Fragination psychological security is a discussion in the workplace globally. It is usually thoughtful as a warm, fuzzy sense, a culture of a culture where everyone is together and does not disagree. But it is not what it is at all. Psychological security, in his essence, is the perception that a person can share his thoughts, question, accept errors, and provide suggestions without punishment or threat of embarrassment. When correctly executed, it can improve the team’s performance, facilitate innovation and create strong organizations. But even though it is important, it is probably the most wrong aspect of a well -working workplace.

why it matters

Psychological security is not relaxed in high-performing teams-this is a candor. This offers employees the ability to push against the status quo, raise issues quickly and share ideas that may be unconventional. When psychological security is absent, however, teams resort to silence, group or dissolution instead. After the 2015 Google research paper, theory gained momentum that psychological security was the most important component of high -performing teams. However, learning and making it is more complicated than not being helpful or not being a troubleshooter.

To remove these prevalent misconceptions, Amy C of Harvard Business School. Edmondson (promoter of the term) and Michela J. Kerissey in his Harvard Business Review article presented six popular myths about psychological security. This is what they say that people are usually wrong:-

This sugarcane is not about reality or is not a difficult interaction. In fact, psychologically safe spaces really incorporates hard criticism and debate, but presently present. The open discussion is the purpose, not the infinite agreement.

There is no need to talk that everyone will agree with you. Teams need to promote many approaches, but psychological security does not mean consensus or your suggestions will be adopted. This only means that they will be heard respectfully.

Psychological security is not a promise that you will never face results such as trimming or role change. It is about making it safe to speak honestly, not about protecting the job title.

Some managers are afraid that establishing a “safe” environment will become a license for decency. In fact, psychological security enables individuals to ask and learn, all the necessary materials for top performance.

You cannot allow individuals to “feel safe”. Faith and openness emerges from continuous action: listening carefully, responding sympathetically, and behaving weakly. Psychological security is obtained, not decisions.

Leaders have a major part of playing, yet psychological security on a team is the responsibility of all. The team members need to strengthen each other’s contribution and give up thinking, even if they do not agree.

So how do companies create psychological security that actually improves the performance of the team?

• Foster Open Communication: Establish habits that enable regularly to share ideas, questions and concerns.
• Model vulnerability: Accept errors and solicit feedback – it creates a tone for the rest of the team.
• Normalize learning: addresses mistakes as an opportunity to learn, not to punish something.
• Accept the contribution: Encourage participation by rewarding individuals who asks questions, obey questions, or provide new ideas.

Psychological security is not soft, it is about being authentic. This is about creating an atmosphere in which individuals are bold, honest and comfortable enough to be human. As Edmondson and Kerissey remind us, it is not a lack of pressure, but the availability of trust that makes really innovative, flexible team. When we release those myths and admit what psychological security is actually, we open not only for more effective teamwork, but also give more effective results to all.