1. Introduction

A potential misconception with psychological safety is that once we give our team a culture without fearstandards may start to slip. Clearly, the ideas of error-reporting, team proactivity, and respectfully questioning authority sound good in theory but how does this manifest itself in performance standards? Can you still hold people accountable to meet high standards in a fearless environment? If you remove fear completely, then don’t you just end up with apathy?

To answer these questions it is important to separate psychological safety and performance standards. In reality, they are both essential conditions for optimal performance and team engagement, and as such both must be present for a team to connect and thrive ¹.

Psychological safety does not lead to the erosion of standards. While trust and respect are inherent in psychological safety, this does not mean you need to constantly praise your peers regardless of how they are performing. In fact, psychological safety is about a workplace culture in which it is natural and easy to speak up. This means all members of the team can be open and candid with each other. If you believe that standards are slipping, then it is precisely within a psychologically safe environment that you can express this comfortably. Psychological safety is about how we can achieve those high standards, but it is not enough to guarantee high levels of excellence. These must be reflected in our organisational goals, so that team members know what is expected of them.

2. The four zones of performance

Let’s take a moment to reflect on your own team and organisation. Take a look at Figure 1. It is a useful tool to help identify where your organisation sits in terms of psychological safety and performance standards. It helps to show the effect that this specific zone is likely having on your team. Hopefully, being equipped with this knowledge will make it easier for you to see where improvements could be made.

Figure 1: The four zones of performance ²

Each of the quadrants of Figure 1 represents a zone. Each zone is the outcome from one of the four combinations of low and high levels of psychological safety and performance standards and expectations. The vertical axis moving from bottom to top shows the transition from low psychological safety to high. The horizontal axis moving from left to right represents low performance standards to high performance standards.

Let’s take a closer look at the four zones:

• Apathy zone (low psychological safety, low performance standards): In this zone, there is low psychological safety. Speaking up is not encouraged, bringing your whole self to work is not an easy thing to do. However, at the same time, little is required from team members. Everyone does what they need to do to make it until the end of the day but there is little opportunity for fulfillment, progression, or learning.
• Comfort zone (high psychological safety, low performance standards): The atmosphere in this workplace is very open, and dialogue can flow freely. People feel that they are supported and respected. Within this environment feedback can be delivered and team members at every level feel that they can contribute. The problem isthat there is not a culture of excellence driving them on. This openness, and freedom is positive but it is not backed up by a drive to achieve high standards of output. In this environment, people are less likely to constructively challenge one another and ask each other to fulfil their full potential.
• Anxiety zone (low psychological safety, high performance standards): In this zone the demands for excellence are present. They are reflected in the team’s cut-throat culture and its performance monitoring processes. However, in this zone, there is a lack of openness or support. Team leaders seek to maintain standards through fear and pressure; they may berate team members for asking so-called ‘stupid questions’, leaving the team hesitant to report concerns and errors. While the motivations behind this workplace culture may be the pursuit of excellence, it denies the team learning opportunities, encourages image management, and in reality acts counter to the original desire for excellence.
• Performance zone (high psychological safety, high performance standards): This is the gold standard. Yes, there is the demand for excellence and the hunger to thrive, but there is also the freedom for team members to seek what they need to reach these heights. It is in this zone that the optimal learning will occur and that the highest standards can be openly requested and achieved by management. It is also in this zone that a nurturing and supportive environment helps the team to thrive.

3. Activity

Take a look at the table above and reflect upon where your team dynamic sits.

1. Would you consider your team to be operating at high or low psychological safety? Do you think your team has high levels of trust and respect, and that team members feel comfortable bringing their whole selves to work?

2. Would you say that there are high or low performance standards currently in place?

3. Depending on your answers above, identify which quadrant you believe your team currently falls into. You may be able to identify changes in this dynamic over time, depending on elements such as which stakeholders are involved or the workload.

4. Consider a time when you disagreed with your hierarchy. Did you speak up? If so, how did you express yourself? If not, what would have made you feel more comfortable to speak up?

If your team is operating in the Comfort, Apathy or Anxiety zones, your aim as a team is to try to move closer to the Performance zone. This is a long-term goal which will take concerted effort over time. In week 4 you will think more about the commitments you can make to help to ensure that your team works in the Learning and High performance zone.

4. Conclusion

A potential misinterpretation of psychological safety is that it creates an environment in which people cannot be held accountable for their performance. Within this interpretation, the removal of fear will mean the removal of repercussions for mistakes or negligence, and this will result in a decline in standards. In reality, psychological safety is about having a safe space in which team members of all levels can communicate openly about how they think work is going and how the team is performing. At the same time, psychological safety is vital to high standards but it is not enough. We also need to ensure that we are setting those standards within our team.

Low standards and low psychological safety deliver a lethargic and unenthusiastic workspace. Low standards and high psychological safety create a comfort zone in which no one is encouraged to achieve their best. High standards and low psychological safety is the anxiety zone, and this means that you will impair cognitive abilities, apply pressure on staff, and hinder learning opportunities for individuals and teams alike. To achieve high performance we need high psychological safety and high standards.

5. Sources