Is it contradictory?

Psychological Safety is a slightly misleading term. Many people think it's about being nice for the sake of avoiding conflict - that to be psychologically safe, we should avoid holding ourselves and others to a higher standard of performance. We’ll also avoid difficult conversations and feedback, so people feel safe. A psychologically safe environment is often uncomfortable, precisely because it is safe to do all these things. As a result individuals and teams will push into greater performance.

High psychological safety without a correspondingly high performance standard creates a comfort zone. Comfortable, but highly unlikely to yield high performance, learning or innovation. Over time, those comfort zones crumble into complacency and eventually apathy.

So what can our business owner of last week do to raise both psychological safety and performance:

• Aim for 5x as much affirming feedback as corrective. Tell people when they are doing a great job and why. This is significantly more effective in setting a high performance standard than critical or corrective feedback. And corrective feedback will be more willingly accepted when it is needed. People will want to know how to improve.

• Ask for feedback yourself. Listen and act on it. By doing so you set the standard that feedback is part of how we work.

• Give yourself feedback by reflecting on your work, what went well and what could be improved. Show the way on this and set up opportunities for others to do the same regularly. Many micro versions trump occasional large ones like performance reviews once a year.

• Be specific and clear when giving feedback. Many of us shy away from this in an attempt to be ‘nice’. It misses the mark.

• Get to know your team and what motivates them. When people feel you care about them as people, as well as the results, the results will benefit.

PS if you’d like some great questions to ask for reflection and feedback, send me a message and we’ll send them through.

Force won’t fix it

A while ago, I was doing a maintenance job on my motorbike. When trying to re-fit the front axle it wouldn’t slide through without a bit of force. As the saying goes, ”If at first it doesn’t fit, get a bigger hammer.” I got one and in return I got some damaged parts. My bigger hammer made a bigger problem.

The situation came to mind when I was talking to a leader about the performance of his team. According to him, they are not bad, but the general standard of their work is a bit lackadaisical. In attempting to lift the standard, all his tactics are about more force. Some of what he told me:

• He expresses anger and/or disappointment at the current standard of work (Understandable by the way, it costs him $$ when work is not on point)

• He plays people off against each other

• He makes thinly veiled threats about people losing their job

• He demands longer work hours to make up for the perceived shortcomings

• He constantly reminds people of policies and procedures

• He is looking over people’s shoulders all the time

• He never thanks people for anything (Why should I thank them for doing the job they are paid to do, especially if they are not doing it well? he asked)

I asked him how that approach was working for him.

“I think it’s getting worse,: he said. People don’t take responsibility and blame others/circumstances for their results. Like me with my axle bolt, I understand his frustration, but I’m not surprised.

In an environment where high results/standards are expected, but people don’t feel psychologically safe, the dominant feeling is anxiety. People will do almost anything to avoid attention and cover their butts. More force adds to the problem, making it harder and longer to fix.

Next time we’ll look at some of what he can do to reverse the current situation and build

Psychological safety as well as the performance standard.

That takes the cake

Want to see a really great example of high quality feedback delivered really well? Such examples are hard to find in a format that can be widely shared. Last night I was watching the finale of School of Chocolate on Netflix. It’s an interesting show if you are into food, sculpture, fine art and expertise. In the finale, two people are competing for a massive prize by making a chocolate showpiece. Chef Amaury Guichon gives the competitors some great feedback when their build is done. The whole season is worth a watch if you are into that sort of thing. If it’s not your flavour, but you’d like to see the feedback go straight to the final episode from 27 min 10 sec until 30 min for one competitor and 30:46 to 33:00 for the other (You’re welcome!). If you want a bit more context watch the whole episode. SPOILER ALERT, if you plan to watch the whole series, watching these 2 segments before watching from Episode One will make it less enjoyable.

Chef Guichon uses some fine ingredients often missing from feedback:

• It’s clear, concise and specific with good examples

• It’s actionable

• When he expresses an opinion, or preference he owns it by saying “I would have liked…”

• When he’s talking industry standards he’s clear about that too

• He doesn’t beat around the bush with ambiguous fluff, making statements that sound as if there’s deep meaning buried in the marrow just waiting to be sucked out by someone who is already on the bus and willing to step up and lift their game (See what I did there?)

• He is respectful in his delivery

• He cares about the development and growth of the person receiving the feedback

• He gives quality corrective feedback as well as feedback on elements that were well executed

Magnifique Chef Guichon! It’s a great recipe. With a bit of practice anyone can do it. Sing out if you’d like a hand with that.

Why can’t we just talk openly?

A new CEO asked this question of his senior staff, one of whom I’m coaching at the moment. His belief is that people should be able to raise issues and talk openly about them with each other. But people don’t. Simply saying that they should, regardless of good intent, won’t change people’s minds.

There’s been a history in the organisation of people raising issues and experiencing significant backlash. There’s been people actively working to boost their reputation while tearing others down. There's been gossip and blame. People are accustomed to bad outcomes when they speak openly about problems. There’s nothing in recent history that suggests doing so would be good or safe.

To change that will take more than words. It will take building trust and psychological safety. That will likely mean starting with relatively small and inconsequential pieces and building up to the bigger stuff. It will take some courage and accountability.

All that can be achieved reasonably quickly, but simply saying it won’t make it so.

“Did you get a free coffee yesterday?”, the owner asked my wife. “No , why?”, she replied. As she brewed a fresh and free coffee, the owner told Donna she had noticed she didn’t drink her breakfast coffee on Sunday. We had left before she could ask why not. She was genuinely curious about why that coffee had been left untouched by one of her regular customers. She listened to Donna’s feedback, asked great questions, and listened some more.

On its own, that’s pretty cool. But it doesn’t make a difference. I’m sure many of us have had experiences of giving feedback, only for nothing to change. At that coffee shop, action is guaranteed - like when the lids on takeaway cups kept coming off and the owner had a new supplier the following day - she makes it safe to speak, she listens and she acts.

Safety in this case is created by 4 things:

1. She has a track record of being open to feedback and genuine enquiry. She always receives feedback without judgement, justification, blame or excuses. She simply listens.

2. The free coffee is a way of saying “I know you were not happy with our product. I know we did something different and less good”. She is creating an invitation to talk about it by acknowledging the problem and making a gesture of good faith.

3. She separates the people from the problem. It’s all about the best possible coffee. It’s not about an argument or lynching baristas.

4. She acts which lets people know the feedback is heard and valued.

By comparison, a coaching client is currently being asked to give feedback about a team member. The process is not transparent. The intent is not transparent. There's a history of issues raised being ignored or not acted on. There’s a history of people being treated differently because they gave feedback. Not surprisingly, she doesn’t feel safe to give feedback.

How do you personally seek and encourage feedback?

How do you make it safe for others to seek it and give it?

What action do you take as a result?

And if you are in Midland, check out New Ritual cafe. The coffee is great.

Work Both Ways

I worked with a team with some of the best scores I have ever seen for psychological safety. It wasn't surprising. The team focusses on it in everything they do. Despite the scores, their biggest opportunity for improvement was feedback. They give and receive plenty. They value it. They care about each other as well as the result. These are all ingredients for a great feedback culture. Almost all of them said the quality of feedback was the challenge.

To give quality feedback work in 2 directions at once. Down into detail and up into context. Specific, actionable detail is feedback gold. If it's not specific enough it's difficult to act on. The master stroke is to link to a bigger contextual frame. Context makes feedback useful across everything you do, rather than just the immediate situation.

I love working with teams to develop great feedback skills. Done well feedback is a superpower for teams. Done poorly it can tear them apart.

How does your team score on feedback?

Order from Chaos - 5 Lessons from a Day with an Elite Response Team

I recently had the privilege of spending the day with a professional emergency response team in their training environment. They are tasked with entering highly dynamic and unpredictable environments, often with minimal information. The situations they face evolve rapidly. One of the stand out aspects of their work was their ability to create order in the midst of chaos. I wondered what lessons could be learned that apply to everyday leadership and business. While the physical risk for most of us is much lower, we certainly face chaotic and unpredictable situations, often with minimal information and evolving dynamics.

Lesson 1 - Inject Clarity

I’m rapidly forming a view that the number one job of leaders in an uncertain world is clarity. The team added clarity in a number of ways. Excellent communication that focussed on what was known and what they were going to do. This included quality questions that highlighted gaps and potential misunderstandings. Ultra clear roles and responsibilities. Everyone knew exactly what they were responsible for. Clear decision making so that when the inevitable decisions on the fly needed to be made the whole team knew where their decision making lines were. Clearly defined start, end, decision, and potential disruption points. Discipline to focus the above on known information or useful speculation. The team stayed well away from the potential rabbit holes of ineffective ‘what if’. 

Lesson 2 - Debrief

After the action stopped, the whole team paused for review. What went well, what could have been improved, what lessons could they adopt for the future? Notable in this process was a strong expectation that people would highlight potential improvement. There was little consideration of position or ego in the process. All input was matter of fact and welcome.

Lesson 3 - BYO Feedback

Part of what made the debrief effective was people providing their own feedback for places they could have done better or had messed something up. They weren’t attempting to blame others or circumstances for anything. And they certainly weren’t waiting to see if someone else noticed. Actively reflecting on your own performance makes it easier and safer for others to give you feedback.

Lesson 4 - Hone your skill

The combination of clarity, practice and debriefing had the team constantly honing their collective skill. Individuals were doing the same. Whatever it is you do, keep practising and refining. Be the best you can be. When chaos lands you know your capability and can deliver without hesitation.

Lesson 5 - Control for Innovation

The team took active control of all elements they could. How they moved, how they communicated, how they decided, who was responsible for what, staying fed/hydrated/rested so they were ready to go, flawless maintenance and front loading, testing systems and gear and much more. The discipline and tight control of elements they could control created a strong core of certainty within chaotic and uncertain environments. It allowed them to quickly adapt and innovate when they needed to.

In what ways can you incorporate these lessons into your work/leadership? What additional insights would you add?