Latest / Safe As Podcast / E37: Psychological Safety - what is it good for? A meta-analysis of research

Transcript

E37: Psychological Safety - what is it good for? A meta-analysis of research · Safe As Podcast

• 0:07
  Are you creating a workplace where ideas flourish or where
• 0:11
  silence rule? What role does psychological
• 0:14
  safety play according to the research?
• 0:17
  Let's find out. Good day everyone.
• 0:20
  I'm Ben Hutchinson and this is Safe as a podcast dedicated to
• 0:24
  the thrifty analysis of safety, risk and performance research.
• 0:29
  Visit safetyinsights.org for more research.
• 0:32
  A discussion today is based on a comprehensive meta analysis
• 0:36
  titled Psychological Safety, a Meta Analytic Review and
• 0:40
  Extension by Frasier ET al 2017, published in Personnel
• 0:46
  Psychology. So a systematic meta analysis is
• 0:49
  a massive synthesis of findings from dozens of studies.
• 0:54
  This particular study involved over 22,000 individuals, nearly
• 0:58
  5000 groups, which have been pulled together from all
• 1:01
  different studies and then analysed as one big sample.
• 1:04
  This gives us a really robust, big picture view of
• 1:07
  psychological safety's role in the workplace.
• 1:10
  Now, it's from 2017, so it's missing a lot of newer research,
• 1:16
  but what I like about this is that it's a meta analysis rather
• 1:20
  than simply a systematic review. So there's newer systematic
• 1:23
  reviews. So what's good about this is
• 1:26
  it's collectively evaluating the effects of psychological safety
• 1:30
  more than just discussing the individual studies or just
• 1:33
  general trends from the research.
• 1:35
  But if there's enough interest, I can cover some of the newer
• 1:38
  systematic reviews in another pod.
• 1:41
  What is psychological safety? So let's start with the basics
• 1:46
  at It's hard. It's the belief that your
• 1:48
  workplace environment is safe for interpersonal risk taking.
• 1:52
  Imagine feeling completely comfortable to voice a new idea,
• 1:55
  or ask a dumb question, admit a mistake, or even challenge the
• 1:59
  status quo. All without that nagging fear.
• 2:02
  Fear that you'll be embarrassed, put down, punished, or that'll
• 2:07
  damage yourself, image or status or career.
• 2:11
  That's psychological safety in action.
• 2:13
  But importantly, don't confuse psychological safety with voice,
• 2:17
  behaviour or speaking up. It goes well beyond voice, and
• 2:22
  it's distinct from other concepts like psychological
• 2:25
  empowerment or work engagement. While those focus on personal
• 2:29
  jobs or tasks, psychological safety is more about your
• 2:33
  perception of the broader social environments, how others,
• 2:36
  especially your colleagues and leaders, will react when you
• 2:39
  step out on a limb. It's also different from general
• 2:42
  trust. While trust is about being
• 2:45
  vulnerable to other's actions, psychological safety emphasises
• 2:49
  the belief that others will extend the benefit of the doubt
• 2:52
  when you take those interpersonal risks.
• 2:54
  Essentially, it's about minimising the perceived risk of
• 2:57
  speaking up or interpersonal risk taking or even trying
• 3:01
  something new. What influences psychological
• 3:04
  safety? So we'll dive into some of the
• 3:06
  factors that allow it to thrive, starting at the individual
• 3:09
  level. So research confirmed that
• 3:12
  certain personality traits play a role.
• 3:16
  If you have a proactive personality, meaning you take
• 3:18
  initiative to create change and solve problems, you're more
• 3:22
  likely to feel psychologically safe.
• 3:25
  Emotional stability and a learning orientation, which is a
• 3:28
  focus on growing competence in new skills.
• 3:31
  We're also positively connected. Interestingly, being open to new
• 3:35
  experiences didn't show a significant statistical link in
• 3:38
  this analysis. However, the findings clearly
• 3:42
  suggest that external factors tend to be more powerful drivers
• 3:46
  than individual personality. Positive leader relations emerge
• 3:50
  as a particularly influential factor.
• 3:53
  The quality of your relationships with your leader
• 3:55
  or boss sends strong signals about support and consistent
• 3:59
  behaviour, which are crucial for feeling safe.
• 4:03
  This includes various leadership styles like transformational
• 4:06
  leadership and simply trusting your leader.
• 4:09
  But beyond leaders, how work is designed also plays a
• 4:12
  significant role. Autonomy, where employees have
• 4:16
  freedom, decision making and interdependence, where
• 4:19
  colleagues rely on each other to get tasks done.
• 4:22
  Both positively shape psychological safety.
• 4:25
  So role clarity, knowing exactly what's expected of you, is also
• 4:29
  important. And of course, a supportive work
• 4:31
  context, receiving support from peers and the organisation as a
• 4:35
  whole were strongly linked. Importantly, when the analysis
• 4:39
  shifted to the group level, the patterns were remarkably
• 4:42
  consistent. While there were fewer studies
• 4:44
  focused solely on groups, the same factors emerged.
• 4:48
  Learning orientation, positive leader relations, autonomy,
• 4:51
  etcetera. They all fostered higher levels
• 4:54
  of group psychological safety. This suggests that their recipe
• 4:58
  for safety is pretty similar, whether we're talking about one
• 5:01
  person or a whole team. What are the outcomes of
• 5:04
  psychological safety? What does it matter?
• 5:07
  There's a whole range of different observed positive
• 5:10
  effects from psychological safety, for instance, work
• 5:14
  engagement, where people feel safe they're more likely to
• 5:17
  invest their full physical, cognitive and emotional energy
• 5:20
  into their roles. Or task performance, where
• 5:23
  individuals and groups perform better when they're not
• 5:25
  constantly worrying about making mistakes.
• 5:28
  They're also more conducive to information sharing around
• 5:31
  groups and collaborating. Citizenship behaviours, where
• 5:35
  discretionary actions help the organisation function smoothly
• 5:38
  and inclusive Voice behaviour, where employee feels safe enough
• 5:42
  to offer suggestions or challenge the status quo.
• 5:45
  It's linked to creativity and learning, so it can help fuel
• 5:49
  the generation of new ideas and helps people overcome the fear
• 5:52
  of failure, which is essential for genuine development and
• 5:56
  learning. It's also linked to a few other
• 5:58
  things which I'm skipping, but the strong links to information
• 6:01
  sharing and learning are especially crucial in today's
• 6:04
  fast paced, dynamic workplaces. There's also some other
• 6:08
  extensions and nuances based on this analysis of the research.
• 6:10
  So it has its own incremental validity.
• 6:13
  So the impact that psychological has isn't just a byproduct of
• 6:17
  other good things. It offers unique explanatory
• 6:20
  power for both task performance and organisational citizenship
• 6:23
  behaviours, even when accounting for other known predictors like
• 6:27
  positive lead relations. It's also been LinkedIn some
• 6:30
  work around national culture, specifically one part around
• 6:34
  uncertainty avoidance. This refers to how much a
• 6:37
  society is threatened by or tolerance is uncertainty, since
• 6:41
  mere analysis found that in high uncertainty avoidance cultures
• 6:45
  where risk taking is less common.
• 6:48
  Personality traits, work design, and a supportive work context
• 6:53
  had an even stronger effect on psychological safety.
• 6:56
  Conversely, positive leader relations had a weaker effect in
• 7:00
  these cultures. So crucially, the impact of
• 7:03
  psychological safety on work outcomes like engagement or
• 7:06
  performance and learning was stronger in high uncertainty
• 7:10
  avoidance cultures, suggesting that in cultural contexts where
• 7:15
  interpersonal risks taking isn't the norm, fostering
• 7:18
  psychological safety becomes even more critical for achieving
• 7:21
  positive outcomes. It does this by acting as a
• 7:24
  powerful buffer against cultural tendencies to avoid uncertainty.
• 7:28
  So what are some key takeaways? Conclusions.
• 7:30
  So obviously I've skipped a lot. This was a large matter
• 7:33
  analysis. But some things we can take away
• 7:35
  are that psychological safety is a robust and highly influential
• 7:39
  factor, both the individual and group levels.
• 7:43
  And we probably have more reason to believe it acts even more
• 7:46
  powerfully at the group levels, even though there's technically
• 7:49
  less overall evidence, at least as of this publication date.
• 7:53
  It's diverse network of antecedents and positive
• 7:55
  outcomes, including enhanced learning and engagement,
• 7:59
  performance, information sharing, creativity and job
• 8:02
  satisfaction solidify It's statistically significant and
• 8:06
  practical contributions to how workplaces function.
• 8:10
  So for organisations, we really should be trying to invest in
• 8:13
  nurturing psychological safety, cultivating open supportive
• 8:18
  environments that encourage interpersonal risk taking,
• 8:21
  design work that promotes autonomy and interdependence,
• 8:25
  giving employees control and fostering reliance on each
• 8:28
  other. While this study significantly
• 8:29
  advances some parts of our understanding, it also
• 8:32
  highlights ongoing research needs and things that we really
• 8:35
  do need to research more. As one point, psychological
• 8:39
  safety isn't all rainbows and butterflies.
• 8:42
  Some other research has actually suggested there's some
• 8:45
  unintended byproducts of psychological safety, Like for
• 8:48
  instance, higher psychological safety may actually increase
• 8:52
  unethical behaviours in certain times.
• 8:55
  Maybe I'll cover some of that critical research in future pods
• 8:58
  if there's enough interest. In any case, there's some
• 9:01
  limitations in this manner analysis like smaller sample
• 9:05
  sizes often prevented a really more rigorous analytical
• 9:09
  examination of the data. Very few studies as of this meta
• 9:13
  analysis remember 2017. Very few studies have examined
• 9:16
  how group level psychological safety is affected by group
• 9:20
  factors. And there's a few other
• 9:22
  limitations like being cross sectional in nature rather than
• 9:26
  longitudinal or randomised controlled trials.
• 9:29
  There was common method bias and a few other things.
• 9:34
  That's it on Safe As I'm Ben Hutchinson.
• 9:37
  Please help share, rate and review, and check out
• 9:40
  safetyinsightsorg for more research.
• 9:43
  Finally, feel free to support Safe As by shouting a coffee
• 9:47
  link in the show notes.