In competitive, high-performance environments, both individual and team performance hinges on a variety of physical, technical, and psychological factors. Among these, psychological safety has emerged as a critical determinant of performance (Cooke et al., 2024). Psychological safety, defined as the shared belief that a team environment is safe for interpersonal risk-taking (Edmondson, 1999), is increasingly recognised as a cornerstone of effective teamwork and individual excellence (Newman et al., 2017).
Psychological safety impacts performance in several ways:
- Enhancing Communication: Teams with high psychological safety experience open and honest communication. Individuals within a team are more likely to share observations and provide constructive feedback, which improves decision-making and problem-solving (Edmondson & Lei, 2014).
- Encouraging Learning and Adaptability: In psychologically safe environments, team members feel comfortable acknowledging gaps in their skills or knowledge. This openness fosters a culture of continuous learning and adaptability, crucial for responding to the dynamic nature of a high-performance environment (Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014).
- Reducing Anxiety and Burnout: Fear of failure or criticism can lead to performance anxiety (Henriksen et al., 2020) and burnout (Fransen et al., 2020). Psychological safety mitigates these risks by promoting a supportive environment where mistakes are viewed as opportunities for growth (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
- Strengthening Team Cohesion: Psychological safety enhances trust and mutual respect within teams. These elements are vital for cohesion, which directly correlates with collective efficacy and performance outcomes (Kleinert et al., 2012).
Strategies to Foster Psychological Safety in High-Performance Environments
Research has illustrated that creating a culture of psychological safety requires intentional efforts from managers, team leaders, and organisations (Vella et al., 2020). Key strategies to promote psychological safety include:
- Leading with Empathy: Managers and leaders should demonstrate genuine care and understanding of the individual experiences within the team. Research has highlighted that active listening, validating feelings, and showing compassion are key to creating a safe environment (White & Rezania, 2019).
- Encouraging Open Dialogue: Establishing regular opportunities for individuals to voice their opinions, reflect on performance, and discuss challenges helps normalise communication and reduces fear of judgment (Purcell et al., 2019).
- Modelling Vulnerability: Leaders who openly acknowledge their own mistakes and limitations create a precedent for others to do the same, fostering an environment of trust and authenticity (Kavanagh et al., 2017).
- Rewarding Effort and Learning: Recognising and rewarding effort, creativity, and learning—even when outcomes are suboptimal—reinforces a growth mindset and encourages individuals to take calculated risks (Bean et al., 2020).
- Providing Constructive Feedback: Delivering feedback in a manner that focuses on behaviours and outcomes, rather than personal attributes, ensures that people feel respected and motivated to improve (Carpentier & Mageau, 2013).
Case Studies and Research Evidence
Empirical research underscores the importance of psychological safety in a variety of high-performance environments. For instance, Fransen et al. (2020) found that teams with higher psychological safety reported better communication, stronger cohesion, and improved performance. Similarly, studies in high-performance settings, such as Olympic teams, highlight the role of psychological safety in fostering resilience and adaptability under pressure (Moynihan & McMahon, 2014; Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014). In support of this, case studies of successful teams often reveal cultures of psychological safety. For example, the New Zealand All Blacks rugby team emphasises collective accountability and open communication, key components of psychological safety, as integral to their sustained success (Kerr, 2013).
Challenges and Considerations
While the benefits of psychological safety are clear, implementing it is not without challenges. Competitive pressures, diverse team dynamics, and entrenched cultural norms can impede efforts to create psychologically safe environments. Addressing these barriers requires a long-term commitment and tailored approaches that respect the unique contexts of different environments, sectors, and teams.
It is also important to mention that psychological safety has the potential to be detrimental if left unchecked. Edmondson (2008) proposed a 2 x 2 matrix, suggesting that low levels of accountability could mediate psychological safety, creating feelings of comfort where people “really enjoy working with each other, but do not feel challenged. Nor do they work very hard” (Edmondson, 2008, p. 6). In support of this, Deng et al. (2017) found evidence that high levels of psychological safety negatively impact motivation and effort levels, suggesting a limit on comfortability. As a result, psychological safety is fragile and, depending on the context has the potential to hinder performance if not managed correctly.
Conclusion
Psychological safety is a powerful enabler of performance in a variety of high-stake environments, promoting communication, learning, and resilience while mitigating stress and fostering team cohesion. By prioritising psychological safety, managers, team members, and organisations can create environments where individuals and teams thrive. Future research and practice should continue to explore innovative ways to integrate this concept into high-performance cultures, ensuring that the benefits are accessible to all individuals within the teams.
M-A-P Performance Case Study
One of the projects we are currently delivering is in partnership with a company in the employability sector. At its core, the company is a people oriented business and a leading provider of work and wellbeing services that inspires and empowers people to progress into work. The company place huge importance on equality, diversity, and inclusion, which are fundamental to the communities they work alongside.
Following COVID-19, the employability landscape changed dramatically and the company found themselves struggling to meet the strict performance targets being imposed on them by external partners. Naturally, this created pressure and stress. Teams became fractured, staff well-being began to deteriorate, and we interpreted, with empathetic understanding, that the culture started to feel psychologically unsafe. We noticed that there was also some disconnect with organisational values, which led to disembodiment of culturally accepted behaviours.
We observed that some people within the organisation were finding it challenging to demonstrate empathy towards others, which was leading to inauthentic communication. In time, we interpreted that there was an incongruence between who they wanted to be and how they were actually working under increasing levels of pressure. We also noticed some distance had been created between senior members of the company and the people they were responsible to support ‘on the frontline’.
Initially, we were invited into their North-West branch to explore the changing needs of individuals and teams within this part of the business. Following a cultural diagnostic, we were invited to stay and support the business with some of the challenges uncovered in our review. This support was received well and we believe a fundamental reason why we achieved success at the company was because we were able to create a psychologically safe environment, where people can be their true self. With our support, this facilitated genuine human connections, which gave people the permission to realign themselves to organisational values and feel a sense of belonging to something bigger than themselves. This sense of shared meaning allowed for embodiment of organisational values, which led to increased empathy for one another.
We entered into the company with limited insight into their culture and context and with limited direction about the hopeful outcome of our support. We feel privileged that we are still in the building, with a deep understanding for the people and their context, and having made a positive difference to their lived experience.
Feedback from the Director
“Working with M-A-P Performance has had a significant impact on me personally and as a leader. Nick and Ben have helped me learn more about myself as an individual, how I can ensure I am playing to strengths without personal cost, and I have learnt more about my colleagues… I am more flexible when under pressure and can now support others by being more understanding of them rather than interactions ending in conflict. I have become better equipped to change. It has created an opportunity to bring about a more psychological safe environment and in a way that embraces the diversity of the teams’ strengths. From a leadership point of view, the work we have done has allowed me to create an environment where colleagues are no longer competing with each other on what’s right vs wrong, but they are seeking to gain an understanding of each other and work more interdependently”
References
-
- Bean, C., Shaikh, M., & Forneris, T. (2019). Coaching Strategies Used to Deliver Quality Youth Sport Programming. International Sport Coaching Journal, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2018-0044
-
- Brady, M. (2005). Creating safe spaces and building social assets for young women in the develop- ing world: A new role for sports. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 33(1/2), 35–49.
-
- Carpentier, J., & Mageau, G. A. (2013). When change-oriented feedback enhances motivation, well-being and performance: A look at autonomy-supportive feedback in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14(3), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.01.003
-
- Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior (1st ed.). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
-
- Deng, H., Leung, K., Lam, C. K., & Huang, X. (2017). Slacking Off in Comfort: A Dual-Pathway Model for Psychological Safety Climate. Journal of Management, 45(3), 1114–1144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317693083
-
- Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
-
- Edmondson A. C. (2008). The competitive imperative of learning. Harvard business review, 86(7-8), 60–160.
-
- Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305
-
- Fransen, K., McEwan, D., & Sarkar, M. (2020). The impact of identity leadership on team functioning and well-being in team sport: Is psychological safety the missing link? Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 51(1), 101763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101763
-
- Fraser-Thomas, J., Côté, J., & MacDonald, D. J. (2010). Community size in youth sport settings: Examining developmental assets and sport withdrawal. Revue phénEPS/PHEnex Journal, 2(2).
-
- Henriksen, K., Schinke, R., Moesch, K., McCann, S., Parham, William D., Larsen, C. H., & Terry, P. (2019). Consensus Statement on Improving the Mental Health of High Performance Athletes. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 18(5), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197x.2019.1570473
-
- Kavanagh, E., Brown, L., & Jones, I. (2017). Elite Athletes’ Experience of Coping With Emotional Abuse in the Coach–Athlete Relationship. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 29(4), 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2017.1298165
-
- Kerr, J. M. (2013). Legacy : 15 lessons in leadership : what the All Blacks can teach us about the business of life. Constable.
-
- Kleinert, J., Ohlert, J., Carron, B., Eys, M., Feltz, D., Harwood, C., Linz, L., Seiler, R., & Sulprizio, M. (2012). Group Dynamics in Sports: An Overview and Recommendations on Diagnostic and Intervention. The Sport Psychologist, 26(3), 412–434. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.26.3.412
-
- Moynihan, Ú., & McMahon, T. (2014). An Investigation of the Youth Development Effects of a School-based Multi-sport Initiative for First-year Boys,. The International Journal of Sport and Society, 4(3), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.18848/2152-7857/cgp/v04i03/53974
-
- Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017). Psychological safety: A systematic review of the litera- ture. Human Resource Management Review, 27(3), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017. 01.001
- Purcell, R., Gwyther, K., & Rice, S. M. (2019). Mental Health In Elite Athletes: Increased Awareness Requires An Early Intervention Framework to Respond to Athlete Needs. Sports Medicine – Open, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-019-0220-1
-
- Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2014). Ordinary magic, extraordinary performance: Psychological resilience and thriving in high achievers. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 3(1), 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/spy0000003
-
- Turner, S., & Harder, N. (2018). Psychological Safe Environment: A Concept Analysis. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 18(18), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2018.02.004.
-
- Vella, S. A., Mayland, E., Schweickle, M. J., Sutcliffe, J. T., McEwan, D., & Swann, C. (2022). Psychological safety in sport: a systematic review and concept analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984x.2022.2028306
- White, S., & Rezania, D. (2019). The impact of coaches’ ethical leadership behaviour on athletes’ voice and performance. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 9(5), 460–476. https://doi.org/10.1108/sbm-11-2017-0079