Over the past few months, I have had the privilege of facilitating a series of Psychological Safety team workshops at a major international company. Together with my trainer colleagues, Lies Wouters, Dr. Günther Endres, and Christine Wirths, we worked with 80 teams from more than 40 cultures.
What started for me as a training initiative based on the groundbreaking work of Lies quickly turned into something much deeper, a journey into how people experience safety, unsafety, trust, and connection at work.
And more importantly, I witnessed firsthand how teams can move from merely surviving to thriving when Psychological Safety is present, even in the midst of major change and deep uncertainty about what lies ahead.
The Silent Cost of Fear in Organizations
Amy Edmondson (Professor at Harvard Business School) defines Psychological Safety as a shared belief of the team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking.
It means people can speak up, ask questions, challenge ideas, admit mistakes, and offer new perspectives without fear of humiliation or punishment.
Psychological Safety is not about being nice or avoiding conflict. It is about creating an environment where the truth can be spoken, and excellence is pursued without fear.
Yet in many organizations, fear operates quietly in the background.
People hesitate to say:
• “I don’t understand.”
• “I made a mistake.”
• “I see this differently.”
When the brain perceives social threat, it shifts into survival mode. Collaboration weakens. Creativity narrows. Performance drops.
This is not just theory. Research, including the Google Project Aristotle, identified Psychological Safety as the strongest predictor of team effectiveness.
In an age of rapid transformation and AI-driven disruption, Psychological Safety is no longer a “nice to have”. It becomes a strategic capability because it helps people navigate the in-between – building critical AI skills while grappling with uncertainty about what AI might mean for their professional future.
Understanding the Brain: Safety vs. Unsafety
One of the aspects participants found most fascinating was the neuroscience behind safety.
When we feel unsafe, the brain activates its threat system:
• The prefrontal cortex shuts down
• Curiosity, creativity, complex problem-solving, and empathy decrease
• People protect themselves rather than contribute
When we feel safe, the opposite happens:
• The prefrontal cortex engages
• Creativity and empathy expand
• Collaboration becomes natural
Participants also explored the three basic psychological human needs that form the foundation of sustainable performance:
• Autonomy – the need to feel agency and ownership
• Competence – the need to feel capable and effective
• Connection – the need to feel belonging and acceptance
When these needs are threatened, people withdraw.
When they are supported, people engage.
The Four Building Blocks of Psychological Safety
Throughout the workshops, we worked with four essential building blocks:
1. Self-Support
2, Empathy
3. Trust
4. Autonomous Support
Interestingly, the first block – Self-Support – was often the most challenging.
Many participants realized something profound: In difficult situations, we often focus on helping others first while ignoring our own internal state.
But Psychological Safety begins within – with yourself.
Only when people can acknowledge their own emotions and regulate themselves can they truly support others.
A Simple Tool That Opened Big Conversations: The Map Metaphor
Another powerful element of the workshops was the Map Metaphor.
It helps teams visualize how safe or unsafe people feel in particular situations.
Rather than debating opinions, participants explore experiences.
The map creates something crucial: situational awareness.
It lowers the barrier to talking about team members’ experiences by using a simple yet powerful terminology that supports honest dialogue.
Where the Magic Happened: The “Lead Your Team to Safety” Game
While participants appreciated the theory, the real transformation happened during the interactive simulation game developed by Lies Wouters: Lead Your Team to Safety.
In the game, participants work through simulated real workplace situations. Each person places their experienced level of safety in the scenario.
Something remarkable happens next.
The team begins to explore questions like:
• Why do different people feel safe or unsafe in the same situation?
• What assumptions have we been making about each other?
• What support would actually help?
The conversations that followed were often the most powerful moments of the workshop.
People realised:
• We often believe we know our colleagues well.
• In reality, people experience the same situation very differently.
• Two colleagues may feel equally unsafe in a situation – but for completely different reasons.
When teams start asking curious, open questions instead of making assumptions, understanding grows rapidly.
By the end of many workshops, something tangible had changed: the connection between team members felt noticeably stronger.
Empathy Is Not Advice
One of the most surprising insights for many participants concerned empathy.
In professional environments, empathy is often limited to the cognitive level. Many people also believe that giving advice is an expression of empathy.
But empathy actually means something different:
Seeing the situation from the other person’s perspective, stepping into their shoes, and acknowledging their experience.
Advice can sometimes unintentionally bypass the human experience entirely.
When participants recognized this difference, it triggered deep reflection about their own communication patterns.
What Participants Took Away
Across the 80 teams, several themes appeared again and again:
1. A new understanding of the connection between the brain, body, and behavior
Participants were fascinated by the neuroscience of safety and how strongly it influences behavior and collaboration.
2. A new perspective on colleagues
After the simulation game, many said they learned a lot about their teammates in a completely different way.
3. The danger of assumptions
We often assume we know why people behave a certain way.
In reality, safety levels vary depending on context, personal experience, and the ability to self-regulate.
4. The power of dialogue
Listening and asking open questions creates understanding faster than any assumption ever could.
Psychological Safety Is Not Harmony
Another important insight surfaced during many workshops.
Some participants initially associated Psychological Safety with harmony or avoiding conflict.
But Psychological Safety is not false harmony. It is not suppressing conflicts to maintain a good team atmosphere.
It is about creating an environment where:
• Truth can be spoken
• Ideas can be challenged
• Mistakes can be acknowledged
• Learning can happen
In psychologically safe teams, conflict does not disappear. It becomes constructive.
From Surviving to Thriving
Facilitating these workshops across cultures and teams was a powerful reminder: Despite our cultural differences, the human need for safety in the form of connection, competence, and autonomy is universal.
When people feel safe, they:
• Speak up
• Collaborate
• Innovate
• Perform at their best
When they don’t, they protect themselves (instead of contributing).
Psychological Safety, therefore, is not a soft concept. It is a performance multiplier.
And perhaps the most encouraging insight from the past months is this: Creating Psychological Safety does not require grand organizational programs.
It often begins with small, persistent actions:
• Listening with curiosity
• Asking instead of assuming
• Acknowledging emotions
• Offering support
When leaders and teams start practicing these behaviors, fear gradually turns into something else: Collective Power.
Now I am curious:
What helps you create Psychological Safety in your team?
Where do you see the biggest barriers today?
And do you think Psychological Safety can help organizations navigate the AI transformation?
