start from 7:30, there are 3 things you can do to build a psychologically safe workplace: 1. frame the work as learning problem, not an execution problem. 2. acknowledge your own fallibility. 3. model curiosity.
Adding the note: 1a. Recognize there are enormous uncertainty and inter-dependability 2a. Say simple thing like "i may miss something i need to hear from you" 3a. Ask a lot of questions
Key message for companies wanting to become more innovative just by acquiring technology and teaching people innovation methods like Design Thinking or Design Sprints, Scrum or Agile. It is about the people! how we work together, how we collaborate. No tool, no method is going to save a company if the interpersonal dynamics are not taken care.
you knew everything mam! Your idea of psychological safety came out of nowhere as you said. i guess it never really existed until you found it. damn, you are brilliant and humble too.
I'm writing a paper on PS within teams right now and I loved to hear you speak about this topic since your 1999 paper is the base of it all! You give very clear and straightforward explanations so thank you!
anxiety zone!!a perfect description of my last full-time job. >.< I was so afraid to ask _anything_ that I tried to solve all problems by myself, so I kept failing every day, from minor to major things. more reprimands made me even more anxious to the point of tremors and heart palpitations.( thanks to the cosmos for the invention of freelance online jobs. no more office wars. x)
thanks for sharing this brave Olga - so many of us have lived this to varying degrees in the workplace. There are benefits to the gig economy for sure.
I especially like the relative simplicity of the concept of psychological safety. To me, it is an essential component that I would look for in a team culture (as an individual member). However looking at it from the vantage point of a leader: unless each (or let's say almost all of them) fully embrace both growth mindset as well as openness / vulnerability - it may be hard to fully implement a culture where people ask questions without hesitation. I do realize the role of the leader in modeling both of these behaviors - there may still be individual resistance perhaps due to learned habits from past experiences.
Sure, there might still be some hesitation from the team member. The goal as a leader is to keep asking these questions and keep building a comfortable environment till people truly and are eager to speak up. We can always unlearn what we've learnt before.
Yes, true. And it’s not just modeling good behavior; it’s also eliciting input and, above all, _not_ humiliating or sharply criticizing people personally for sharing ideas, asking questions, admitting mistakes, raising concerns.
Nowadays, the word "Psychological Safety" is becoming buzz word in field of HR, in Japanese companies. This word seems to be understood as the key word for "Comfort Zone", as it has been introduced as the countermeasures of "Harassment" here in Japan. However, "Psychological Safety" is the key word for "Learning Zone". --- Better teams make more mistakes. Workplace where "Psychological Safety" is secured, people feel that it is OK to speak up with concerns, questions, and mistakes. "Psychological Safety" is the keyword to make both team and members grow under circumstances with complexity and independence. With a lot of thanks to this video, I will do my best to spread her message right in Japanese companies.
I am excited to come across Amy's work as this is essential to our work on the Risky Business of Bad Bossing and creating psychological safety in Agile Teams.
Hi Debra I'm currently looking into the agile "factors" that may affect psychological safety. Did you come across any relevant research on this? It seems agile focuses on trust, but the psychological safety is up to each team on their own. Any thoughts on that?
Excellent! Amy Edmondson is one of the greatest researcher for leadership and teaming of our time. Her proximity to practice and their clear, direct and concise messages are fascinating. So leadership development works. Amy Edmondson´s research plays a major role in our training courses for executives.
"I thought about the need for coordination between physicians and nurses, I thought about the need for teamwork on the fly for speaking up, for double checking." I'd like to add one. I THOUGHT ABOUT THE NEED FOR SPEED!!!!
4a) Why did the nurse not call? 4b) Why did the pilot not speak up ? 4c) Why did the executive not say anything? 4d) What are 3 things you can do to build a psychologically safe workplace? 4e) What is your favorite statement from this video? Something the presenter said. what are the answers of these questions
Excellent presentation and full of thought provoking ideas and approaches to bring teams together and leverage the collective. Curiosity needs balance with humbleness. I would add the dimension of humility so that as questions are asked, they are framed in a desire to seek and understand and not to catch and hold accountable, in the moment.
An amazing and very logical presentation, thank you! I think the first thing we always have problems working through in a team, is the management's ego, and their constant phase of denial, and also how they tend to band together to protect one another. These problems need to be broken down first and foremost, before we can move into the phase of open discussion. Any suggestions on how to break those barriers down?
This is a great concept, but we need to take it all the way to the natural conclusion. Under capitalism, your survival depends on your job, a truth that will always undermine boldness. Talk about the psychological safety of people whose survival is divorced from their productivity and be brave enough to voice that the outcome would be better, not worse, for all of us.
The challenge is to build an environment where people feel more worried about losing their job because of not adding enough to their colleagues - by remaining silent too much. I know it's easier said than done, but the rewards are immense.
Boldness can be undermined by a desire to keep a job for many, especially with dependent family members, but there is a line how much are people willing to suffer for a job. I think a work environment that doesnt nourish at least a bit of boldness is soon boring, unengaging and not fulfilling. We dont thrive in such work and many choose to move on. Edmondson's agenda is that stimulating approaches can be taught and encouraged - I love at least the idea ...
The most important thing is psychology. There should be a psychologically safe place to reduce stress and improve skills. Our subconscious defines the reasoning, thinking and talking to people.
Can I ask a silly question? What happened in the cases of the nurse, the co-pilot and the junior executive? It would be nice to know, so that it can aid in highlighting the catastrophic consequences of not having psychological safety.
The nurse type is situation is described in the data she showed here, in full detail, in her 1996 paper in JPSP “Learning from mistakes is easier said than done.” The type of executive situation is described in her 1999 paper in ASQ “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.” They examples in the talk might be prototypes and are not explicitly addressed in those papers. But you can imagine that what happened is nothing-and that’s the tragedy. No one learned. No team improved. Performance suffered both now and in the future.
If there is no trust employees will not feel safe to express the problems facing them in their jobs this can only reinforce an organisation that is ineffective and inefficient where there is no creative solutions to problems
Teams might be more willing to talk about their mistakes... but I also wonder if a person had to take full responsibility because they were not in a team, would they not also double check a little more often that they did it right? Maybe somehow in a team setting people get a false sense of security that they're doing it right.
I have a question about the term "better teams". in the aspect of the Hospital , does it mean they are better doctors and nurses based on where they graduated or something else. because if they are "better teams" why did they do more mistakes?
Wonderful presentation for anyone who works on a team striving for excellence. Have you compared your model for psychological safety and accountability to Daloz's model of challenge and support? Some neat parallels between the two of them. Thank you!
You would think that there is a standard assessment for medical error, rather than relying on self-reporting? Actual errors would answer this question definitivr
It's clear that a former employer either never watched Amy's video on Psychological Management or after viewing it, got so defensive and angry because they are the antithesis of this management style, they fired every employee who viewed it. Why? Because the truth of their bullying, ant-worker mentality was much too real to bear.
Its funny how she apparently is an authority on this issue, lol. An issue that was examined when I was in college in the late seventies and early eighties. There's nothing new under the sun, in my opinion.
Nice, but unrealistic and naive. The biggest obstacle to communication is self-interested individuals in HR and Management are not your friends. Your own honesty/feedback is an opportunity for other interests to label you a potential "scapegoat" when things aren't going according to plan. The workplace is a competitive place and this type of cooperation can't be implemented in a hierarchical environment. The culture of companies has to change.
She has published dozens of papers studying real teams in myriad real companies - teams that succeed and teams that fail. This is no ivory tower nonsense. It’s real. She’s one of the sharpest and most practical academics I’ve ever met.
The risk of being labelled a "scapegoat" is exactly what prompts the need to create psychological safety where mistakes are appreciated and people take risks and speak up. And their contribution is appreciated acknowledged as opposed to becoming the scapegoat
I see this at the same time I'm reading White Fragility by Robin Diangelo. I'm curious if they are as opposite as they seem, or perhaps there is another distinction I'm missing.
start from 7:30, there are 3 things you can do to build a psychologically safe workplace:
1. frame the work as learning problem, not an execution problem.
2. acknowledge your own fallibility.
3. model curiosity.
Adding the note:
1a. Recognize there are enormous uncertainty and inter-dependability 2a. Say simple thing like "i may miss something i need to hear from you" 3a. Ask a lot of questions
Key message for companies wanting to become more innovative just by acquiring technology and teaching people innovation methods like Design Thinking or Design Sprints, Scrum or Agile. It is about the people! how we work together, how we collaborate. No tool, no method is going to save a company if the interpersonal dynamics are not taken care.
3w20 Employee Experience Lab well said! I’m going to quote you on this.
Model curiosity, ask a lot of questions. Each time a kind person likes this, I would be reminded of this mantra :)
Pudding
@@antonywarner5665 thanks 😀
you knew everything mam! Your idea of psychological safety came out of nowhere as you said. i guess it never really existed until you found it. damn, you are brilliant and humble too.
I'm writing a paper on PS within teams right now and I loved to hear you speak about this topic since your 1999 paper is the base of it all! You give very clear and straightforward explanations so thank you!
And all her many, many papers since that time! 😊
anxiety zone!!a perfect description of my last full-time job. >.<
I was so afraid to ask _anything_ that I tried to solve all problems by myself, so I kept failing every day, from minor to major things. more reprimands made me even more anxious to the point of tremors and heart palpitations.(
thanks to the cosmos for the invention of freelance online jobs. no more office wars. x)
thanks for sharing this brave Olga - so many of us have lived this to varying degrees in the workplace. There are benefits to the gig economy for sure.
I especially like the relative simplicity of the concept of psychological safety. To me, it is an essential component that I would look for in a team culture (as an individual member). However looking at it from the vantage point of a leader: unless each (or let's say almost all of them) fully embrace both growth mindset as well as openness / vulnerability - it may be hard to fully implement a culture where people ask questions without hesitation. I do realize the role of the leader in modeling both of these behaviors - there may still be individual resistance perhaps due to learned habits from past experiences.
Sure, there might still be some hesitation from the team member. The goal as a leader is to keep asking these questions and keep building a comfortable environment till people truly and are eager to speak up.
We can always unlearn what we've learnt before.
Yes, true. And it’s not just modeling good behavior; it’s also eliciting input and, above all, _not_ humiliating or sharply criticizing people personally for sharing ideas, asking questions, admitting mistakes, raising concerns.
I like when communication is a key to build a safe workplace
Nice video. Starting from 10:42 "As long as there is uncertainty and interdependence, building a psychologically safe workplace is necessary."
Nowadays, the word "Psychological Safety" is becoming buzz word in field of HR, in Japanese companies. This word seems to be understood as the key word for "Comfort Zone", as it has been introduced as the countermeasures of "Harassment" here in Japan. However, "Psychological Safety" is the key word for "Learning Zone". --- Better teams make more mistakes. Workplace where "Psychological Safety" is secured, people feel that it is OK to speak up with concerns, questions, and mistakes. "Psychological Safety" is the keyword to make both team and members grow under circumstances with complexity and independence. With a lot of thanks to this video, I will do my best to spread her message right in Japanese companies.
I am excited to come across Amy's work as this is essential to our work on the Risky Business of Bad Bossing and creating psychological safety in Agile Teams.
Hi Debra
I'm currently looking into the agile "factors" that may affect psychological safety. Did you come across any relevant research on this? It seems agile focuses on trust, but the psychological safety is up to each team on their own. Any thoughts on that?
Excellent food for thought!! Feel safe to speak up!
Those who need this training and understanding the most will never understand what Amy is saying.
Excellent! Amy Edmondson is one of the greatest researcher for leadership and teaming of our time. Her proximity to practice and their clear, direct and concise messages are fascinating. So leadership development works. Amy Edmondson´s research plays a major role in our training courses for executives.
It's amazing how clearly you convey the message. I hope that many of my colleagues will attend this talk. Thank you very much.
Great Talk.
Without the freedom to fail, innovation is stifled and freedom to learn what works and what doesn't is diminished.
"I thought about the need for coordination between physicians and nurses, I thought about the need for teamwork on the fly for speaking up, for double checking." I'd like to add one. I THOUGHT ABOUT THE NEED FOR SPEED!!!!
This was great. It applies to our safety culture and Behavior Based Safety Program.
4a) Why did the nurse not call?
4b) Why did the pilot not speak up ?
4c) Why did the executive not say anything?
4d) What are 3 things you can do to build a psychologically safe workplace?
4e) What is your favorite statement from this video? Something the presenter said.
what are the answers of these questions
Excellent presentation and full of thought provoking ideas and approaches to bring teams together and leverage the collective. Curiosity needs balance with humbleness. I would add the dimension of humility so that as questions are asked, they are framed in a desire to seek and understand and not to catch and hold accountable, in the moment.
In fact, service without humility is not worth.
Thank you very much, that was precise and clear. I wish all lectures were like that.
An amazing and very logical presentation, thank you! I think the first thing we always have problems working through in a team, is the management's ego, and their constant phase of denial, and also how they tend to band together to protect one another. These problems need to be broken down first and foremost, before we can move into the phase of open discussion. Any suggestions on how to break those barriers down?
This is a great concept, but we need to take it all the way to the natural conclusion. Under capitalism, your survival depends on your job, a truth that will always undermine boldness. Talk about the psychological safety of people whose survival is divorced from their productivity and be brave enough to voice that the outcome would be better, not worse, for all of us.
The challenge is to build an environment where people feel more worried about losing their job because of not adding enough to their colleagues - by remaining silent too much. I know it's easier said than done, but the rewards are immense.
Boldness can be undermined by a desire to keep a job for many, especially with dependent family members, but there is a line how much are people willing to suffer for a job. I think a work environment that doesnt nourish at least a bit of boldness is soon boring, unengaging and not fulfilling. We dont thrive in such work and many choose to move on. Edmondson's agenda is that stimulating approaches can be taught and encouraged - I love at least the idea ...
Very nice Video, learnt a lot on my responsability to stand up and give my voice
I would like to add a Korean subtitle to this video. Would you open the preferences possible?
The best video I watch about manage.
The most important thing is psychology. There should be a psychologically safe place to reduce stress and improve skills. Our subconscious defines the reasoning, thinking and talking to people.
Can I ask a silly question?
What happened in the cases of the nurse, the co-pilot and the junior executive? It would be nice to know, so that it can aid in highlighting the catastrophic consequences of not having psychological safety.
The nurse type is situation is described in the data she showed here, in full detail, in her 1996 paper in JPSP “Learning from mistakes is easier said than done.” The type of executive situation is described in her 1999 paper in ASQ “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.” They examples in the talk might be prototypes and are not explicitly addressed in those papers. But you can imagine that what happened is nothing-and that’s the tragedy. No one learned. No team improved. Performance suffered both now and in the future.
If there is no trust employees will not feel safe to express the problems facing them in their jobs this can only reinforce an organisation that is ineffective and inefficient where there is no creative solutions to problems
Very insightful. Thank you for the work you put into this presentation
Amazing!!! Thanks for this information!!!
Good pointer on scoping of psychologicall safe workplace at 10:41 "as long as there's uncertainty and interdependence... "
i love safety!
Great topic.
Muy buena presentación.
This part "Every time you don't speak up, you rob your colleagues of the chance to learn"".
Teams might be more willing to talk about their mistakes... but I also wonder if a person had to take full responsibility because they were not in a team, would they not also double check a little more often that they did it right? Maybe somehow in a team setting people get a false sense of security that they're doing it right.
This is so apt!
I have a question about the term "better teams". in the aspect of the Hospital , does it mean they are better doctors and nurses based on where they graduated or something else. because if they are "better teams" why did they do more mistakes?
Very good talk
Wonderful presentation for anyone who works on a team striving for excellence. Have you compared your model for psychological safety and accountability to Daloz's model of challenge and support? Some neat parallels between the two of them. Thank you!
I will look it up now. Thanks for the great suggestion.
You would think that there is a standard assessment for medical error, rather than relying on self-reporting? Actual errors would answer this question definitivr
It's clear that a former employer either never watched Amy's video on Psychological Management or after viewing it, got so defensive and angry because they are the antithesis of this management style, they fired every employee who viewed it. Why? Because the truth of their bullying, ant-worker mentality was much too real to bear.
superb
I'm sure the guy holding up the Ipad at 1:14 woke up that morning with the intention to be intrusive.
🤣
Part 2 - 8:47
😍
What are some of your activities/ action items/ things you (in your context) do to create it?
Very Good
Does someone has the source about the Psychological safety and Accountability image with explanation?
Nice video for successful
Psychological safety is a very difficult concept to grasp
This is big and cuts to the core of effective teams.
Its funny how she apparently is an authority on this issue, lol. An issue that was examined when I was in college in the late seventies and early eighties. There's nothing new under the sun, in my opinion.
ALL STOP 2023?
human choice decentralization; God's kingdom centralization
like if you came from Mckinsey Forward program :)
FAVOR EN ESPAÑOL
Possible foreign references in occupational safety and health in school
Nice, but unrealistic and naive. The biggest obstacle to communication is self-interested individuals in HR and Management are not your friends. Your own honesty/feedback is an opportunity for other interests to label you a potential "scapegoat" when things aren't going according to plan. The workplace is a competitive place and this type of cooperation can't be implemented in a hierarchical environment. The culture of companies has to change.
Where would be the best place to start?
She has published dozens of papers studying real teams in myriad real companies - teams that succeed and teams that fail. This is no ivory tower nonsense. It’s real. She’s one of the sharpest and most practical academics I’ve ever met.
The risk of being labelled a "scapegoat" is exactly what prompts the need to create psychological safety where mistakes are appreciated and people take risks and speak up. And their contribution is appreciated acknowledged as opposed to becoming the scapegoat
I see this at the same time I'm reading White Fragility by Robin Diangelo. I'm curious if they are as opposite as they seem, or perhaps there is another distinction I'm missing.
Seems like a funny topic in todays cancel culture norm. How we have lost our way
am sas
Engr101
The lecturer should drink something before talking.