Introduction
Psychological safety (PS) is the shared belief among team members that it is safe to take interpersonal risks in the workplace [3]. PS is relevant to software development (SD) teams, particularly those using agile practices. Some practitioners even claim that “agile doesn’t work without psychological safety” [2]. Effective collaboration, creativity, and collective problem solving are fundamental in everyday SD teams. PS fosters an atmosphere where team members feel free to share their views and opinions without fear of judgment or retaliation, thereby facilitating an environment conducive to effective collaboration. In a psychologically safe workplace, individuals are comfortable sharing their opinions, worries, or doubts, seeking support when required, and acknowledging errors without fear of being blamed or punished. In such an environment, teams and their members feel empowered to take ownership, innovate, take initiatives, and assume responsibility for their deliverables, resulting in better outcomes. The question, then, is how to achieve and sustain a psychologically safe workplace in the context of software development.
The literature on this topic suggests that strategies and behaviors at various levels of the organization institutionalize and sustain psychological safety. For PS to materialize, individuals, teams, and leadership alike should place an emphasis on a culture of no-blame authentically across the whole organization and openness [1]. These qualities are the “butter and bread” cementing psychological safety. In order for PS to transcend hierarchies, leadership must demonstrate commitment by taking ownership of its values. This goes beyond words by “walking the talk.”
Leadership Behavior
PS is more than just a label to use in the organization’s set of values and brochures. Leaders should first demonstrate this behavior authentically. It’s a matter of integrity; if you preach it, then exercise it and demonstrate it in your own behavior. For example, when leaders avoid blaming team members for mistakes, it fosters trust and respect, leading to greater team investment in projects. Consistent leadership behaviors that demonstrate psychological safety, such as openness and accepting failures, ensure that these values are authentically experienced by the team.
Unfortunately, there is no magic formula for leaders to implement. In her book “The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth,” Amy Edmondson reported several examples, which are all different but sometimes ingenuous [4]. For example, Pixar’s leadership, under Ed Catmull, emphasized the importance of a safe environment where employees could share candid feedback without fear of criticism. Pixar’s leadership regularly held “Braintrust” meetings, fostering an environment where teams could openly discuss their work, critique ideas, and support each other in problem solving. This culture of openness and mutual respect contributed to Pixar’s ongoing innovation and success in the highly competitive film industry [4, 5]. In my research on psychological safety within SD teams, I discovered that leaders who actively demonstrate psychological safety by setting an example, facilitate group activities to foster socialization of PS’ values, demonstrate the application of psychological safety principles, and acknowledge their own mistakes, demonstrate a strong commitment to PS [1].
Team Behavior
At the team level, several strategies and behaviors were reported in the literature—autonomy, collective decision-making, and slack time [1]. While autonomy and slack time are negotiated with management, collective decision-making emerges from within the team [1]
Autonomy: Autonomy in teams means having the freedom to operate independently, with minimal interference from outside the team. This involves management trusting the team’s competencies and the team meeting expectations. For example, a team that is self-organized and given the liberty to decide their processes and approaches can foster psychological safety as members feel trusted and responsible for their work. This environment allows the team to build its culture internally and feel empowered to innovate and take ownership of their tasks, enhancing their chance for success.
Collective Decision-making: Collective decision-making involves the entire team in the decision process, ensuring that decisions are not attributable to a single individual. This inclusive process promotes psychological safety by fostering a sense of shared responsibility and encouraging team members to voice their opinions and challenge ideas. When team members feel their input is valued and decisions are made collectively, it enhances their investment in the team’s success and their willingness to participate actively.
Slack Time: Slack time refers to allowing team members to dedicate time to tasks outside the core development activities, such as discussing issues, seeking help, and working on improvement plans. Providing slack time reduces pressure and enables team members to engage in interpersonal activities that contribute to psychological safety. When teams have more time to focus on developing their skills and discussing their work without the stress of tight deadlines, it creates a more structured and safe environment. When teams and their members view slack time as an investment by the organization in their well-being and development, they become more invested in the success of their projects.
Individual Behaviors
PS is also an individual effort and contribution; it does not materialize only when the leadership and the team embrace its value and implement strategy to sustain it. Individuals’ behaviors must show openness and accept failures without blame. Openness fosters an environment where team members feel valued and heard, while the no blame culture encourages a constructive response to mistakes, promoting learning and shared responsibility. These strategies require collective effort and commitment from all team members, transcending hierarchy and roles to create a psychologically safe workplace.
Openness: Openness involves team members’ willingness to share information and opinions, accept different perspectives, and provide constructive criticism and feedback. The team maintains this as a collective effort, but each member also holds an expectation. Openness ensures transparency and helps individuals feel heard and valued. For instance, team members are encouraged to openly discuss their ideas and concerns and be receptive to others’ viewpoints, fostering a collaborative and supportive environment.
No Blame Culture: Psychological safety places a strong emphasis on the “no blame” approach, which views mistakes and failures as learning opportunities instead of grounds for criticism or sanctions. This approach is nurtured by conducting lessons-learned retrospective meetings to understand and avoid future mistakes. By welcoming mistakes and avoiding blame, the team promotes a constructive problem-solving attitude and a shared sense of accountability. However, the “ no blame” should be exercised by every team member. This strategy applies to all levels within the team, ensuring a unified approach to handling mistakes.
Since the proposition of PS and over the past few decades, research and industry accounts have demonstrated that psychological safety is a fundamental human need. When this need is met, teams respond with a variety of behaviors that enhance their dynamics and overall performance. In future article(s), we will discuss the effects and benefits of psychological safety on the dynamics and contribution to delivering better software products.
Author: Adam Alami
Adam Alami is an assistant professor with Aalborg University, Denmark. He has broad experience in information technology practices. His career began in software development, before progressing to include business analysis and project management. Involvement in major IT transformation projects has for twenty years been the mainstay of his work. His chosen fields of research fit within the broad topic of cooperative, social, and human aspects of software engineering. He has a keen interest in business analysis and contemporary software development practices. He holds a PhD degree in Computer Science from the IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark, a Master degree in Computer Science from the University of Technology (UTS), Sydney, and a Bachelor degree in Software Engineering from the Université du Québec à Montréal. Email: [email protected]. Twitter: @AdamAlamiDK.
References
- A. Alami, M. Zahedi, and O. Krancher. Antecedents of psychological safety in agile software development teams. Information and Software Technology, 162:107267, 2023.
- T. R. Clark. Agile doesn’t work without psychological safety. https://hbr.org/2022/02/agile-doesnt-work-without-psychological-safety, Feb. 2022. (Accessed on 04/13/2023).
- A. Edmondson. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2):350–383, 1999.
- A. C. Edmondson. The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. John Wiley & Sons, 2018.
- Leanblog. Amy c. Edmondson on psychological safety and ”the fearless organization”. https://www.leanblog.org/2020/01/s1e356-amy-c-edmondson-on-psychological-safety-and-the-fearless-organization/. (Accessed on 07/28/2024).