Table of Contents

• What stops your players from speaking up?

  • Quote of the week

  • An even deeper dive

What stops your players from speaking up?

Psychological safety is defined by Amy Edmondson as an environment that is safe for interpersonal risk taking. It’s worth spending some time unpacking this definition and looking at what it means. It’s a good definition—but unless we unpack what ‘interpersonal risk’ actually means in team settings, it can feel a bit abstract.

What does interpersonal risk taking mean?

Think about all the moments within a team throughout a season where someone could say or do something to someone else to help with:

• Learning

• Refining something

• Challenging something

• Improving something

• Feeling more connected

• Feeling more confident

In a lot of team environments, I wonder how many of these opportunities are missed; people choosing not to give that piece of feedback, or to challenge constructively. Why would they make that choice? According to Edmondson’s definition, it often comes down to a fear of taking an interpersonal risk.

For example, I don’t want to be perceived as negative, so I’m not going to offer a suggestion for how things can be improved. Or, if I give this feedback, I may not be invited to golf anymore, so I’m going to keep my mouth shut. That’s what interpersonal risk-taking means. It’s not worth threatening my relationship, my standing or my place in this team, so I won’t say anything. And if those opportunities are overlooked consistently, valuable insights and information are missed that can help that team’s performance. This is a really important point I’d like to reinforce. When people consistently hold back ideas, feedback, or critiques, performance suffers—because valuable insights go unspoken. In fact, one of Edmondson’s biggest myths she tries to bust about psychological safety is that psychologically safe environments aren’t high-performing. It is, in fact, the opposite.

In my previous post, there were numerous opportunities for people around the coach to step in and say “I don’t see anything”, but they didn’t. They let the consultants continue to perpetuate their ‘trick’. They let the coach continue a charade they didn’t believe in. They weren’t willing to take that interpersonal risk.

Edmondson has a nice way of highlighting what some of the common interpersonal risks people avoid within teams are, which she calls “impression management”. I’ve added a few to her list.

The senior players in my previous post didn’t want to look negative or incompetent, so they managed their impression with the coach by not being honest, not admitting weakness or even hinting at some confusion.

Let’s shift from last edition’s example and explore psychological safety more practically. Because as the leaders of our environments, we need to understand why a player may choose not to take that interpersonal risk. Just because we’ve said ‘my door is open’ and ‘I want to hear your thoughts, good or bad’, doesn’t mean our people will take us up on those words. There may be perceived selection concerns, contracting concerns, or other very reasonable reasons why a player we’re leading may not feel comfortable, initially, in voicing their concerns or asking possibly ‘dumb’ questions (see here for some thoughts on this). This means we need to be deliberate in creating processes that encourage interpersonal risk-taking—and in role modelling the behaviours that support it.

According to The Leader Factor, people feel more psychologically safe when four key needs are met (see here - they’ve got some great resources). Here's one example of how you can support each one in your coaching environment:

Level One - Inclusion

• When someone is new to your environment, they’re unlikely to speak up if they’re experiencing a problem, see something that could be done better or have a concern. However, if they’re asked, they’re more likely to volunteer that information. So make it a habit to ask new people for their perspectives, early in their time with your team. In the first three weeks is ideal.

Level Two - Learning

• Openly share what you’ve learnt from feedback, whether that’s from players or your fellow coaches/staff. If you get feedback through annual surveys, this could be presenting back to the playing group the key themes from that survey, what you’ve heard, what you need clarifying and what you’re looking to change as a result. It could also be more informal than that, by sharing some feedback you got from a player offhand and how that has helped you rethink something.

Level Three - Contributing

• Be aware of the people in your team who contribute in more ‘quiet’ ways. Some people aren’t comfortable participating or sharing in larger group settings. But they can still add value. Find ways to pull the gold from them, either through checking in 1-1, smaller group conversations or tapping teammates to have a word with them. When they do share—regardless of the setting—make sure to honour and value their contribution.

Level Four - Challenging

• Model the ‘challenge’ behaviours you want to see. The two that come to mind for me are vulnerability and disagreement. By being vulnerable with your people, it is sending the signal that we all make mistakes, do dumb stuff, or lose. By modelling good disagreement, you are showing your people that we can debate ideas and issues on their merits and find a way forward without getting personal or creating fear/conflict.

Ultimately, psychological safety isn’t just about feelings—it’s about performance. Teams that don’t feel safe, don’t speak up. And when they don’t speak up, they don’t grow. As coaches, we set the tone. The question is—what thoughts, ideas or observations are your people currently holding back on? And what might happen if they feel they can take the interpersonal risk and share them?

*One’s I added to Edmondson’s list

“When we talk about courage, we think it’s going against an enemy with a machine gun. The real courage is seeing the truth and speaking truth to each other”

Dave Cooper, Former US Navy Seal

If I could, I’d link to the whole show. But I can’t, so I’ll settle for this clip from Ted Lasso season one. A great example that highlights inclusion and contributing from the examples above.

Want to discuss anything you’ve read? Email us at [email protected]. We’d love to hear from you!

Want to share the Deep Dive with friends? Just send them the link below to subscribe