Understanding Psychological Safety: Its Benefits and the Risks When It Goes Too Far

We are inherently driven to enhance our comfort and safety. This fundamental desire has fueled innovation since the dawn of tool use. While the pursuit of these goals is natural, achieving total and continuous comfort is not within our design.

In The Fearless Organization, Amy Edmondson highlights teams that embrace risk-taking, admit mistakes, and ask questions without fear of retribution. Today, these principles are widely accepted as self-evident. Similarly, in Fail Fast, Fail Often, Babineaux and Krumboltz showcase action-oriented organizations where experimentation thrives, and failure is viewed as a learning opportunity. However, in practice, these ideals often morph into mere clichés, resulting in employees hesitating to take risks or voice concerns. Psychological safety has been misinterpreted to mean freedom from stress and accountability; comfort has become synonymous with safety. When team members witness the consequences of failure, they shift the burden of risk away from themselves and towards product owners and stakeholders.

The Disconnect in Decision-Making

Feeling safe often stems from executing someone else's directives. For instance, receiving a pre-planned list of tasks for a sprint cycle can create a false sense of security, as it shields individuals from the risk of change and personal accountability. If a task is delayed, the response can easily be redirected to an estimation issue. Likewise, if an approach fails, the blame can fall on the person who directed the actions. This disconnect from ownership fosters a toxic view of psychological safety, where technology workers are encouraged to become passive order-takers, escaping the stress of responsibility but relinquishing their sense of ownership.

To cultivate a high-performing culture, we need to redefine psychological safety. It should allow for constructive risk-taking rather than simply transferring risk. As Edmondson states, “psychological safety in the workplace is the belief that the environment is safe for interpersonal risk-taking.” This means fostering an atmosphere where team members can voice ideas, questions, and concerns without fear of punishment.

Fostering a Culture of Learning from Mistakes

Leaders must actively nurture a culture that tolerates mistakes and promotes learning from failures. Encouraging team members to take risks and share their perspectives is vital, yet mere failure accumulation is not the measure of success; we should focus on the value we create.

The strength of collaboration in scoping and design leads to superior products compared to those developed in isolation. Factories once designed around water wheels saw only marginal improvements until they adapted to electricity. Similarly, updating old methodologies with technology will yield minimal benefits unless we integrate innovative thinking. As Henry Ford noted, “If I had asked what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.” To excel, we need a challenger mindset and strong leadership support, embracing discomfort while participating in decision-making.

Encouraging discomfort does not undermine psychological safety; rather, it emphasizes careful planning and awareness of human factors. Technology work inherently involves challenges, which requires transparency about risks and a continuous focus on delivering value. Accepting the responsibility that comes with owning technology not only enhances professional success but also leads to greater personal fulfillment.