20 February 2025
Nanna Svart, Organisational Psychologist and Consultant
Psychological safety has now been studied for several decades. Amy Edmondson and her colleague Derrick Bransby (2023) have therefore reviewed the contemporary research and effects of psychological safety in a comprehensive review article where one of four key themes is – leadership. Based on Edmondson’s and Bransby’s selection of studies on leadership behaviours and psychological safety, this article gives a brief overview of behaviours that can benefit you as a leader – and those you might reflect on setting aside.
Amy Edmondson and Derrick Bransby (2023) describe in their review article (amongst a range of themes) three types of leadership behaviour, which have been examined in three highlighted studies, and that affects psychological safety. We will take a closer look at these three areas and examples of how you, as a leader can 1) be a good listener, 2) demonstrate competence in your job, and 3) be transparent about decisions and information. All three focus areas are linked to psychological safety, which has historically been known to enhance team performance.
Psychological safety refers to “(…) a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking” (Edmondson, 1999, p. 354).
In such teams, people are not afraid to ask ‘silly questions’ because there is a low level of interpersonal risk associated with e.g. asking questions or challenging each others’ views. “The term is meant to suggest neither a careless sense of permissiveness, nor an unrelentingly positive affect but, rather, a sense of confidence that the team will not embarrass, reject, or punish someone for speaking up. This confidence stems from mutual respect and trust among team members.” (Edmondson, 1999, p. 354).
While this all sounds ideal in theory—how does one implement it in practice?
Below, I will attempt to describe how the research findings could be reflected in a leader’s everyday behaviour with practical examples. It should be noted that the richness of the research findings cannot necessarily be reflected 1:1 in these simplified examples, but they are pragmatic suggestions to inspire reflections of how it might look.
Based on listening, competence, and transparency, I will examine the leadership behaviours from Edmondson and Bransby’s article (2023) – highlighting and examining three types of leadership behaviour one at a time.
A collection of five studies conducted by Castro and colleagues (2018) indicates that when our superiors (e.g. a leader or a professional supervisor) listen to us, we are more likely to explore new ideas and become more creative. The act of our superiors listening to us contributes to the psychological safety.
Listening behaviours can include:
For example, your conversation partner might be sharing that they are struggling to structure strategy meetings in the legal department. In this case it might be tempting to share your opinion on how to do it – or to share your own similar experiences.
When you actively listen, you do not share your experiences or suggestions for solutions, because the goal is rather to focus on the other person. Instead, enquire about the challenges of structuring the strategy meetings, e.g. how often and when the challenge arises. In addition, enquire about how the others in the team respond and act. When you listen actively, this is done without necessarily aiming to solve the problem, but aiming to understand the other person’s perspective.
If your conversation partner asks for your experiences, you can, of course, share them. They might greatly appreciate it – and the conversation may then shift more towards an exchange of experiences.
Listening behaviour also involves having good intentions towards your conversation partner.
In other words, you will not necessarily be perceived as listening if you participate in the conversation while thinking (and perhaps conveying) that you or others could do the job better. This can negatively affect your behaviour and shape the response you give. Even well-intentioned advice such as “Have you tried…?” may imply that you know the solution – and then we can find ourselves being less motivated to listen and more motivated to share our perceived solution.
Additionally, you should be aware that if you are someone’s superior, there may be an unequal power balance, which means your words and solutions can quicklier be accepted as the right ones. Therefore, you need to make an extra effort to listen actively and ask questions to encourage more elaboration from your conversation partner to install a sense of being heard and listened to.
Competent leaders might miss out on the positive benefits of their capabilities if they engage in self-serving behaviour. A study by Mao and colleagues (2019) suggests that while leader competence enhances psychological safety, this effect is diminished if the leader appears to act in self-interest. Here, competence is understood as the individual’s capability to perform one’s job (Mao et al., 2019, p. 54)
In organisational settings, leader self-serving behaviour can result in leaders being perceived as taking away resources and diminishing psychological safety (Mao et al., 2019, p. 56). Examples could be presenting others’ work as one’s own – or failing to acknowledge contributions from others when celebrating achievements to enhance personal recognition.
As a leader, you might have assessed that an important stakeholder expects you to personally present recommendations for ongoing work because you are responsible for the quality of the work. If the team perceives this as self-serving, psychological safety decreases – even if the effect on the stakeholder is positive and you appear competent.
On the other hand, leadership competence may be perceived as weaker when external factors are blamed for errors instead of taking accountability. The key determinant is not the leader’s intentions—often well-meaning—but rather how the situation is perceived by others.
The optimal scenario is a competent leader whose employees do not perceive them as self-serving. This results in increased psychological safety within the team.
A practical way to gauge how you are perceived can be through a 360-degree leadership evaluation or another form of leadership evaluation that measures these parameters. Alternatively, you could directly ask your leader or employees: “In which situations do you perceive me as most competent? What do I do in those moments? When do I appear to act in self-interest? When do you see me prioritising the team’s interests most effectively?”
A trusted colleague could also provide feedback by sharing thoughts from situations where you demonstrate competence or inadvertently act in self-interest.
For example, a colleague might notice that you often take on the most exciting tasks in your team. Your rationale might be that these tasks are also the most demanding, and you aim to prevent the team from working overtime. However, if the team perceives you as consistently assigning yourself to the most interesting projects, psychological safety may decrease—even if your competence is evident.
There can be many good intentions behind your actions – but if you are perceived as self-serving by your employees or colleagues, you might risk not achieving the desired positive outcome of psychological safety. Even if you are a very competent leader.
This brings us to the third and final category of leadership behaviour that affects psychological safety.
Interestingly, being transparent as a leader also affects employees’ ability to focus their attention and be creative. This is examined in a study by Han and colleagues (2017).
Being transparent in your leadership role typically involves sharing relevant information, being open to feedback, and openly discussing your motives and rationale behind decisions (Edmondson & Bransby, p. 68, 2023). This form of openness creates more psychological safety. The intriguing aspect of the study by Han and colleagues (2017) is that psychological safety also appears to be linked to employees’ focused attention, thereby enhancing their ability to generate new ideas and be creative.
The model by Han and colleagues (2017, p. 336) illustrates how your transparency as a leader can influence three interconnected aspects: psychological safety, focused attention, and creativity.
Leaders can become more transparent by ensuring that relevant information is shared with the appropriate individuals at the right time and in a manner that is meaningful to the recipients. An important aspect here is considering the recipient’s need for information. Perhaps seek feedback and ask questions to assess whether the team members perceive your leadership to be transparent ad whether they have access to the necessary knowledge.
Being transparent includes openly sharing your intentions behind the questions you ask, the priorities you set, and why you do things in a particular way. For example, if you want to change the structure of team meetings, you can explain the rationale e.g. increasing engagement or streamlining the agenda.
Furthermore, in decision-making processes you can benefit from communicating transparently about the reasoning, status and what is currently not known. While certain decisions may require confidentiality, failing to address the team members need for information and transparency can negatively impact psychological safety. Addressing that there are certain things you do not know or cannot share at this moment, might temporarily support the team members in understanding what is going on – even though you cannot disclose all information.
Overall, these three focus areas—listening, demonstrating competence, and ensuring transparency—could serve as inspiration for your priorities in 2025 to enhance psychological safety within your organisation. You are likely already focusing on these areas – but it is important to identify precisely how and when they occur. As with many aspects of life, practice gets us further and feedback is key in improving.
Castro DR, Anseel F, Kluger AN, Lloyd KJ, Turjeman-Levi Y. 2018. Mere listening effect on creativity and the mediating role of psychological safety. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 12(4):489–502
Edmondson, A C. and Bransby, D P., Psychological Safety Comes of Age: Observed Themes in an Established Literature (J2023). Annual Review of Organizational Psychology & Organizational Behavior, Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 55-78, 2023, http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-055217
Edmondson, AC. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adm. Sci. Q. 44(2):350–83
Han Y, Hao P, Yang B, Liu W. 2017. How leaders’ transparent behavior influences employee creativity: the mediating roles of psychological safety and ability to focus attention. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 24(3):335– 44
Mao J, Chiang JT, Chen L, Wu Y, Wang J. 2019. Feeling safe? A conservation of resources perspective examining the interactive effect of leader competence and leader self-serving behaviour on team performance. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 92(1):52–73
