Psychological Safety as Easy as 1,2,3

SpatzAI.com – fair play

I believe that psychological safety is much simpler than most see it.

If psychological safety is being in a safe space or environment where one can speak up without fear of suffering any unfair repercussions then I think that all we need is a system to resolve what is an actual fair or unfair repercussion.

And who better than our peers in an open forum to assist in getting some more objectivity when we are having trouble resolving what is fair or unfair in a one-on-one discussion.

And that is it.

The 3-step procedure (app and platform) I’m proposing helps resolve unfair behavior between a fellow team member or manager, but uses the peer review method to evaluate our minor differences (when we can’t amicably do it ourselves) so we can overcome our individual biases and reduce or resolve our uncertainties.

I hope to prove the simple civil model that’s already used in science and in our judicial systems (trial by our peers). This is hardly rocket science but the real-world data that we could collect would be invaluable to organizations wanting to evaluate the psychological and emotional health of a team I believe.

I believe we can judge if a place is psychologically safe or not by how fair or unfair this space is in evaluating or resolving our minor differences. The SpatzAI.com referee toolkit is designed to resolve any unfairness in teams.

“Interesting concept. I like the benchmarking with peers for perspective. I’m wondering though if this could be perceived as peer judgement?”

Dr Iain Price (PhD)

Exactly Iain. Open and transparent judgment, where the team and the Spatz AI gets to hear both sides of the story and judge what is fair or unfair behavior.

What we have at the moment, I believe is no method to resolve our minor spats. So what do I do when I feel I was wronged by you? I go and tell my trusted confidants how you wronged me but of course they only get to hear my biased one-sided story. And you do the same with your trusted confidants and this happens daily even hourly in teams with schism and cliques forming.

Judgement happens, only it is usually unfair judgment based on our biased one-sided perspectives. It’s commonly called gossiping, talking behind someone’s back, backbiting, hearsay or backstabbing and it is endemic in every organization and team like a hidden toxic cancer.

I’m sure you’ve heard of it and we have all participated in such behavior and unfair judgment on occasion. SpatzAI is designed to eradicate this malicious unfair judgment and behavior, and give us a more balanced and fairer judgment.

“Additionally, detailing safeguards or measures to ensure the process remains positive and constructive could further alleviate potential concerns”.

Concern from the SpatzAI

Yes, we are addressing your concern by requiring team members participating to of course review in a respectful manner, however if they do not then the reviewing behavior can also be challenged using the Spatz process. Everyone in the team that has agreed to use the Spatz protocol will be subject to it and judged by it, with the Spatz AI also contributing her views and offer any recommendations if required.

The SpatzAI Procedure: is a structured referee toolkit for addressing & resolving team micro-conflicts. It consists of the team charter, a 3-step app, team-assisted review platform and team LLM data, for adjudicating what is fair or unfair play:

◾0. Verbal Caution (Pause): A team member initiates the process by verbally cautioning a colleague or manager about the problematic behavior during a discussion, aiming for an immediate change in tone, volume or approach.

◾1. Official Caution (Spat): If the issue remains unresolved, the offended party can escalate to an official caution using the SpatzAI 3-step app, documenting the specific behaviors & seeking acknowledgment from the offender.

◾2. Official Objection (Dispute): Unresolved or contested issues progress to an official objection, where the offending team member is required to provide a simple apology for a resolution.

◾3. Official Stop (Conflict): Continuing issues are further escalated with an official “Stop.” This stage involves the conflict getting automatically posted on the peer review platform using the data from the app.

◾Post on Platform: The SpatzAI Team-assisted Review Platform for broader more objective team input and resolution, with a required heartfelt apology acceptable to the offended party to finally atone for the conflict.

The SpatzAI Demo Video