09th September 2025
The Tandem Drivers of Psychological Safety
Psychological safety is often hailed as the cornerstone of high-performing teams. It’s the idea that people feel safe to speak up, admit mistakes, and challenge the status quo without fear of humiliation or punishment. But like any powerful concept, it’s not universally positive. When misapplied or misunderstood, psychological safety can become a shield for complacency or a breeding ground for groupthink.
There are plenty of places to go and authors to read and follow to learn more about Psychological Safety, many more informative than I could ever be. But here’s a way of thinking about, and applying Psychological Safety, to your team that might help you plan your next steps.
Two Essential Conditions for Psychological Safety:
For Psychological Safety to exist, two things need to be present at the same time. They are:
- A Willingness to Challenge: Individuals are prepared to question their leader and peers.
- The Ability to be Vulnerable: Individuals (and more importantly, leaders) openly admit mistakes, gaps in knowledge, or personal limitations.
Like any good construct we can plot and explore this construct more deeply via a 2X2 Matrix:
Looking at this this way give gives rise to four distinct team / organisational dynamics:
Challenge + Vulnerability: The Gold Standard
This is the sweet spot. People feel safe enough to admit when they’re wrong and bold enough to challenge others when they think something’s off. These teams iterate fast, learn constantly, and hold each other to high standards. Conflict is constructive, and feedback flows freely. It’s not always comfortable, but it’s deeply productive.
Implication: This is where psychological safety delivers on its promise. Leaders should actively cultivate this quadrant by modelling vulnerability and rewarding constructive dissent.
Challenge + No Vulnerability: The Intellectual Battleground
Here, people are willing to challenge each other, but not to expose their own weaknesses. The result is often a combative environment where ideas are debated fiercely, but personal growth stalls. Individuals may posture or defend their positions at all costs, fearing that vulnerability will be weaponised.
Implication: This quadrant can produce sharp thinking but poor collaboration. Without vulnerability, trust erodes. Leaders need to signal that it’s safe to be wrong, not just to be right.
No Challenge + Vulnerability: The Comfort Zone
In this quadrant, people are open about their shortcomings but reluctant to challenge others. It’s a warm, empathetic environment, but one that risks stagnation. Mistakes are forgiven, but mediocrity may go unchallenged. Teams here often prioritise harmony over progress.
Implication: This is psychological safety without accountability, toxic positivity. Leaders must encourage respectful challenge and make it clear that care and candour are not mutually exclusive.
No Challenge + No Vulnerability: The Silent Spiral
This is the danger zone. People neither speak up about their own limitations nor challenge others. It’s a culture of silence, where problems fester and innovation dies. Individuals may feel unsafe, disengaged, or simply indifferent.
Implication: This quadrant signals a breakdown in trust. Leaders must intervene quickly—rebuilding safety from the ground up and creating space for both honesty and dissent.
So what?
Psychological safety isn’t just about being nice. It’s about creating a culture where truth can be spoken, whether it’s uncomfortable, inconvenient, or humbling. The best teams don’t just feel safe, they feel responsible: for themselves, for each other, and for the work.
If you’re a leader, ask yourself: which quadrant does your team live in? And what are you doing to move them towards the gold standard?
Justin Miles
Categories: Developing Leaders
