Security and trust, the basis of an effective team

Google did some large-scale research a few years ago among its own teams, to find out what really makes a team effective. Contrary to what they were expecting, it was not the right mix of people and skills, but "psychological safety" that was top of the list, by some way. Psychologically secure teams generated more turnover, their team members were twice as effective, made better use of the power of diverse input, shifted to different roles and challenges more rapidly, and were more loyal to the employer. Things which all contribute to both the effectiveness of a team and the long-term fitness for work of employees. In brief, as a manager, investing in psychological safety is well worth it.

What exactly is psychological safety? Amy Edmundson, a professor at Harvard Business School, has done a great deal of research on this subject and defines psychological safety as follows:

Without psychological safety it is almost impossible to work together effectively, let alone to innovate, improve and make progress. Employees who have doubts about what may happen next, who suffer from excessive pressure of work, or feel tension about a new project will only verbalise this if they can do so without losing face or hurting themselves.

The same thing applies for other things that affect fitness for work. If, for example, an employee is no longer motivated, they will not talk about if they have the impression that it will put their job at risk. Someone going through a divorce at home will only talk about it if they are not immediately labelled as being highly emotional. If someone is in conflict with a colleague, they will only raise it if they have the feeling that it will be taken seriously. If there is no space for this, then you run the risk that employees will report sick more frequently, which is of course not the right solution.

So as a manager you want to create an environment where people dare to speak up, are able to experiment, can take (calculated) risks, and where every new situation is a learning opportunity. Where people know their shortcomings, are able to admit their mistakes, and are above all willing to learn.

Trust is a very broad concept. In Google's research the concept of "dependability" came in second for effective teams, or the ability to trust someone. This is primarily about whether team members can assume that each of them will deliver high quality work on time. Trust in each other's expertise and "a promise is a promise" are crucial to this. As a manager you set the example. If you do not trust your people, then your people will not trust each other. If, on the other hand, you are convinced that your people can hack it, and you stand up for them, then their (self-)confidence will grow. Which does not mean that you have to pretend that everything is sweetness and light. Anyone who abuses the trust within the team can of course be called to account.

Trust is also closely linked to communication. If you as manager regularly say one thing to the team, and another to individuals, if you gossip about people in your group, or if your behaviour does not line up with what you say, that does not generate trust. Nor does it inspire your team http://loont.nu/veiligheid-en-vertromembers to behave better. Being honest about mistakes made, recognising them and – even as manager – admitting that something is troubling you, will do so. It also gives you the opportunity to try out how something might be done better, which also contributes to the team's effectiveness.

Teresa Amabile, lecturer and researcher at Harvard, also concludes that a friendly social context where encouragement, involvement, friendship and genuine contact are the norm, is of significant importance in stimulating people's creative thinking. We know from other research that enjoying your work increases productivity, loyalty and long-term fitness for work. This squares the circle.