Psychological Safety

I make no secret of the fact I am a big fan of Amy Edmondson's work - in particular on #psychologicalsafety, so I found it very interesting when reading Walter Isaacson's biography on #elonmusk to read about Musk's views on the subject - specifically during his takeover of #Twitter (now #X).

When covering the #twitter takeover, Isaacson writes that one of the commonly used 'buzzwords' there was #psychologicalsafety and how this is a concept which Musk considers to be the enemy of "urgency, progress and orbital velocity" - pointing out that Musk's preferred buzzword was "hardcore". Musk believes that discomfort is a good thing, particularly in preventing complacency.

I have never met Musk, so I can only base my judgement on what I have read - primarily in Walter Isaacson's book because he spent so much time with Musk in the process of writing it. That said, I am aware that #Musk is a controversial character. Some of his methods aren't always conventional and his management style can be extreme. His neurodiversity means he struggles with empathy.

Notwithstanding this, it cannot be ignored that #musk has achieved remarkable things in business that have, and will continue to have, a profound impact on the world. Further, in 2022, the value of the four companies he had initially built were:

- Tesla $1 trillion

- SpaceX $100 billion

- #TheBoringCompany $5.6 billion

- #Neuralink $1 billion

That list doesn't take account of other successful business ventures he has been involved with or exited. And it's worth mentioning that he constantly flirts with the title of being the "richest person on earth", so he's doing 'OK'.

Personally, I find Musk quite fascinating - he is a complex and multi-dimensional character. And at the end of the day - he gets results. Whilst I'm not advocating for the way he sometimes goes about it - it does make me curious. . .

My personal interest in business is #highperformanceteams and #organisationaldesign which is why I find Amy Edmondson's work on #psychologicalsafety so interesting, and I was prompted to write this having read this post by Adrian Pyne: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/psychological-safety-how-tell-someone-offin-nice-way-adrian-pyne-zbc8e/ which refers to Google's Project Aristotle (a study conducted at Google to better understand how to create #highperformanceteams).

The project found that psychologically safe teams were not just high performing, but also had greater #creativity and #innovation - things which are surely critical to Musk's companies!?

So why is he so against the idea? Perhaps its a simple lack of understanding. . . as Adrian's article notes, #psychologicalsafety doesn't mean you have to be nice to people all the time, and it certainly doesn't mean that difficult or uncomfortable conversations should be avoided.

I would argue that it means the exact opposite: psychological safety, if embedded properly and effectively, should create conditions within the operating environment to facilitate those difficult conversations at all levels within the #organisation. Ultimately, it is about ensuring a standard of #performance.

There are multiple scenarios in Isaacson's book that indicate that Musk might have benefitted from being challenged on certain decisions by better informed members of his team - but even those within his closest circle seem to struggle to challenge him. This means Musk is deprived of #information, #ideas, and critical insights - all of which could help him to make better #judgements.

In the complex and rapidly evolving industries in which Musk's companies operate, good decision-making is mission-critical.

The key then, is to truly understand what #psychologicalsafety means (and what it doesn't mean). It certainly doesn't mean being "really nice" to each other. It doesn't mean making sure nobody's feelings get hurt and it absolutely doesn't mean that poor performance should be tolerated - ever.

Whilst #respect, #inclusivity, and #consideration are crucial elements of an effective, high performing team, that doesn't mean we must always be "nice". When we operate in teams, as almost all of us will do in our professional lives, we have a responsibility to challenge, criticise (constructively), and provide honest #feedback. Equally, we must all receive that feedback, challenge, and (constructive) criticism with humility - without taking it personally.

This ensures that ideas are shared, #creativity flourishes, innovation thrives, relationships strengthen, #knowledge is disseminated and, importantly, #progress is made.

This type of culture also ensures that decisions can be made quickly - which is important because decision-paralysis is one of the biggest killers of progress and productivity. This was highlighted in Stan McChrystal 's book #TeamofTeams, which documents the changes he made to the operating framework during combat missions to ensure that teams were #empowered, #engaged, and #aligned around the Mission. The key term devised was "empowered execution" - both within the organisation and with external partner teams - which requires rapid, inclusive and transparent #communication and #collaboration.

In my industry, which is safety-critical and complex by nature - and which depends on multi-discipline, cross-functional teams - effective communication and collaboration is central to successful programme delivery. Without it, silos area created, tension builds, and relationships breakdown, leading to timescales slipping and costs increasing.

Whilst I am in no position to tell #ElonMusk how to run his multi-trillion dollar companies, I do think it might be worth him exploring the concept of #psychologicalsafety in more detail; considering that it is designed to enable open disagreement, encourage risk-taking, and ensure that bad news is delivered - and dealt with - quickly, he might find he likes it. . .

Plus - high performing, creative, innovative teams come in handy when you're trying to change the world!