
[55:17] change which means that it can start
[55:19] anywhere and it can start to ripple
[55:22] through the organization number one you
[55:27] need to worry about your own modeling
[55:28] behavior are you poised our use are you
[55:34] showing the poise in the composure and
[55:36] the superb emotional intelligence that
[55:40] you need to show in order to be a model
[55:43] because the primary enabling skill of
[55:48] psychological safety is emotional
[55:50] intelligence there's a direct
[55:52] correlation between your emotional
[55:55] intelligence and the psychological
[55:57] safety on a team so you've got to pay
[56:00] attention to that that's how you
[56:03] increase your own influence skills your
[56:06] emotional intelligence is your conduit
[56:09] of influence to your matter as well as
[56:13] your co-workers so you have to assess
[56:16] the extent to which you can be an
[56:19] influencer without positional power
[56:22] you've got to assess that and then
[56:25] you've got to try to do everything that
[56:27] you can based on your competency and
[56:31] your emotional intelligence to try to
[56:35] coach your box now I know that sounds
[56:38] ironic but this is something that that
[56:41] we all have to try to do in good faith
[56:44] with with with absolute good faith but
[56:48] you've got to try to do all that you can
[56:50] because in doing that you will create
[56:54] opportunities for yourself
[56:57] now we could go on but that's what I
[56:58] would do I would start with yourself the
[57:00] natural progression of leadership goes
[57:02] across three domains number one lead
[57:05] yourself
[57:05] number two lead the lead team number
[57:09] three leave the business you've got to
[57:12] focus on leading yourself in the best
[57:15] possible way that's job one okay let's
[57:21] go to some others okay
[57:31] comment traditional concept of team
[57:35] formation storming norming and forming
[57:39] okay this is the old Tuchman model that
[57:41] you're probably all familiar with yes
[57:45] let me comment that here's what we're
[57:49] finding that see and that process
[57:53] continues and it's accurate but what
[57:57] we're finding in 2020 and with the
[58:00] coming decade is that this process can
[58:04] happen much faster No so we go for we go
[58:11] forming storming and norming so the
[58:15] norming comes last because what we're
[58:17] talking about is the definition and the
[58:19] establishment of the prevailing norms
[58:22] what we're finding and this is in large
[58:26] part due to the influence of Millennials
[58:28] Millennials are coming into the
[58:30] workforce with a lot more native agility
[58:34] and they are able to create establish
[58:40] and abide by norms much faster than the
[58:43] other generational cohorts and so I
[58:47] guess what I'm saying is that you can do
[58:50] this much faster than perhaps you
[58:53] thought in the past and this is a great
[58:56] benefit this is one of the advantages we
[58:58] have in the new decade is that we can
[59:01] norm at a team we can establish terms of
[59:04] engagement much much faster and that is
[59:08] really helping us
[59:09] so I would just say that about it I
[59:12] think that's a that's an advantage that
[59:14] we have there's more agility in in the
[59:18] demographics okay let's see I'm just
[59:25] scrolling through there's a lot here
[59:29] here's here's here's a question do you
[59:32] like the concept of radical candor let
[59:36] me qualify that so remember I said that
[59:40] we need to increase intellectual
[59:41] friction and decrease social friction
[59:44] candor cannot include personal attacks
[59:49] the moment that that candor spills over
[59:53] into the personal realm we're in trouble
[59:56] and so leaders have to forbid personal
[01:00:00] attacks if we need to provide candid
[01:00:05] feedback to a person about performance
[01:00:07] that's fine we don't do it in a public
[01:00:10] environment we don't engage in public
[01:00:12] shaming and we do it in a respectful way
[01:00:15] and so I would simply qualify that
[01:00:18] because sometimes people talk about
[01:00:20] radical candor they don't know what they
[01:00:22] mean so we have to be very careful about
[01:00:25] moving into the personal realm that's
[01:00:28] where people often derail so we have to
[01:00:31] be very careful about that we want a
[01:00:33] high tolerance for candor but we want to
[01:00:38] preserve the individual in the process
[01:00:42] if we don't preserve the individual then
[01:00:45] as we talked about earlier we trigger
[01:00:48] the self censoring instinct and they
[01:00:51] retreat okay
[01:00:53] so Jonathan I think we're out of time
[01:00:56] unfortunately and so we've got to wrap
[01:00:58] it up but thank you so very much for the
[01:01:01] opportunity to spend a few minutes with
[01:01:03] you and I will just say that let me just
[01:01:09] share a couple of things for those of
[01:01:11] you that are interested in more
[01:01:12] resources hey Ken I wanted to add it if
[01:01:16] you want to keep going a little bit more
[01:01:17] that's fine okay well for those of you
[01:01:21] that want to hang on I'll just share
[01:01:23] there's some free resources that I know
[01:01:26] some people will be interested in first
[01:01:28] of all there's the behavioral guide the
[01:01:30] behavioral guide is the how to tactical
[01:01:34] concrete behavioral guide that provides
[01:01:38] all of the behaviors for each of the
[01:01:41] four stages and that is a free download
[01:01:44] so if you just go to leader factor comm
[01:01:47] it's a free download and it's a very
[01:01:50] robust resource to help leaders and
[01:01:52] teams and then of course we have the
[01:01:54] four stages
[01:01:55] team survey the first team is always
[01:01:59] free and this this is a very
[01:02:02] sophisticated survey platform that gives
[01:02:05] you that gives you survey data for each
[01:02:11] stage of psychological safety as well as
[01:02:16] prescriptive analytics to help you
[01:02:19] figure out what the next stage step
[01:02:21] steps are for you and your team so those
[01:02:24] resources are available and don't forget
[01:02:26] the free book giveaway for those of you
[01:02:29] that want to post I'll answer some
[01:02:32] additional questions we will excuse
[01:02:35] those of you that have to go at the top
[01:02:37] of the hour and say thanks very much for
[01:02:39] joining us but I'd be happy to field
[01:02:42] some additional questions for those of
[01:02:44] you that would like to hang on I'm happy
[01:02:47] to do that okay let's see how does
[01:02:59] growth mindset factor into psychological
[01:03:02] safety so I think we're getting into two
[01:03:05] right the work of Carol Dweck at
[01:03:09] Stanford and mindset so the growth
[01:03:13] mindset is basically a learning mindset
[01:03:17] what psychological safety has to do with
[01:03:20] this is that we're now talking about the
[01:03:22] environment in which you are learning
[01:03:24] and so if you have a learning mindset
[01:03:28] that's fantastic but you also need an
[01:03:32] environment that is going to nurture
[01:03:35] that
[01:03:35] and so the leader stewardship as far as
[01:03:39] promoting and cultivating a growth
[01:03:42] mindset is to make sure that the learner
[01:03:45] safety is there that we can ask the
[01:03:48] questions that we can give and receive
[01:03:50] feedback that we can experiment that we
[01:03:52] can make mistakes and we're not going to
[01:03:56] be punished for that we're not going to
[01:03:59] be ridiculed we're not going to be hung
[01:04:01] out to dry for that so I would just
[01:04:04] simply encourage all of you to think
[01:04:06] about am I doing my part because I have
[01:04:09] a stewardship to play in cultivating a
[01:04:13] growth mindset with my people to the
[01:04:15] extent possible the workplace culture
[01:04:19] needs to support that okay okay here's
[01:04:29] here's one so let's talk about diversity
[01:04:32] and inclusion
[01:04:33] first of all let's distinguish the two
[01:04:36] diversity is a fact it's a compositional
[01:04:38] fact even if you say you have a team
[01:04:43] that may let's say we have a team that
[01:04:47] does not is not diverse in some areas at
[01:04:54] a minimum there's going to be cognitive
[01:04:57] diversity so we always think cognitive
[01:05:00] diversity that's the default position
[01:05:02] it's true for every team and then we
[01:05:05] move up from there to see what other
[01:05:08] kind of compositional diversity that we
[01:05:09] have but we're going to set that aside
[01:05:11] because diversity is compositional its
[01:05:14] effect inclusion is a choice
[01:05:18] inclusion is behavioral the the
[01:05:25] limitation that we have the barrier that
[01:05:27] we have and we our efforts are not
[01:05:31] producing the return on investment for
[01:05:33] inclusion because we are obsessing on
[01:05:38] teaching awareness and appreciation of
[01:05:43] differences that's fantastic
[01:05:46] and I'm not suggesting that we stop
[01:05:48] doing that we've got to continue to do
[01:05:51] that but that is never going to be
[01:05:55] sufficient because then what we're doing
[01:05:58] is we're aware of we appreciate the
[01:06:01] differences then we sit and wait for our
[01:06:04] hearts to change that's not going to for
[01:06:08] most people you're going to wait a long
[01:06:09] time if you're waiting for your heart to
[01:06:11] change so how do you do it here's the
[01:06:14] principle behave until you believe you
[01:06:18] can have appreciation and awareness of
[01:06:20] differences now you've got to get work
[01:06:23] and what that means is that you start
[01:06:26] acting interacting collaborating
[01:06:30] behaving with diverse people with a
[01:06:34] diverse team because it's only through
[01:06:38] the behavior that you generate the
[01:06:41] confirming evidence that says to you hey
[01:06:43] you know while this diversity this works
[01:06:48] I love this look what we've done and in
[01:06:54] that process of behaving and working and
[01:06:57] collaborating together we generate the
[01:07:01] belief in the diversity and we also
[01:07:05] generate the business impact
[01:07:07] so we're generating two streams of
[01:07:10] evidence number one the value of my
[01:07:14] diverse colleagues which goes to a
[01:07:16] completely different level and number
[01:07:19] two the value of the business impact
[01:07:22] that we have created so we've we've got
[01:07:26] to move beyond awareness and
[01:07:29] appreciation of differences we've got to
[01:07:31] get to work so we behave until we
[01:07:34] believe that's not going to happen if
[01:07:37] we're sitting on the sidelines waiting
[01:07:38] for our hearts to change it doesn't work
[01:07:41] that way but if we get to work we
[01:07:43] accelerate the process it's absolutely
[01:07:46] fantastic
[01:07:47] I personally let me share something
[01:07:49] personal with you that you may
[01:07:50] appreciate you'll notice in the book
[01:07:54] that I took some chances
[01:07:58] and I shared some personal experiences
[01:08:02] so I'm I'm a much more autobiographical
[01:08:05] than I would normally be because I'm a
[01:08:08] trained researcher so I should be this
[01:08:10] dispassionate third party that's just
[01:08:13] evaluating the data you'll notice that I
[01:08:16] I took some risks and I shared some
[01:08:19] personal experiences because I'm
[01:08:22] learning from my own personal
[01:08:24] experiences as well as analyzing the
[01:08:27] data so I have personal qualitative data
[01:08:31] I have personal anecdotal data I have
[01:08:34] personal impressionistic data that I'm
[01:08:37] combining with the quantitative data let
[01:08:42] me give you an example so in my career
[01:08:45] I've had two african-american bosses
[01:08:49] I've had a female boss I've had a gay
[01:08:53] boss I've had a Japanese boss and I've
[01:08:57] had marvelous experiences with these
[01:09:00] people
[01:09:01] marvelous experiences these people have
[01:09:04] been my mentors I've had diverse
[01:09:08] experiences I grew up in Durango
[01:09:11] Colorado and my my father was a teacher
[01:09:14] among the Navajo the second largest
[01:09:16] Native American tribe to the Cherokee
[01:09:19] I've lived in Asia
[01:09:21] I've lived in Europe these are rich
[01:09:24] experiences but the problem is that many
[01:09:28] people are having these experiences and
[01:09:30] they're not getting the yield they're
[01:09:33] not learning from these experiences
[01:09:36] they're not developing the inclusive DNA
[01:09:42] that we need to have and so that's why I
[01:09:46] took some chances and I got a little
[01:09:47] more personal in the book and I hope
[01:09:50] you'll forgive me for that but I hope
[01:09:51] that it will resonate with you because
[01:09:55] this is where we've got to get to in the
[01:09:58] 2020s we've got work to do
[01:10:02] okay and there's a lot of questions okay
[01:10:16] yes okay let me give you a coaching tip
[01:10:22] right so I spend a portion of my time
[01:10:25] just with the executives doing executive
[01:10:28] coaching let me give you a coaching tip
[01:10:30] the primary purpose of coaching is to do
[01:10:33] two things number one transfer
[01:10:35] accountability and ownership and number
[01:10:41] two transfer critical thinking there
[01:10:46] needs to be a transfer of those two
[01:10:47] things ownership and critical thinking
[01:10:49] how do you do that you cannot do that
[01:10:52] with a didactic model a tell model and
[01:10:55] so we do it with an inquiry model we do
[01:10:58] it through questions we lead primarily
[01:11:00] through questions rather than answers so
[01:11:03] that means that we have to overcome the
[01:11:07] leader as Oracle Industrial Imperial
[01:11:12] model of leadership this is hard for
[01:11:15] people it's hard for leaders they have
[01:11:17] to unlearn this model and so here's
[01:11:20] here's a very practical tip for you that
[01:11:22] are coaching learn to use what we call
[01:11:25] the three workhorse questions now these
[01:11:30] are the three questions in that transfer
[01:11:33] the burden of critical thinking number
[01:11:36] one what number two why number three how
[01:11:42] if you ask those questions as you're
[01:11:45] coaching your people you are
[01:11:48] transferring the primary burden of
[01:11:51] critical thinking and so you need to use
[01:11:54] those questions a lot more and move away
[01:11:58] from the binary yes/no questions and the
[01:12:02] softballs and then of course the
[01:12:05] didactic the telling that just breeds
[01:12:08] dependency and learned helplessness so
[01:12:11] create more rigor in your coaching
[01:12:14] conversations
[01:12:15] use the workhorse questions to transfer
[01:12:19] ownership and to transfer critical
[01:12:21] thinking does that make sense to you the
[01:12:24] best coaches in the world that's what
[01:12:27] they do that's how you move people out
[01:12:29] of their comfort zone you push them to
[01:12:31] the outer limits not too far but you put
[01:12:34] some stretch in there and you accelerate
[01:12:37] the development process so use your
[01:12:40] workhorse questions what why how just a
[01:12:45] practical tip for those of you that are
[01:12:48] coaching okay that's I think we've gone
[01:12:52] over enough Jonathan I'll turn it back
[01:12:54] over to you my friend yeah okay thank
[01:12:56] you to him that was incredible
[01:12:59] incredible talk that you you just gave
[01:13:02] us and extremely educational the this
[01:13:07] webinar is sponsored by the company
[01:13:12] introduced calm that's spelt like
[01:13:16] introduced without the I in front and
[01:13:18] introduced calm is a hiring platform
[01:13:22] that matches job seekers and companies
[01:13:26] together based on personality traits
[01:13:29] cultural values and soft skills so what
[01:13:34] dr. Clark is talking about here is
[01:13:36] directly relevant to what we do and we
[01:13:40] feel that as a job hiring platform where
[01:13:44] we're job seekers and companies come
[01:13:47] together I think it's extremely
[01:13:49] important to start hiring based on
[01:13:53] personality traits cultural values and
[01:13:57] soft skills that are needed to to be
[01:14:02] able to put psychological safety in your
[01:14:07] workforce and your team so by hiring the
[01:14:11] right people
[01:14:11] it'll be really helpful in achieving the
[01:14:15] psychological safety that dr. Clark has
[01:14:17] been talking about I want to thank
[01:14:20] everybody for attending a lot of you
[01:14:22] have stayed on for the additional
[01:14:25] question answers and
[01:14:27] we appreciate that and Tim I want to
[01:14:30] thank you for this webinar it's been
[01:14:34] terrific it's been very informative and
[01:14:38] a lot of people are going to take away a
[01:14:40] lot of great things from it so thank you
[01:14:43] thank you all right we're gonna wrap
[01:14:47] things up thanks everybody

In the opening moments of the presentation, the speakers, Danny Kim and Dr. Tina Berenbaum, set a welcoming tone, inviting attendees to feel psychologically safe in the environment they are in. They introduce themselves, with Danny sharing his background as an organizational consultant and Tina recounting her journey from academia to consulting. Tina mentions her experience in a challenging work environment in Washington, D.C., where she learned the significance of psychological safety while attempting to transform a toxic workplace culture. This anecdote serves as a backdrop for the discussion on psychological safety, emphasizing its relevance in organizational settings.

As the session progresses, Tina encourages the audience to define psychological safety among themselves, highlighting the importance of a shared understanding of the concept. She notes that psychological safety is often discussed but not always clearly defined, leading to varied interpretations. The audience engages in a brief discussion, and Tina collects insights to incorporate into future presentations, demonstrating the collaborative nature of the session.

Transitioning to the importance of psychological safety, Danny outlines several key reasons why this topic is particularly relevant in today’s educational and organizational climates. He references the current societal climate, including movements like #MeToo, which have heightened awareness around harassment and the need for safe environments. He emphasizes that unsafe environments lead to disengagement, which can adversely affect productivity and profitability, even in educational contexts where students are the primary customers. Danny cites a staggering statistic indicating that the U.S. loses approximately $300 billion annually due to a lack of engagement, underscoring the financial implications of psychological safety.

Moreover, Danny discusses the rising levels of anxiety among students, referencing a Duke University study that found nearly 25% of surveyed students were on anti-anxiety medication. This statistic highlights the urgency of addressing psychological safety not only in educational institutions but also as students transition into the workforce. The speakers aim to provide insights into the neurobiology of safety, outlining three components: stressors, affiliation, and reactivity. They explain how stressors can impact individuals within group contexts and how different people respond to stress based on their biological predispositions.

To illustrate the impact of stress, Danny shares a personal story about a camping trip where he inadvertently left food accessible to bears, leading to a tense situation. This anecdote serves to highlight the biological responses to fear and stress, such as the release of cortisol and epinephrine, which prepare individuals for fight or flight responses. He contrasts this with the background of stress present in educational settings, where students may feel unsafe due to academic pressures or negative feedback, which can hinder their engagement and learning.

Following this, the speakers shift focus to the positive aspects of psychological safety, emphasizing the role of oxytocin, a hormone associated with bonding and empathy. They explain that environments fostering psychological safety can lead to increased collaboration, trust, and productivity, ultimately benefiting learning outcomes and organizational success. The discussion touches on the concept of mirror neurons, which suggest that individuals reflect the emotional states of those around them, reinforcing the importance of creating supportive environments.

Danny introduces an equation for psychological safety, which includes the interplay between leadership, culture, and individual characteristics, divided by self-orientation. He emphasizes that effective leadership is crucial in establishing a psychologically safe environment, noting that leaders should be selected based on their ability to elevate others rather than solely on their academic or research credentials. He encourages attendees to reflect on the qualities of effective leaders, such as integrity, vision, expertise, and mentorship.

As the discussion progresses, Tina elaborates on the components of culture that contribute to psychological safety, including guiding values, clear policies, skill-building initiatives, and collective responsibility. She stresses the need for organizations to create frameworks that allow individuals to voice concerns and seek support when feeling unsafe. This includes fostering emotional intelligence and understanding interpersonal dynamics to enhance communication and empathy within teams.

The speakers also address the individual aspect of psychological safety, acknowledging that people have varying sensitivities to stress and fear based on their biological makeup. They discuss resilience as a critical component, defining it as the ability to adapt and learn from adversity rather than being overwhelmed by it. Danny outlines five components of resilience, including addressing fear, developing emotional intelligence, managing stress, ensuring overall well-being, and fostering social connections. He emphasizes that social connections can significantly enhance resilience and contribute to a supportive environment.

Throughout the presentation, the speakers reiterate the importance of mindset in shaping perceptions and responses to challenges. They encourage attendees to adopt a positive mindset, viewing obstacles as opportunities for growth rather than threats. This shift in perspective can lower stress levels and enhance engagement in both educational and professional settings.

In the concluding segment, Tina discusses potential unintended consequences of efforts to promote psychological safety, such as the emergence of a victim mentality, the weaponization of psychological safety concepts, and the pitfalls of identity politics. She cautions against fostering an environment where individuals feel disempowered or overly focused on group identities rather than their unique contributions. The speakers advocate for a balanced approach that empowers individuals to take responsibility for their actions and interactions while fostering a culture of empathy and understanding.

In summary, the presentation by Danny Kim and Dr. Tina Berenbaum provides a comprehensive exploration of psychological safety, its significance in educational and organizational contexts, and the multifaceted components that contribute to creating a safe and supportive environment. Through personal anecdotes, research findings, and practical strategies, the speakers emphasize the critical role of leadership, culture, and individual resilience in fostering psychological safety. They encourage attendees to reflect on their practices and perspectives, ultimately aiming to empower individuals and organizations to cultivate environments where everyone can thrive.

The transcript does not explicitly define interpersonal risk within the workplace context. However, it discusses concepts closely related to interpersonal risk, such as psychological safety. Psychological safety is described as a climate where individuals feel comfortable expressing themselves without fear of punishment or backlash. This is crucial for team learning and performance because it fosters an environment where team members are more likely to share ideas, admit mistakes, and engage in constructive feedback.

For example, the speakers emphasize that people must feel secure enough to make mistakes and learn from them. When individuals are aware that they can take interpersonal risks without negative repercussions, it leads to greater collaboration and innovation within teams. Specifically, the transcript mentions that a lack of psychological safety can result in disengagement, which ultimately diminishes productivity and profitability.

Moreover, the speakers refer to the necessity of having one’s colleagues have their back, indicating that interpersonal risks are mitigated when there is a supportive team culture. When team members feel that their opinions are valued, they are more likely to contribute actively, which enhances overall team effectiveness.

• [03:05] "...the importance of psychological safety..."
• [05:56] "...making mistakes is an OK thing so long as it’s something to be learned from..."
• [06:06] "...the U.S. loses about 300 billion dollars a year to a lack of engagement..."

The transcript distinguishes psychological safety from merely being nice, avoiding disagreement, or creating a comfort zone. The speakers explain that psychological safety is not about creating an environment where everyone agrees or feels comfortable all the time. Instead, it is about fostering a climate where individuals can express their thoughts, concerns, and even disagreements without fear of negative consequences.

One of the key points made is that psychological safety is about authentic expression and being able to take risks in communication. For instance, the speakers highlight that a psychologically safe environment allows for discussions around difficult topics, such as harassment and other sensitive issues, which are particularly relevant in the current climate. This means that while an organization might be friendly and agreeable, true psychological safety involves the ability to engage in potentially uncomfortable conversations.

Furthermore, the transcript notes that psychological safety is essential in educational settings, where students must feel free to ask questions and express their views, even if they differ from the mainstream thinking. This is contrasted with a comfort zone, which might stifle critical discussions and growth. Therefore, the essence of psychological safety lies in encouraging open dialogue and recognizing that discomfort can be a sign of growth rather than a reason to retreat into silence.

• [04:31] "...it’s got to be something about a climate in which people are comfortable about being and expressing themselves..."
• [05:50] "...it’s relevant for our times today..."

The transcript does not specifically mention leaders openly acknowledging their own mistakes, uncertainties, or limitations. However, it does emphasize the importance of leadership behavior in fostering an environment of psychological safety. The speakers imply that when leaders model transparency and vulnerability, it encourages team members to do the same.

For instance, the speakers discuss the role of leaders in setting the tone for the organization. They assert that when leaders exhibit integrity and accountability, it invites team members to feel safe in voicing their concerns and admitting their own errors. While direct references to leaders admitting their own shortcomings are not present, the overall message suggests that such behaviors are conducive to creating a supportive atmosphere.

Moreover, the discussion about the importance of leaders in shaping organizational culture implies that if leaders acknowledge their limitations, it not only humanizes them but also encourages a culture where mistakes are viewed as learning opportunities. This aligns with the broader theme of the transcript, which is to highlight how psychological safety can be cultivated through effective leadership practices.

• [14:09] "...the tone is set at the top..."
• [16:00] "...leaders are people that elevate the performance of others..."

The transcript indeed discusses the role of leaders in fostering psychological safety through behaviors such as asking questions, inviting input, and admitting that they do not have all the answers. This behavior is critically linked to creating a culture of psychological safety, as it encourages open dialogue and collaboration among team members.

For instance, the speakers emphasize that leaders should be approachable and willing to engage with their teams, which facilitates a more inclusive environment. When leaders ask for input or share their uncertainties, it communicates to team members that their perspectives are valued and that it is acceptable to express doubts or seek clarification. This not only fosters trust but also enhances team cohesion.

Additionally, the speakers point out that these behaviors are essential in educational settings, where the environment should support students in feeling safe to engage with their instructors and peers. By modeling vulnerability and a willingness to learn, leaders can significantly impact their teams' dynamics, ultimately leading to improved performance and engagement. The emphasis on leaders who are open to feedback and willing to admit their limitations shows a clear connection to the principles of psychological safety.

• [06:15] "...we need to create begin to think about psychological safety..."
• [12:10] "...that increases learning that’s the end product..."

The transcript does not explicitly discuss how to maintain both high psychological safety and high performance expectations or accountability without fear becoming dominant. However, it does touch upon the importance of creating an environment where individuals feel safe to express themselves while also emphasizing the need for accountability in performance.

The speakers highlight that psychological safety can coexist with high expectations by fostering a culture where mistakes are viewed as opportunities for learning rather than as failures. This implies that leaders must create a balance where team members feel comfortable taking risks and acknowledging their mistakes while still being held accountable for their performance.

Moreover, they suggest that when leaders exhibit behaviors that model psychological safety—such as openness, empathy, and constructive feedback—it encourages team members to strive for high performance without the fear of repercussions. This balance is vital in environments like educational institutions, where both psychological safety and academic rigor are necessary. The speakers imply that the key lies in effective leadership that promotes a culture of trust, support, and accountability.

• [30:05] "...the opportunity to raise psychological safety..."
• [30:26] "...when self-orientation is lower we actually enhance our empathy..."

The transcript indeed highlights a significant relationship between employees remaining silent and various negative outcomes, particularly in the context of psychological safety. Dr. Tina Berenbaum emphasizes the importance of a culture where individuals feel comfortable expressing themselves without fear of repercussions. In environments lacking psychological safety, employees might hesitate to voice their thoughts or concerns, leading to a cascade of detrimental effects.

When individuals remain silent, organizations risk reduced innovation as creative ideas and alternative solutions may never see the light of day. The fear of negative judgment or punishment can stifle employees' willingness to share potentially groundbreaking ideas, consequently limiting the organization's ability to adapt and grow. Moreover, this silence can lead to missed learning opportunities. In a psychologically unsafe environment, mistakes are often hidden rather than discussed as learning moments. This lack of open dialogue can prevent teams from learning from errors, resulting in repeated mistakes and a stagnation of progress.

Furthermore, the transcript suggests that silence can lead to preventable errors. When team members do not feel safe to communicate openly, vital information may not be shared, leading to misinformed decisions. This can ultimately culminate in poorer decisions being made, as teams operate without the full spectrum of knowledge that could inform their actions. In essence, the absence of psychological safety creates a culture of silence that hampers growth, learning, and effective decision-making.

•  
  • [05:09] "the importance of psychological safety"
  • [05:50] "when there are unsafe environments it actually creates a lack of engagement which actually kills productivity"
  • [06:06] "the u.s. loses about 300 billion dollars a year to a lack of engagement"

The transcript does not specifically address the unique challenges that remote or hybrid work creates for psychological safety. It focuses more on the general principles of psychological safety and its importance in organizational settings. However, it is reasonable to infer that many of the core concepts discussed, such as the need for open communication and a supportive environment, are universally applicable regardless of the work setting.

Notably, while the challenges of remote work—such as the dynamics of video calls, written communication, and digital meeting dynamics—are not explicitly mentioned, the broader context of psychological safety implies that these factors could indeed impact how employees feel safe to express their thoughts and ideas. The lack of spontaneous interactions that typically occur in physical office environments might hinder the development of trust and connection among team members.

Thus, while the transcript does not delve into remote work challenges, the concepts of psychological safety can be applied to remote settings, where the absence of face-to-face interactions may complicate the establishment of a supportive atmosphere.

•  
  • [03:05] "I learned more than I ever could have learned anywhere else about the importance of psychological safety"
  • [05:25] "the climate to call out the bad actors"

The transcript does not provide specific practices or approaches for remote teams to build trust, connection, or informal psychological safety in the absence of in-person interactions. The focus remains on the broader principles of psychological safety rather than on particular methods tailored for remote or hybrid work environments.

However, the discussions on psychological safety imply that practices fostering open communication, mutual support, and recognition can be beneficial in any setting, including remote teams. For instance, facilitating regular check-ins, encouraging informal conversations through digital platforms, and recognizing team members' contributions could potentially enhance feelings of safety and connection among remote colleagues.

Additionally, fostering a culture where team members are encouraged to share their experiences and perspectives can help bridge the gap created by physical distance. Although the transcript does not delineate these practices explicitly, the foundational elements of psychological safety can guide organizations in developing strategies that are effective for remote work.

•  
  • [12:10] "we want to see higher levels of oxytocin and there’s actually some interesting things on mirror neurons"
  • [30:05] "self orientation is when the ego gets in the way"

The transcript does hint at the idea that psychological safety can differ among individuals or groups, particularly in relation to their backgrounds, roles, and levels of seniority. Dr. Danny Kim alludes to the varied responses individuals may have to stressors based on their biological and psychological makeups, suggesting that reactivity can differ among team members. This variability can impact how safe individuals feel in expressing their thoughts and concerns.

Moreover, the discussion around leadership indicates that individuals in different roles may experience psychological safety differently. For instance, leaders are often expected to set the tone for their teams, and those in senior positions may have more influence over the culture of psychological safety than junior members. The transcript implies that backgrounds and experiences can shape how individuals perceive and engage with their environment.

While the transcript does not provide extensive details on these differences, it can be inferred that acknowledging the unique perspectives of diverse individuals and tailoring approaches to foster psychological safety accordingly is vital for creating an inclusive environment.

•  
  • [24:26] "all of us are born with a biology where we're more or less sensitive to the stimuli around us"
  • [34:45] "we run the danger of not looking at them as an individual but looking at them as a member of a group"

The transcript does not specifically mention measuring, assessing, or monitoring psychological safety within a team or organization. There are no methods, questions, indicators, or follow-up actions described for evaluating psychological safety levels. However, it emphasizes the need for an environment where individuals feel safe to express themselves, which implicitly suggests the importance of assessment in fostering such an environment.

Although direct methods for measuring psychological safety are not mentioned, the discussion around leadership and culture implies that organizations might consider evaluating the effectiveness of their leaders in creating a psychologically safe atmosphere. This could include soliciting feedback from team members on their experiences and feelings of safety in expressing their thoughts or concerns.

In summary, while the transcript highlights the significance of psychological safety, it does not provide concrete strategies or methods for measuring or monitoring this crucial concept.

•  
  • [10:19] "there is this background of stress and our culture right now"
  • [12:20] "we want the students to learn"

[00:05] [Music]
[00:09] good morning everyone
[00:10] glad that you are here at the happiest
[00:13] place on earth
[00:13] and hopefully you can find that
[00:16] happiness in the midst of a great
[00:18] learning that we have we have a brief
[00:20] hour and we have a very full room and so
[00:22] I'm gonna invite you to feel
[00:24] psychologically safe even as you sit
[00:26] very comfortably next to your neighbor
[00:27] as mentioned my name is Danny Kim and
[00:30] this is dr. Tina Berenbaum and I am an
[00:33] organizational consultant for a global
[00:36] consultancy called scent art and we
[00:38] support leaders and organizations at
[00:39] pivotal moments to gain clarity to
[00:42] create alignment and ultimately take
[00:43] courageous action and before I was here
[00:45] I was a career counsellor we're using a
[00:48] strengths-based methodology to help our
[00:50] students design a calling I was going to
[00:53] suggest that people come and sit on the
[00:54] floor if you feel comfortable and then I
[00:56] looked down and I saw you so thank you
[00:58] for feeling safe to do that I'm Tina I
[01:00] started my career as a professor in the
[01:03] sociology department at McGill
[01:05] University in Montreal and realize that
[01:09] I have this really amazing love of a
[01:12] variety and so I went into consulting
[01:14] which is what something that I
[01:16] personally am much more suited for and
[01:18] as was mentioned I was at PwC in Canada
[01:22] made the brilliant decision to move to
[01:25] Southern California eleven years ago and
[01:27] haven't regretted it since I hate to
[01:29] talk about myself which is why I said
[01:31] please make it short and sweet at the
[01:32] beginning but I do want to tell you a
[01:34] little bit about my life and
[01:36] particularly I want to tell you about a
[01:38] year in my life and I want you to
[01:42] imagine this it's the year before the
[01:46] previous presidential election I'm
[01:49] working in Washington DC and it is a war
[01:54] zone
[01:55] and I don't say that lightly
[01:59] there were landmines everywhere people
[02:02] were throwing each other under the bus
[02:05] everywhere there was no safety the CEO
[02:09] was an autocrat he had a team of four
[02:12] other people one
[02:13] was a narcissist I'm a sociologist not a
[02:16] psychologist so don't take that too
[02:18] seriously but he was a narcissist
[02:20] another was a bureaucrat another was the
[02:25] local historian and the final one was a
[02:29] harasser who ended up being removed from
[02:32] the company and in that environment I
[02:34] was tasked with trying to transform
[02:38] their culture sounds like an impossible
[02:40] task
[02:41] it was the growing edge of my consulting
[02:44] and it wasn't that long ago so I've been
[02:46] consulting for a long time before I
[02:48] really found my growing edge and I'll
[02:52] say that I'm not sure if we were a
[02:54] hundred percent successful but we
[02:57] definitely move the needle in the right
[02:59] direction and I learned more than I ever
[03:01] could have learned anywhere else about
[03:03] the importance of psychological safety
[03:05] now this is a very full room so clearly
[03:09] you think it's a very important topic
[03:11] and I hope we live up to your
[03:13] expectations I also think you know a lot
[03:16] about psychological safety already
[03:18] because of the experiences that you've
[03:20] had the thinking that you've done
[03:22] perhaps actions that have been taken in
[03:24] your institutions so I want to start by
[03:27] having you talk amongst yourselves about
[03:30] what is the definition of psychological
[03:32] safety because one of the things we want
[03:34] to do danny and i today is to give you a
[03:37] couple models to think about but also to
[03:39] have a clearer picture of what that
[03:42] definition is because I think it's
[03:44] thrown around a lot and people don't
[03:45] necessarily aren't necessarily talking
[03:48] the same language and I want you to
[03:50] discuss what is your definition of
[03:53] psychological safety and we're going to
[03:55] have a fun way of sharing that at the
[03:57] end of about ten minutes so talk amongst
[04:00] yourselves
[04:12] great so thank you so much for your
[04:15] definitions and because no one has put
[04:19] in their names I may borrow one or more
[04:22] of them for the next time we give this
[04:24] talk as some of them were absolutely
[04:25] fantastic so we walked in here with a
[04:29] basic definition of psychological safety
[04:31] but you could read up there that there
[04:33] were clearly some themes so it's got to
[04:35] be something about a climate in which
[04:36] people are comfortable about being and
[04:38] expressing themselves it also has to be
[04:42] an inner belief that you're not going to
[04:44] be punished for what you are who you are
[04:47] or what you do so making mistakes is an
[04:51] OK things so long as it's something to
[04:53] be learned from and then knowing that
[04:56] others are going to have your back they
[04:58] may not agree with you they may not like
[05:00] what you said but they're not gonna hurt
[05:02] you so I want to punt it over to Danny
[05:05] who's gonna be talking about why this is
[05:07] so important right now especially in a
[05:09] university and college setting why do we
[05:12] care about this why does this matter
[05:13] first of all our current climate is
[05:16] begging us to talk about this climates
[05:19] like me too there's a heightened
[05:20] awareness for harassment these kinds of
[05:23] issues and there is more courage in our
[05:25] current climate the climate to call out
[05:28] the bad actors all right so this is an
[05:30] important issue that we need to discuss
[05:31] and bring up it's relevant for our times
[05:33] today secondly there's tons of research
[05:36] that shows that when there are unsafe
[05:38] environments it actually creates a lack
[05:41] of engagement which actually kills
[05:44] productivity which actually kills then
[05:46] profitability so when Tina and I were
[05:49] discussing this we thought ah
[05:50] profitability that's not a education
[05:52] question or this is in the right context
[05:55] however
[05:55] it is because our customers are students
[05:58] and when they don't feel safe in an
[06:01] environment of Education they don't come
[06:04] recent studies show that the u.s. loses
[06:06] about 300 billion dollars a year to a
[06:10] lack of engagement and so it's there's
[06:12] an ROI to this as well and then finally
[06:15] there is an upsurge in anxiety in a
[06:18] recent study by Duke University
[06:21] there were 6,000 university students who
[06:24] were surveyed
[06:25] they found almost 25% of the students
[06:28] were on some sort of anti-anxiety
[06:29] medication so there is already a
[06:32] heightened background of depression and
[06:35] anxiety whether it's real or not but
[06:37] this is a real thing that we need to
[06:38] address and they are entering into the
[06:41] workforce with a heightened sense of
[06:43] awareness right so this is why we need
[06:45] to create begin to think about
[06:46] psychological safety not only in the
[06:49] education sector but also as we think
[06:50] about sending them into the workforce
[06:52] after college this morning we're going
[06:54] to talk a little bit about the
[06:55] neurobiology of safety and there's three
[06:58] kind of components that we want to
[06:59] address first one is this the stressors
[07:01] that we experience in our lives the
[07:03] other piece is affiliation how stress
[07:07] impacts us within group context right we
[07:10] we don't live in isolation and so
[07:12] there's people sometimes can be the
[07:14] stressors right so we have cultures of
[07:16] stress potentially or things that get in
[07:19] the way of our ability to feel
[07:20] psychologically safe and then ultimately
[07:22] reactivity how we respond to those
[07:25] things within each other within
[07:27] ourselves individually we have certain
[07:29] propensity zin our biology that allow us
[07:31] for some of us to be more resilient and
[07:33] others of us that are more prone to
[07:36] being afraid or fearful and being pushed
[07:39] by these stressors and I want to tell
[07:41] you a story my wife and I we love to go
[07:45] camping anyone like to go camping one of
[07:47] our favorite places is Yosemite just
[07:49] right up north and we frequent our
[07:52] camping up there sometimes and a few
[07:54] years ago my wife and I we decided we go
[07:57] camping we spent all day hiking and you
[07:59] in that moment when you get in that late
[08:01] at night after you've made your dinner
[08:03] and the s'mores are done and in your
[08:05] stomach you just all you want to do is
[08:06] get in your sleeping bag alright so we
[08:09] achat for the night and my wife turns to
[08:10] me and she says Danny do you put all the
[08:13] food away because rule number one when
[08:16] you're camping you put the food away you
[08:19] put it in the bear boxes right I said
[08:21] absolutely absolutely cuz all I do is
[08:23] want to go to sleep I'm tired I'm
[08:25] exhausted and then an hour later kid you
[08:28] not I hear something and this is what
[08:32] was near us
[08:37] pretty intense right I hear some
[08:39] laughing wasn't laughing in that moment
[08:41] my wife was petrified and I sat there
[08:45] and she said are you sure we don't have
[08:47] any food I realized that I had left beef
[08:50] jerky in my hiking pants probably the
[08:53] worst thing you could possibly put in
[08:54] Evelyn could smell beef jerky especially
[08:56] a bear
[08:57] so I loved my car ran out threw my jerky
[09:01] pants into the car and ran back and she
[09:04] said did you see the bear I said no I
[09:05] didn't see the bear not looking out
[09:06] there with a flashlight next morning
[09:09] sure enough there was a bear our
[09:10] neighbors and their comfortable RV said
[09:12] yeah that's a bear right by our tent
[09:13] last night so thanks for helping us you
[09:15] know now I know go camping right what
[09:19] reaction did you get when you saw this
[09:21] image of the spare what did you feel
[09:25] fear what else
[09:28] right stress in this moment when we
[09:31] experience something as petrifying as
[09:34] this we have a biological response and
[09:38] now this default biological response is
[09:41] innate it's given to us because we need
[09:42] it sometimes right all fear and all
[09:45] stress isn't bad sometimes it's good
[09:47] what happens in our brain is that our
[09:50] Migdal up releases cortisol and
[09:52] epinephrine which actually increases
[09:55] your heart rate takes away blood from
[09:57] your digestive system I was not thinking
[09:59] about beef jerky in that moment right
[10:01] and it actually heightens our awareness
[10:03] so that we can respond either fight or
[10:05] flight right so I could either fought
[10:08] the bear or I very quickly fled from the
[10:11] bear right into my tent because that was
[10:13] my immediate response but what happens
[10:16] is that there is this background of
[10:19] stress and our culture right now right
[10:22] in our workplaces in education system a
[10:25] recent study shows that 60% of people
[10:27] are stressed by the current political
[10:29] climate I'm surprised that it's not more
[10:32] than that so they are walking into
[10:34] education systems already afraid so when
[10:38] a professor gives a bad grade to a
[10:40] student what happens you don't like me I
[10:42] don't feel safe I need to leave this
[10:44] classroom because I don't feel safe and
[10:46] actually hinders our ability to be able
[10:48] to engage and focus now I want to flip
[10:51] the script let's take a look at this
[10:53] photo what do you feel stress
[11:06] yeah but absolutely some of you feel
[11:12] stressed but some of you felt a sense of
[11:14] connection right a sense of awe that's
[11:16] so beautiful that's so cute only they
[11:18] always look like that right but in most
[11:21] times we feel that the opposite of
[11:23] stress responses when your amygdala
[11:25] releases cortisol epinephrine is the
[11:27] opposite we release oxytocin and
[11:31] oxytocin is actually found in high doses
[11:34] and mothers who are nursing their
[11:36] newborn child and those mothers who
[11:39] actually have a hard time bonding with
[11:40] their child actually are given increases
[11:43] of oxytocin to kind of stimulate their
[11:45] ability to connect with their child
[11:47] oxytocin actually increases our ability
[11:49] to feel good it increases our empathy
[11:52] with one another
[11:53] it increases pro-social behavior and so
[11:57] within the education context we actually
[11:59] see an increase in collaboration we see
[12:03] an increase in trust we see an increase
[12:06] in productivity which ultimately
[12:08] increases profitability whatever your
[12:10] metric for that is for us if you're in
[12:13] the faculty context and you're in a
[12:15] teaching context that increases learning
[12:17] that's the end product right we want the
[12:20] students to learn if you're an
[12:22] administration you want an environment
[12:24] where faculty are collaborating with one
[12:26] another and the staff are supporting
[12:28] those initiatives all right so we want
[12:31] to see higher levels of oxytocin and
[12:34] there's actually some interesting things
[12:36] on mirror neurons is these neurons that
[12:39] actually shows that when you are in a
[12:41] particular environment you begin to
[12:43] reflect those things in that environment
[12:46] right so if you are in a context where
[12:48] it feels psychologically unsafe you will
[12:51] begin to feel that way and you won't
[12:53] respond in that way now the positive
[12:55] side of neurons is that you can actually
[12:58] create environments of psychological
[13:00] safety
[13:00] you have the ability to change the way
[13:03] people respond there's some research
[13:05] that's done that when you clap for
[13:07] somebody they feel good there's oxytocin
[13:12] is being released and so how often do we
[13:15] get to clap for our students or for our
[13:16] faculty that's a positive reinforcer
[13:18] that can enhance psychological safety
[13:20] through the release of oxytocin I'm
[13:24] gonna provide our equation for
[13:27] psychological safety and then Tina's
[13:29] gonna talk about some of the elements
[13:30] the equation for psychological safety is
[13:33] leader culture and the individual all
[13:39] divided by self orientation when we have
[13:43] better developed leaders
[13:45] healthier cultures and we have
[13:48] individuals who are resilient and we
[13:51] have a lower sense of self orientation
[13:53] which is really your ego right when
[13:55] you're less concerned about protecting
[13:57] yourself within a culture and within a
[13:59] context we have the opportunity to raise
[14:02] a psychological safety I'm gonna focus
[14:06] first on leaders we've all heard the
[14:09] expression the tone is set at the top
[14:12] and it's very true there's a real
[14:15] paradox though if that's the right word
[14:18] in the academic setting because what
[14:21] kind of people get chosen to be leaders
[14:23] at the very top are they chosen because
[14:26] they've got great leadership skills or
[14:28] they chosen because they do fantastic
[14:30] research are they chosen because they
[14:33] have an academic brand that is well
[14:37] known so I'm seeing like lots of heads
[14:39] nodding the same thing happens in other
[14:41] sectors like like government where
[14:44] people are put in positions of authority
[14:48] for reasons that have nothing to do with
[14:50] their ability to really lead other
[14:52] people and I want to encourage you to be
[14:56] thinking in the academic setting about
[14:59] who are the leaders that's in toric we
[15:02] have the simplest definition possible
[15:05] leaders are people that elevate the
[15:07] performance of others anybody can be a
[15:10] leader it doesn't matter where you are
[15:12] in an org chart or where
[15:14] position is if you positively and
[15:17] sometimes negatively but if you
[15:19] influence individuals you are a leader
[15:23] which means that students in a class can
[15:26] be leaders the faculty at the front of
[15:29] the class is a leader and hopefully a
[15:31] mentor we'll talk a little bit more
[15:32] about that later and then you've got the
[15:35] administration of the of the university
[15:37] or the college they are also there the
[15:39] formal official leaders but everyone has
[15:42] an opportunity to be a leader now when
[15:44] we're looking for formal and official
[15:46] leaders we often are looking for very
[15:49] similar characteristics when you admire
[15:53] a leader what characteristics do they
[15:56] have I want you right now to imagine a
[16:00] leader somebody that you really admire
[16:02] it could have been someone from your
[16:04] childhood someone you've read about
[16:06] someone you've met someone that mentored
[16:07] you in your mind have you got a picture
[16:10] Kathy your current director one
[16:14] characteristic integrity great your
[16:18] pastor encouraging mm-hmm Gandhi and one
[16:27] characteristic compassion your choir
[16:31] teacher inclusive this is who came to
[16:36] mind for me when I asked myself the same
[16:38] question
[16:39] Nelson Mandela and indeed he's got some
[16:44] of the characteristics that were
[16:46] mentioned here today in the world of
[16:48] selection when organizations are
[16:51] selecting leaders do they tend to select
[16:54] them for integrity compassion
[16:57] inclusivity or do they tend to select
[17:02] them for other characteristics I do a
[17:05] lot of work in industry I do a lot of
[17:08] executive coaching and I find that the
[17:10] people who tend to get selected
[17:12] initially and or more quickly are the
[17:15] people who have charisma who look good
[17:19] in what they're wearing they actually
[17:21] tend to be taller which for a while I
[17:24] resented and then I just gave up on it I
[17:26] would say
[17:28] in many of the organizations private
[17:30] companies publicly traded companies that
[17:32] I work in right now a lot of them are
[17:35] men there's nothing wrong with men I
[17:37] have two sons they are wonderful human
[17:40] being
[17:41] adults and so I don't want to I this is
[17:44] not about men bashing it's not about
[17:46] bashing anybody were a psychologically
[17:48] safe group here the research shows that
[17:50] those are not the right leaders those
[17:52] are the people who I call the shiny
[17:53] pennies they're attractive they're
[17:55] charismatic they look right so we do a
[17:58] lot of work with the Hogan organization
[18:00] and they have found that there are
[18:02] rather than these charismatic shiny
[18:05] penny characteristics what are the most
[18:07] important characteristics of a leader
[18:08] you've already mentioned them one is
[18:11] integrity
[18:12] what does integrity mean you do it you
[18:18] say you're gonna do you give credit
[18:20] where credit is due
[18:21] you're consistent you have values doing
[18:26] the right things when no one's looking
[18:29] that's one of the characteristics
[18:31] another characteristic vision leaders
[18:34] are not leaders unless they have
[18:36] followers especially formal leaders so
[18:40] vision is incredibly important people
[18:41] need to feel some kind of inspiration
[18:45] for why they would follow that person so
[18:47] how does that play itself out in a
[18:49] university or in a classroom as a
[18:52] graduate student in Ohio I had a fear
[18:57] went of statistics and methodology I was
[19:00] horrible in math in high school I went
[19:03] to graduate school and I thought I'm not
[19:05] gonna get my master's degree I'm not
[19:07] because I have to take these for
[19:09] statistics and methodology classes I'm a
[19:11] failure it's gonna be horrible but what
[19:14] happened
[19:15] I had a statistics professor who was the
[19:19] son of a pastor so he taught like this
[19:21] because he learned his body language
[19:23] from his father and he had an image of
[19:27] how statistics could be practical and it
[19:30] could save people and it could solve
[19:32] problems and he inspired me to get
[19:35] beyond my fear of math and my I would
[19:39] say my biological incapability
[19:41] of doing math and I became a statistics
[19:45] and methodology minor people also have
[19:48] to have expertise so a leader needs to
[19:51] be very good and know what they're doing
[19:53] about something it doesn't even
[19:55] necessarily have to be about what you
[19:57] are looking at them for and finally a
[20:01] leader needs to be someone who wants to
[20:02] share themselves so being a mentor
[20:06] what does um what does it mean to be a
[20:08] mentor develops others elevates others
[20:11] by teaching them and modeling for them
[20:13] they give of themselves in the service
[20:15] of another they share their expertise
[20:18] you know when Danny first came to work
[20:20] with us it was okay Danny here are the
[20:23] models here is how we do things come
[20:25] with us when we go see a client we
[20:27] shared of ourselves there's a generosity
[20:30] about being a mentor and mentors helped
[20:33] to navigate the landscape that a person
[20:37] has to navigate they can either get
[20:39] impediments out of the way or they can
[20:41] try and help people with some political
[20:44] decisions and maneuvers that they have
[20:45] to make etc so those are the
[20:47] characteristics of a great leader but
[20:49] it's not just about the leader the
[20:51] leader whether they're in a club whether
[20:55] they're in a classroom whether they're
[20:57] the Provost of a university they are
[21:01] instrumental in creating a culture
[21:02] around them and we've got five
[21:05] components of culture that we that we
[21:07] look at the first is guiding values and
[21:09] behaviors and I wanna I wish I could put
[21:12] behaviors and capitals but I didn't do
[21:15] that because in that first organization
[21:18] that I taught you told you about the
[21:21] first value that they had in their list
[21:23] of values was integrity I also told you
[21:26] they were very willing to throw each
[21:27] other under the bus to save themselves
[21:29] that is non integrity so its values Plus
[21:32] what are the associated behaviors that
[21:35] you expect from each other that relate
[21:38] to those values and in the organizations
[21:40] that are really forward-thinking right
[21:42] now they're actually putting as part of
[21:44] their performance assessment those
[21:47] behaviors because they want to ensure
[21:50] that they're reinforced it's not just
[21:52] about values and be
[21:54] Havers is also about having clear
[21:55] pragmatic policies so if you think about
[21:58] psychological safety there needs to be a
[22:01] container in which a person knows that
[22:05] there's somewhere that they can go if
[22:06] they feel unsafe in some way whether
[22:09] it's psychological safety physical
[22:11] safety etc there needs to be focused
[22:14] skill building one of the things that
[22:16] I've noticed in industry and I'm also on
[22:20] the board of advisors for the u-s-d-a
[22:24] School of Engineering one of the things
[22:26] I've noticed about students is there's
[22:29] been a decrease in their ability to have
[22:33] contact 'fl skillful conversations lots
[22:38] of people say things they don't mean
[22:41] harm but they don't know better so part
[22:45] of it is building the skill about
[22:47] understanding each other about
[22:49] developing empathy about developing
[22:51] emotional intelligence and part of it is
[22:54] building the skill of being able to have
[22:56] the conversation so if someone says
[22:59] something to me that I feel is that
[23:02] makes me uncomfortable it behooves me to
[23:07] say something about it how many of us
[23:10] innocently ask questions not realizing
[23:14] that we might be making the other person
[23:16] feel uncomfortable there needs to be
[23:19] collective and individual responsibility
[23:21] so not only does the institution and the
[23:24] leaders in the institution the leaders
[23:26] in the classroom need to take action if
[23:29] they see something that is creating a an
[23:32] environment that is not safe but so does
[23:35] the individual need to step up the
[23:37] individual student who feels
[23:39] uncomfortable because somebody else had
[23:41] something said to them that was
[23:42] uncomfortable it's very important to
[23:44] have somebody who understands human
[23:46] dynamics policies and how to train
[23:48] people at the leadership table in the
[23:52] institutions that were organizations
[23:54] that we work in we really try to have an
[23:56] HR leader at the table helping the rest
[23:59] of the leaders understand what's
[24:00] necessary so we've talked about leaders
[24:02] we've talked about culture and now I
[24:04] want to talk about the individual how
[24:05] many of you were
[24:07] to the picture on your left so a few
[24:09] people in the room how many people
[24:11] relate to the picture on the right and
[24:14] some people relate to another picture
[24:17] that's not up there the bear yeah the
[24:22] bear the baby whatever all of us are
[24:26] born with a biology where were more or
[24:28] less sensitive to the stimuli around us
[24:31] and that's something that's very
[24:33] important keep in mind as we wonder why
[24:36] someone's having a much stronger or
[24:38] weaker reaction than we are so I've
[24:42] talked about the difference in
[24:44] reactivity that's biological we all can
[24:46] create coping mechanisms we'll talk a
[24:48] little bit about that and in fact
[24:50] Danny's going to talk next about
[24:51] resilience so how would you define
[24:53] resilience good be able to bend and not
[24:57] break kind of when there's challenges or
[24:59] there's this toughness that we have yeah
[25:02] maybe one more yeah ah yeah yeah we're
[25:07] gonna talk a moment we'll talk about
[25:09] that but the ability to see adversity as
[25:11] a learning opportunity not just
[25:14] detriment right - to who you are or to
[25:17] what your learning opportunity is so
[25:18] we're going to talk a little bit about
[25:19] individual resilience and I'm going to
[25:21] share five different components and what
[25:23] we can do a little bit about that so
[25:25] number one is fear we have to address
[25:27] fear and sometimes fear is not just the
[25:32] thing in the moment but actually might
[25:33] be tied in with some of your past all
[25:36] right it could have been you watch the
[25:38] news the morning before you go to work
[25:40] and you come into work fearful and then
[25:42] you have a bad performance evaluation
[25:44] and maybe it might be tied to that so we
[25:46] have to be cognizant of what are the
[25:48] real fears that we face and are we
[25:50] dealing with some of the fears that we
[25:52] have that are unconscious in our in our
[25:54] systems next is this EQ emotional
[25:57] quotient or emotional intelligence it is
[26:00] extremely helpful to build resilience
[26:02] when we understand our own emotions and
[26:04] the impact that we have on other
[26:07] people's emotions so understanding how
[26:09] we might impact people's triggers for
[26:14] stress and how we can defuse some of
[26:16] that being able to pay attention to
[26:18] people's body language and
[26:20] tonality and how we can be able to
[26:23] foster high levels if the emotional
[26:26] safety the other thing is this stress
[26:28] there's all sorts of stress that we
[26:30] experience both in the moment and as a
[26:32] long-term so the question that I want to
[26:34] invite you to consider is what are you
[26:37] doing to cope with stress that is both
[26:39] long term and short term so long term it
[26:43] might be taking up practices such as
[26:45] meditation or yoga became becoming more
[26:48] centered with yourself and thinking
[26:50] about how can I deal with stress on a
[26:52] larger level and the other part of it is
[26:55] in the moment stress so when you're in a
[26:57] meeting back-to-back meetings maybe
[26:59] you're going into this next student
[27:01] teaching session and you have the
[27:03] stressful moment what do you do to cope
[27:05] with that stress do you take five
[27:08] breaths and breathe you go for a walk
[27:11] outside do you make sure you tend to all
[27:14] your biological needs eat some food for
[27:17] example right oftentimes we can get so
[27:19] crazy busy and that we don't even know
[27:22] that we're actually adding intent other
[27:24] kinds of stress so we go in charged to
[27:28] certain readings and that can cause a
[27:29] sense of lowering psychological safety
[27:32] well-being well-being is more than just
[27:35] emotional or psychological well-being
[27:38] which we've talked about consider
[27:39] financial well-being right if you're
[27:41] feeling like stress about your paycheck
[27:43] and your finances that can add to the
[27:46] sense of lowering your resilience and
[27:48] also coming in with a more of a charged
[27:50] experience into certain situations so
[27:52] think about well-being holistically
[27:54] financially socially mentally
[27:56] emotionally physically how do you feel
[27:59] are you taking care of your body in that
[28:00] way and then finally connection social
[28:04] connection really is the piece that
[28:06] we're talking about here there's plenty
[28:08] of research to show that when we have
[28:10] tight-knit social connections it
[28:12] actually enhances our longevity our
[28:14] health our ability to create and
[28:16] collaborate and remember what we talked
[28:18] about earlier oxytocin right so when you
[28:21] have a stressful day then you go spend
[28:22] some time with some close friends or
[28:24] family you have the ability to recharge
[28:26] and take away some of that cortisol
[28:28] that's still within your body
[28:30] I came to relax
[28:32] but most importantly if I want to talk a
[28:33] little bit about mindset what do you
[28:35] think mindset might mean yes yes the way
[28:43] we like to describe it it's like a
[28:45] picture frame what picture frame or I'm
[28:48] a videographer as well what lens are you
[28:51] putting in front of that camera it's
[28:53] going to change your experience of that
[28:55] perspective so if you have a challenging
[28:57] perspective ma'am as you said do I see
[28:59] it as something that's hard that I'm
[29:01] gonna fail at that's going to show be a
[29:03] detriment on my character or is it an
[29:05] opportunity to enhance my learning to
[29:08] actually know that this is for my good
[29:10] no pain no gain right so that mindset is
[29:14] very positive but we have to change even
[29:17] Tina and I were prepping for this talk
[29:18] yesterday and we both had to look at
[29:20] ourselves and say we will have fun
[29:21] because there's a lot going on but we
[29:24] need to change our mindset right because
[29:26] we could either look at this moment that
[29:28] we get to spend some time with you as
[29:29] something in our day that we have to
[29:31] drive up from San Diego for and it's a
[29:33] patron you know or we could say man this
[29:35] is an opportunity for us to interact
[29:36] with colleagues in different industries
[29:38] and really get to share some of our
[29:39] experience and share with one another so
[29:42] we had to change our mindset hopefully
[29:45] lowering our stress levels so just to
[29:48] recap psychological safety is enhanced
[29:51] when we have high capacity leaders the
[29:55] right kinds of leaders high Integris
[29:57] leaders we've got cultures that support
[30:00] these kinds of leaders right we also
[30:03] have policies in place and then finally
[30:05] we have individual both their their
[30:08] capacities their individual biological
[30:11] capacities and some skills we need to
[30:13] build whether that's coping mechanisms
[30:16] of stress thinking about your well-being
[30:18] thinking about your social connection
[30:20] these are incredibly important to
[30:21] raising an elevating psychological
[30:23] safety all of this is divided by self
[30:26] orientation so self orientation is when
[30:30] the ego gets in the way and what do I
[30:33] mean by that is that when we have
[30:36] heightened levels of stress we actually
[30:39] come in with the perspective of
[30:40] self-preservation and self protective
[30:44] behavior that can sometimes come at the
[30:47] cost of throwing other people under the
[30:49] bus when that happens your
[30:51] self-orientation is skyrocketing because
[30:55] it's about you the opposite of that is
[30:57] when self-orientation is lower we
[31:00] actually enhance our empathy and we have
[31:03] a greater opportunity to actually see
[31:06] people through their own lens through
[31:10] their own perspective think about a
[31:12] culture that says I see where you're
[31:14] coming from I want to understand where
[31:16] you're coming from that lower self
[31:18] orientation and as a whole
[31:20] increases psychological safety I'm gonna
[31:24] invite you one less time to pull out
[31:27] your phones and this is gonna be for
[31:28] everybody which element do you believe
[31:30] is a strength of your organization
[31:33] excellent so what are we seeing here
[31:36] that's it what do we see is a strength
[31:40] within this group culture when for those
[31:45] of you who texted in culture what did
[31:47] you what were you thinking
[31:49] collaborative yeah collaboration people
[31:51] are working together shared values yeah
[31:55] we're not gonna do something that
[31:56] doesn't align yes sir yeah so even if
[32:00] people come and go or whatever there's a
[32:02] healthy culture that stays intact yeah
[32:06] freedom to take risk yeah sounds like
[32:09] psychological safety right when I know
[32:11] that I'm gonna share my idea and I'm not
[32:13] gonna be reprimanded or I'm gonna be
[32:15] judged or I'm gonna be thrown under the
[32:17] bus okay
[32:18] so Tina's gonna wrap it up so far we've
[32:20] been doing the kind of the feel-good
[32:22] about psychological safety but there is
[32:24] a dark side whenever you take action
[32:28] there is a reaction and sometimes there
[32:32] are reactions that you want and
[32:34] sometimes there are unintended
[32:36] consequences there are three unintended
[32:39] consequences that I have seen play
[32:40] themselves out in the psychological
[32:43] safety space the first is a cult of
[32:45] victimhood I used to do a lot of work in
[32:47] prisons and there were people who are
[32:49] going woe is me I came I have this
[32:52] particular
[32:54] background my parents were particularly
[32:57] like this and blah-blah-blah-blah-blah
[32:59] totally disempowered themselves or were
[33:03] totally disempowered other people with
[33:05] exactly the same background I was
[33:07] interviewing who were executives and
[33:09] organizations and so what they focus on
[33:13] things like microaggressions the
[33:16] unintended consequence is that people
[33:19] start to think of themselves as stuff
[33:20] happening to them they don't think about
[33:22] well what can I do about it they think
[33:24] who do I go to to help me do I go to the
[33:30] CEO do I go to HR do I go to my pastor
[33:34] there's nothing wrong with any of these
[33:36] but if the person is starting to feel
[33:38] like a victim like all these things have
[33:41] happened to me I think that is doing a
[33:44] disservice it's how do we empower people
[33:46] to take care of themselves when these
[33:48] situations arise because there's always
[33:51] going to be bad actors and they're not
[33:53] all white people and they're not all old
[33:55] people think about how do we dis empower
[33:58] ourselves
[33:59] the other is weaponization I can only
[34:02] give you one example that I know
[34:03] psychological safety was used as a
[34:05] weapon was that a summer camp there was
[34:08] a young girl about 12 years old who was
[34:10] misbehaving in an extreme way a male
[34:13] counselor went up to her and said if you
[34:15] don't stop doing what you're doing I'm
[34:16] going to have to take you to the camp
[34:18] director she looked at him and she said
[34:21] to him if you tell me what to do one
[34:24] more time I'm gonna go to the camp
[34:26] director and I'm gonna tell him that you
[34:27] touched my private parts and she meant
[34:30] it and so that's something that we
[34:32] really have to be very careful about
[34:34] and finally identity politics in trying
[34:37] to protect people and keep them
[34:38] psychologically safe we run the danger
[34:41] of not looking at them as an individual
[34:43] but looking at them as a member of a
[34:46] group you know it a woman a young woman
[34:49] an older woman a black male an Asian
[34:53] person like I've just done some work in
[34:56] a gaming organization and in that gaming
[34:59] organization somebody told me a story
[35:01] that I couldn't believe she just said
[35:04] like everybody is focusing on
[35:06] Who I am and then I'm a woman and
[35:09] they're stepping on glass that they
[35:12] don't want to break and finally I
[35:15] wouldn't have done what she did but she
[35:16] went in and she said to leave she went
[35:19] into a board meeting she said the
[35:21] vaginas in the room I would not have
[35:23] done that I can't believe I just said
[35:25] that in public but she just couldn't
[35:27] send everyone was so careful with her
[35:29] that they actually weren't in contact
[35:32] with her and she didn't know what to do
[35:34] to break it other than to be completely
[35:35] outrageous now we think that
[35:37] psychological safety it's in the air
[35:39] it's this new thing we've got this new
[35:41] awareness we're finally evolved as human
[35:45] beings to the point where we can see it
[35:47] I personally believe nothing's new
[35:50] Danny's heard me say this nothing is new
[35:52] the first quote that I found about
[35:55] psychological safety although they
[35:57] didn't call it that was from Hillel who
[36:00] lived between 110 BC and 10 ad that's a
[36:04] long time ago that which is hateful to
[36:07] do do not do to your fellow do not judge
[36:11] your friend until you have stood in his
[36:13] place
[36:14] so the message going forward that we
[36:18] hope that you take is that number one
[36:22] empower empower yourselves empower the
[36:25] people around you to take care of
[36:27] themselves to empathy try to step in
[36:32] their shoes and see what the world looks
[36:33] like from their point of view and that
[36:36] could also be the person who said the
[36:37] thing that makes someone feel
[36:38] psychologically unsafe and three take
[36:43] responsibility take action and take
[36:46] action immediately
[36:48] thank you
[36:53] [Applause]
[36:55] [Music]
[36:58] you
[37:00] [Music]