Psychological safety, a term coined by Amy Edmondson, refers to an environment where individuals feel safe to take interpersonal risks, such as speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. In the realm of process improvement, fostering psychological safety is paramount, as it encourages creativity, collaboration, and continuous improvement.

In my Shingo Award winning book, Avoiding The Continuous Appearance Trap: 12 Questions to Understand What’s Truly Underneath Your Culture, I contrasts the cultures of two companies I worked for and, though each started with similar lean models and visions, one was mechanistic and only gave the appearance of lean, while the other developed an actual culture of continuous improvement. In the book, I discuss my experience at one of the companies, which I call “Company Company Continuous Improvement,” as one that had high psychological safety. While my experience at the other company, which I call “Company Continuous Appearance,” was one where psychological safety did NOT exist. Below are five characteristics I experienced while working with “Company Continuous Appearance…”

Five Characteristics of a Company Lacking Psychological Safety

1. Fear of Speaking Up: At Company Continuous Appearance, Employees were reluctant to voice their opinions, ideas, or concerns due to fear of retribution or ridicule. This led to a lack of innovation and missed opportunities for improvement.
2. Blame Culture: When mistakes occurred at Company Continuous Appearance, the focus was on finding and punishing the person responsible rather than understanding the root cause. This discouraged risk-taking and stifled learning and development.
3. Low Engagement and Morale: At Company Continuous Appearance, employees showed low levels of engagement and enthusiasm. High absenteeism and turnover rates often accompanied this, as workers felt undervalued and unmotivated.
4. Lack of Collaboration: Teams operate in silos at Company Continuous Appearance, and there was minimal cross-functional collaboration. This isolation hindered the flow of information and reduced the efficiency of process improvements.
5. Micromanagement: Leaders at Company Continuous Appearance excessively controlled and monitored employees, leaving little room for autonomy. This undermined trust and reduced employees’ confidence in their abilities.

Three Actions Displayed by Leaders at Company Continuous Improvement that Promoted Positive Psychological Safety

1. Encourage Open Communication: Leaders at Company Continuous Improvement fostered an open-door policy where employees felt comfortable sharing their thoughts and concerns. Regularly scheduled meetings, suggestion systems, and anonymous feedback channels helped facilitate this. By actively listening and responding to feedback, leaders showed that they valued and respected their employees’ contributions.
2. Focus on Learning, Not Blame: When mistakes happened at Company Continuous Improvement, leaders adopted a learning-oriented approach rather than a punitive one. Conducting blameless post-mortems and emphasizing the lessons learned helped to create an environment where employees felt safe to take risks and innovate.
3. Empower and Trust Employees: Leaders at Company Continuous Improvement, delegated responsibilities and trusted employees to make decisions. Providing support and resources while avoiding micromanagement empowered employees, built their confidence, and fostered a sense of ownership and accountability.

---

Psychological safety is crucial for fostering a culture of continuous improvement. By recognizing and addressing the characteristics of an unsafe environment and taking concrete actions to promote psychological safety, leaders can create a workplace where employees feel valued, empowered, and motivated to contribute to process improvements. This not only enhances the overall performance of the organization but also cultivates a positive and innovative work culture.

Be like Company Continuous Improvement, not like Company Continuous Appearance.