Being accountable for our actions sounds simple, but try extracting an acceptable apology from someone, and you will soon find out that this ability is as rare as hen's teeth. My brother Steve and I tried this experiment some 20 years ago. We agreed that if either of us got angry, we would give the... Continue Reading →
The term "psychological safety" is believed to have been first employed and explored by organisational researchers Edgar Schein and Warren Bennis in 1965, defining it as "an atmosphere where one can take chances (which experimentalism implies) without fear and with sufficient protection." (Schein and Bennis, 1965, p. 44)"
When one thinks about it most of our behavior is based around fear of conflict and how we can avoid it.So we have created and listened to stories that tell us: Don't be a snitchGo with the flowYou are too sensitiveDon't make wavesLet sleeping dogs lieDon't rock the boat Don't upset the applecartSticks and stones....Suck... Continue Reading →
So many people seem to be talking about psychological safety in organizational psychology circles lately. The idea has been around for the last 50 years. It can be defined as a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking. That is, to construct an environment where it is safe to speak up without fear... Continue Reading →
This is the simple reason why startups fail and how we propose to fix it: https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/cjrlFySKoiduzo?hostedIn=slideshare&page=upload SpatzAI Startup Moderator Toolkit to Resolve Founder Conflict
I don't agree with this definition of psychological safety ie. "Psychological safety is achieved when an employee feels that they can be their authentic self, especially in a team setting, and not suffer any negative consequences as a result." I don't believe that psychological safety is a "feeling" but true psychological safety is only achieved... Continue Reading →
65% of Startup Teams Fail Due to Founder ConflictProf. Noam Wasserman THE FOUNDER’S DILEMMAS Why is it that no one seems to want to do anything about reducing this figure. Yes, you are reading correctly 65% and yet I am not aware of any startup accelerators doing anything differently to rectify this figure. I am... Continue Reading →
What we thought was a minor spat at the time turned out to be an ongoing major conflict that is still unresolved to this day. I guess you could say it was a conflict in disguise.
We should be able to test and resolve all of our spats to ensure that they are not the more severe dispute or conflict. Let's try to resolve all our minor team spats mainly because some of these spats could be conflicts in disguise and ultimately could be responsible for causing the the next startup team to fail.
So you’ve formed your startup team, great! And together, you’ve formed a neat code of conduct because you want everyone to feel psychologically safe in the team, right? You’ve read all the books on managing a team well and do all the workshops; Amy Edmondson, Tim Clark, Kim Scott, Adam Grant, Simon Senek, and the... Continue Reading →
Feeling psychologically unsafe? What does it even mean, really? Okay, lets break it down.Amy Edmondson coded description: “A shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking.” Amy EdmondsonA shared belief...that the team is safe...for interpersonal risk-taking. === Desmond SherlockWe agree on...a way to keep the team safe...sharing conflicting ideas. Here is my decoded... Continue Reading →
Slack XXX Group's Code of Conduct We hold all stories or personal material in confidentiality We are careful about interrupting each other.When we disagree, we focus on the idea, not the person.When we have a discussion, we make spaces to pause for reflection.We don’t need to be articulate to express ourselves.We acknowledge that there is... Continue Reading →
We are all conductors in a team, I believe. Like electricity conductors, only in our case we are conductors of information and may be very similar to nodes in a network. And the network suffers when we have a mis-conduction between two team members caused by a misconduct.
Firstly I think an essential part of a code of conduct is what happens when there is a violation of the code and company ethics. A "misconduct," if you will. I refer you to the article, defining a code of conduct. Maybe the code of conduct should be called a "code of misconduct," ha!
Amy Edmondson defines psychological safety as "a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking." In a nutshell, for a team to speak up, take risks, and share radical ideas, they will need to feel protected from so-called naysaying behavior. I don't think the problem is going to be fixed by creating “a shared belief... Continue Reading →
How would a machine learn to behave civilly in a team environment? No real knowledge in this area, but this is how I would wing it. How about we create an algorithm. It would consist of a team member (anyone in the team can be the trainer) using Step 1. Verbal Caution of the robot,... Continue Reading →
Why are team members in organizations hesitant to take a risk and share their ultra-radical ideas? Because of the feedback response, they are likely to receive if they step too far out of the norm.
Machine moderators may be used in the pre-moderation stage to flag content for review by humans. This would increase moderation accuracy and improve the pre-moderation stage.
Firstly everyone in the team would need to agree to use the safety moderator. It allows anyone to speak up in real-time and object when we feel offended or uncomfortable with how we are treated during a heated discussion.
Q. When will we know we have enough of it? A. When we don't need to talk about it as much.
Could the secret to being objective in what what we say and do be embedded in the word itself when we simply object? I think so.
I find this both ironic and hypocritical that the psychological safety movement and organizational psychologists can criticize leaders or managers for being know-it-alls, psychopaths or narcissists. And at the same time, talk about creating a safe environment for teams
Mistake or Misbehavior I exchanged comments on LinkedIn yesterday and had an interesting discussion with someone on the differences between the word mistake versus misbehavior. I tend to believe that people can confuse the two. A mistake is usually seen as unintentional. Knocking over a cup of coffee by mistake is seen as a misdirection... Continue Reading →
My tip, for what it's worth, as a person with cognitive biases, is to look out for and listen to how people frame their thoughts to you. Premising our statements with "I think.." or "to me..." is a handy reminder.
Can a Lone Manager Destroy Real Psychological Safety in a Team? I am no expert, so I don't know. Maybe someone can enlighten me? I don't believe any workplace that claims to be a "safe space" can have its safety destroyed by one individual. Imagine an existing manager, boss, CEO, investor, or leader in the... Continue Reading →
Listen to any two people in a heated dispute and one thing I believe you are bound to notice, and that is their surety that they are right and the other is wrong. No doubts! You can quickly tell by the absolute and dogmatic language they are using. No prefacing their statements with "I think.."... Continue Reading →
Illusion of Objectivity Have a conversation with some "experts" on their chosen subject, and you may well detect their Objectivity Illusion. Now, I better be careful, or you could be accusing me of this flaw. Well, it is true. I'm pretty sure that I have this illusion also, ha! How we conquer this illusion is... Continue Reading →
Restoring Eroded Trust Search on Google for building trust and psychological safety, and you will see oodles of articles on the subject but not so many on restoring lost trust. The issue for me is not so much on building trust in a team but how we restore it when it is lost or eroded. Generally,... Continue Reading →
Freestyle Conversation Empowering Teams to Speak Up Imagine if we were free to interrupt our conversations or discussions with anyone in our team or with management. Anytime or anywhere, we could pause our interactions when we felt something amiss with what was said or how it was said. In the same way that a Toyota... Continue Reading →
Adapted from: Wikipedia Andon System of manufacturing. From Wikipedia: "An Andon system is one of the principal elements of the Jidoka quality control method pioneered by Toyota as part of the Toyota Production System and therefore now part of the lean production approach." END.Also know as Stop-the-Line manufacturing. What is an Andon Discussion - Object123Andon gives every worker the ability and empowerment to... Continue Reading →
First Human Attempts at Controlled Flight I believe it is time we replicated the quest for controlled flight by getting governments and investors to offer cash prizes to the first organization that achieves an effective and measurable psychologically safe environment in the workplace. Excerpts from Matt Williams Blog "The idea of offering incentive prizes to inspire... Continue Reading →
Unfortunately, when we focus on correcting mistakes, we seem to focus on the person as much as on the mistake. That's how we were brought up. We still use language like "his mistake," "your fault," "he's a trouble maker," and "she's to blame." We even have institutions to help correct people's BIG mistake-making, called "correctional... Continue Reading →
How do we save billions of dollars globally on HR and management fees? Easy! Simply create a one-on-one, self-moderating procedure that teams can use to to help resolve their behavior disputes with fellow team members or their manager. We call ours Object123 . Then create a social network of independent peers that are willing to review and adjudicate any disputes that we have trouble resolving using this tool. We call our the Disputz Network . And that's it.
Lately, I seem to be hearing a lot about psychological safety as a new strategy to help teams perform more effectively in the workplace. Let's be clear; there is nothing new about the concept. The term was first coined in 1965 by MIT professors Edgar Schein and Warren Bennis, who argued that psychological safety was... Continue Reading →
Object123 procedure and the Disputz Network It is guaranteed that our behavior will be somewhat objectionable on occasion, especially when we disagree within an organization. (no one’s perfect, right?)We can either ignore the behavior as it happens, and be more likely to complain to others after, using malicious gossip, and creating a toxic workplace….Or we... Continue Reading →