Abstract

This paper discusses psychological safety and distinguishes it from the related construct of interpersonal trust. Trust is the expectation that others ' future actions will be favorable to one's interests; psychological safety refers to a climate in which people are comfortable being (and expressing) themselves. Although both constructs involve a willingness to be vulnerable to others ' actions, they are conceptually and theoretically distinct. In particular, psychological safety is centrally tied to learning behavior, while trust lowers transactions costs and reduces the need to monitor behavior. This paper proposes a model of antecedents and consequences of psychological safety in work teams and emphasizes the centrality of psychological safety for learning behavior. Drawing from field research in a variety of organizational settings, I describe different approaches to studying and measuring psychological safety in teams. I conclude with implications of this work including limitations of psychological safety in practice and suggestions areas for future research. 1 There's much greater openness on this team—it's intangible.- Marketing member, new product development team, manufacturing company [In this team] people are put down for being different...- Accountant, publications team, manufacturing company Mistakes [in this unit] are serious, because of the toxicity of the drugs—so you’re never afraid to tell the nurse manager.- Nurse, Team A, Memorial Hospital [The team leader] treats you as guilty if you make a mistake... I was called into her office and made to feel like a two-year old... You get put on trial...- Nurse, Team B, Memorial Hospital

Citations