Instead of investing more to train the frontline team members on problem-solving methods, spend more time educating and coaching leaders on the behaviors that are proven to build psychological safety. Starting at the top, leaders must model and reward vulnerable acts related to continuous improvement. Instead of blaming workers, change the management behaviors that change the culture. Participation and continuous improvement will be far more likely to materialize, and everybody wins.
However, someone has to pay for this content. And that’s where advertising comes in. Most people consider ads a nuisance, but they do serve a useful function besides allowing media companies to stay afloat. They keep you aware of new products and services relevant to your industry. All ads in Quality Digest apply directly to products and services that most of our readers need. You won’t see automobile or health supplement ads.
When it’s safer and easier to use one’s voice, and when doing so leads to action and improvement, people are more likely to continue speaking up and participating in continuous improvement. Leaders replace fear and punishment with encouragement and positive reinforcement.
I can’t count how many times during the past 20 years I’ve heard executives complain that their people aren’t enthusiastically participating in their lean program. Leaders lament that while the company has spent a small fortune to put everybody through continuous improvement training, hardly anybody submits ideas. The problem isn’t their employees; it’s a cultural problem and, therefore, a leadership problem.
In an environment of fear and punishment, employees understandably protect themselves by staying quiet about opportunities for improvement, which comes at a great cost to the organization. How do we address this? Don’t just tell employees they should feel safe or be brave in the face of fear. Eliminating fear is crucial, as W. Edwards Deming said decades ago. We need to replace fear with psychological safety.
|
|
What is psychological safety?
A “vulnerable act” exposes a person to the risk of harm or loss. Basically, any interaction between two or more human beings can be vulnerable, some interactions more than others. A specific act might make a person vulnerable, to some degree, in a specific situation, such as disagreeing with a particular leader, admitting a mistake, or making a process improvement suggestion.
Unlike physical safety, where we might say a particular act is inherently risky for all (such as working up high without a safety harness), the perceived level of risk for acts, such as admitting we don’t know how to do something, is situational and individual.
For example, leaders must model the key behaviors they want to see, such as admitting that things aren’t perfect. Leaders can also model helpful behaviors by sharing an idea along with the words, “I might not be completely right, so let’s test our idea on a small scale and see.” When leaders model these vulnerable acts, some employees might choose to follow their lead.
Lean
Stop Spending Money on Problem-Solving Training
Focus on psychological safety instead
How do leaders cultivate the conditions in which employees feel safe enough to speak up and participate in continuous improvement? Clark argues that leaders need to: 1) model vulnerable acts; and 2) reward vulnerable acts.
Our PROMISE: Quality Digest only displays static ads that never overlay or cover up content. They never get in your way. They are there for you to read, or not.
He dubs these four bullet points The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety. I highly recommend Clark’s book (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2020). As we progress to the fourth stage of psychological safety, everybody feels safe to challenge the status quo, which leads to a culture of continuous improvement. Reaching this pinnacle requires a foundation, in Stage 1, of feeling included, accepted, and respected.
How do leaders boost the feeling of psychological safety?
Social scientist and writer Timothy R. Clark succinctly defines psychological safety as “a culture of rewarded vulnerability.”
Stop blaming the employees
In the book Toyota Culture (McGraw Hill, 2008), Jeff Liker (who has studied Toyota for decades) and Michael Hoseus (a former Toyota leader) write, “(Toyota believes) people must be treated fairly; they must feel psychologically and physically safe….” Learning from mistakes and continuous improvement more broadly requires mutual trust; as Liker and Hoseus write, “Without trust in their employers, employees are reluctant to admit to the existence of problems and learn that it is safest to hide them.”
When a person chooses to speak up, it isn’t a matter of courage or character; it’s a function of culture. The level of safety that’s felt by an employee is the end result of all of the interactions they’ve had with leaders and colleagues, past and present.
These frustrated leaders often try to force employees to participate through incentives and quotas. A better strategy for leaders is taking responsibility and working to reduce two key cultural factors that keep employees from speaking up: fear and futility.
• Included
• Safe to learn
• Safe to contribute
• Safe to challenge the status quo
Thanks,
Quality Digest