Looking back at the professional choices I have made so far, I realized I have always gravitated towards companies and teams that provided:
- an enticing technical challenge (without going into the details of what it means)
- a psychologically safe environment in which I felt free and supported to pursue solutions to that challenge
What is significant is that while the challenge has always been merely a necessary condition, the safety alone was sufficient for me to perform better as a team member and an individual contributor.
I have been a member of teams in which I did my best even if the challenge itself was not that compelling. Conversely, I have spent time in environments that provided fantastic challenges that I couldn’t tackle to the best of my ability, because I did not feel safe enough.
From a business perspective, focusing on psychological safety is not just a way to create more humane working conditions (although if we can, then why the hell wouldn’t we want to do o). Lowering the emotional cost of making mistakes or experiencing outright failure, will lead to better outcomes through increased trust and cooperation, less burnout and greater willingness to openly test one’s limitations. When done well, it may even result in a cycle of positive feedback:
Once a safe and supportive team climate has been established, a challenging leadership style can sometimes further strengthen psychological safety. A challenging leader asks team members to reexamine assumptions about their work and how they can exceed expectations and fulfill their potential. Challenging leadership styles have been linked with increased employee creativity and desire to improve.
It may sound trite, but in order for someone to get out of their comfort zone to achieve better results, the comfort zone must be established in the first place.