IS PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY A SHAM? (THE ANSWER WILL SURPRISE YOU)

Once, during a meeting with executives, a newly hired project manager raised his hand to challenge a strategic decision made by the CTO.
The room froze. The silence lasted longer than it should.
But the leader simply smiled and said:
“Great question. Let’s explore that point.”

That story is real.
That manager was me.
But it could have been someone else.

In most organizations, fear is silent.
It doesn’t scream — it whispers.
And it disguises itself as “good behavior.”

People avoid asking questions so they don’t seem incompetent.
They hear absurdities and stay quiet to avoid conflict.
They smile in meetings while panicking inside.

Leaders — often well-intentioned — think they are creating a safe environment,
when in fact, they’re just cultivating a pleasant atmosphere.

Psychological safety is not about collective hugs — it’s about collective courage.

And 90% of leaders still confuse the two.
In the agile world, talking about a “safe environment” has become a cliché.
But few truly understand that the real antidote to catastrophic failure — both human and organizational —
is the ability to say:

• “This is wrong”
• “I don’t know”
• “I disagree”

• …especially when it means confronting someone with more power than you.
The correct definition is simple, yet profound:

Psychological safety is the shared belief that it’s safe to take interpersonal risks — such as asking questions, admitting mistakes, or disagreeing — without fear of punishment or humiliation.

But here’s the catch: this definition only makes sense when you understand what it is not.

And that’s where the real problem — and the overlooked opportunity — lies.

❌ Nine Common (and Dangerous) Misconceptions

Throughout my experience in cognitive-behavioral and organizational development, I’ve seen leaders drown in misunderstood concepts that, far from creating healthy environments, end up reinforcing toxic practices disguised as “kindness” or “inclusivity.”

Psychological safety is not a comfortable state where everyone agrees and avoids friction.
On the contrary, it is a fertile ground for productive discomfort, respectful confrontation, and the courage to be vulnerable in front of the group.

So before you create your next “safe space,” reflect on these nine common — and dangerous — misconceptions that keep teams and leaders trapped in an illusion that could be very costly.

1. Psychological Safety Does Not Mean Being “Nice”
❌ Common mistake:
Believing that “we’re all friends here” is enough to ensure a safe environment.

1.1. Negative Impact:
• Fear biology: Avoiding all conflict to maintain “peace” activates the limbic system (amygdala), hijacking the prefrontal cortex — our rational command center.
• Impoverished decisions: Without productive tension, debates become monologues and the best ideas stay hidden.
• Strategic blind spots: Ignoring legitimate doubts makes room for unseen risks and invisible failures.

1.2. Essential Reframe:
• Kindness ≠ Being perpetually nice
• True kindness (from Latin gentilis) is the fusion of empathy and courage: respecting others while having the bravery to say what must be said — even when it’s uncomfortable.

1.3. The Paradox of Healthy Debate:
• Psychologically safe teams act like champion debaters:
✓ They challenge ideas with intensity, as if sparring on the mat.
✓ Then, they align as one team to celebrate the decision, as champions do.

1.4. DCCO Foundation:
• In the cognitive-behavioral approach, we reinforce that well-managed discomfort is the engine of brain plasticity: every time we face disagreement, we form new neural connections that expand our capacity to solve complex problems.

Practical example:
In a recent workshop, I asked each participant to identify the “weakest point” in a critical project. The reaction was tense: hands trembled, voices cracked.
But after revealing the critiques, we saved 80 hours of rework in upcoming Sprints and strengthened collective commitment — a clear sign of emotional maturity.

Reflect:
• In your team, what “uncomfortable truths” are being silenced in the name of “kindness”?
• How can you cultivate kindness with courage in your next meeting?

2. Psychological Safety Does Not Mean “Getting What You Want”
❌ Common mistake:
Confusing “being heard” with “being granted.”
Many leaders treat psychological safety as if “everyone gets a trophy.”
The truth is: psychological safety means everyone enters the arena — where ideas compete, but people remain respected.

2.1. The Participation Paradox:
When we treat all suggestions as equally valid, we create:
• False consensus — no one dares to disagree to avoid “ruining the mood.”
• Watered-down decisions — average solutions that please everyone, but inspire no one.

2.2. Negative Impact:
• Silent frustrations grow, eroding trust and undermining the real purpose of psychological safety: to enhance decision quality through diverse perspectives.

2.3. Essential Reframe:
• Psychological safety ensures every voice is heard, but does not promise every opinion will prevail.
Google’s research shows that high-performing teams disagree 5x more than average teams — but they have clear rituals for converging on final decisions.

2.4. DCCO Foundation:
In cognitive-behavioral dynamics, exposure to conflicting perspectives activates neural networks linked to creativity and problem-solving.
Without that friction, the brain gets stuck in comfort zones — and innovation stalls.

Provocative Example:
Imagine a leader who promotes active listening but consistently ignores the most challenging suggestions. This:
✓ Breeds resentment (those who spoke up feel betrayed)
✓ Fuels cynicism (“Why bother speaking up?”)
✓ Corrodes trust (the “open channel” becomes a façade)

2.5. How to Apply (DCCO in Action):
• Before the debate:
✓ “Let’s exhaust all viewpoints — then decide based on clear criteria, not votes.”
• During the conflict:
✓ “Maria, you disagreed with the plan. What data or insight might the team be missing?”
• After the decision:
✓ “Carlos, your idea wasn’t chosen, but it helped us reinforce [X point], avoiding three traps in the proposal.”

2.6. Systemic View & Reflection Invitation:
Great ideas arise all the time — but what makes them real isn’t just creativity, but the courage to test, refine, and defend the best ones, even when that’s uncomfortable.
Organizations, as living systems, thrive on difference.
If a system ever reaches a state of “perfect harmony” — with no conflict — it’s actually approaching its death: the peak of balance, where no change is needed.

Psychological safety doesn’t eliminate conflict; it keeps it productive, constructive, and respectful — a fertile ground for innovation, learning, and sustainable growth.

Self-Assessment Question:
Can your team say, “I completely disagree — and here’s why” without fear?
If, on top of that, everyone accepts the final decision without resentment — congratulations: you’ve reached Jedi level.

3. Psychological Safety Does NOT Mean “Job Security”
❌ A dangerous misconception:
Confusing the freedom to speak up with job stability — as if every bold word granted lifelong immunity.

3.1. The Paradox of Dissent
In 2023, after mass layoffs at Google, many employees claimed their psychological safety had been “broken.” Paradoxically, the very fact that they could openly criticize the company was a sign of psychological safety — something unimaginable in a truly fear-driven environment.

3.2. The negative impact of this mistake:
• False sense of “shield”: Employees believe free speech = immunity from consequences.
• Expectation misalignment: When it’s time to restructure, reallocate, or assess performance, the disappointment is brutal.
• Systemic trust erosion: Unfulfilled promises corrode the mutual courage pact.

3.3. Essential reframing:
Psychological safety allows you to raise your hand, question, and highlight risks — but it is not an exemption from accountability.
It’s a courage pact: you share your ideas without fear of humiliation; the organization, in turn, commits to transparency in tough decisions — maintaining ethics and clarity.

3.4. DCCO Principle: Courage and Accountability
• In the Cognitive Behavioral Organizational Development approach, authenticity only thrives when paired with responsibility.
• Living systems flourish through honest exchanges and clear choices. Without that balance, they stagnate or collapse.

4. Psychological Safety Does NOT Mean Trading Performance for Well-Being
❌ A common mistake:
Believing a psychologically safe environment must be “light,” “comfortable,” and pressure-free — as if care and high performance were mutually exclusive.

4.1. Necessary reframing:
Psychological safety doesn’t replace performance expectations — it enables them with maturity, autonomy, and courage.

4.2. The negative impact of this false dichotomy:
When leaders avoid clear expectations in the name of “well-being,” they end up creating an environment of permissiveness, low accountability, and mediocre outcomes.
Performance declines, and the climate turns passive-aggressive.

4.3. The truth according to DCCO (Cognitive Behavioral Organizational Development):
Teams that combine high safety with high accountability (the model proposed by Amy Edmondson) develop accelerated learning cycles, deliver consistently, and view challenges as opportunities — not threats.
Example: Imagine a leader who says, “Here, you’re allowed to make mistakes.” That alone is not psychological safety. What matters is how they respond to the mistake. If the answer is, “Let’s learn from this — now, how will you correct it and prevent it next time?”, you’ve found the golden spot: empathy + accountability = organizational maturity.

4.4. Practical application:
Instead of asking, “Are you okay with this deadline?”, a mature leader asks:
→ “What support do you need to deliver this result with excellence?”
This approach builds trust without paternalism — and commitment without oppression.
Reflect:
✅ Environments with only well-being become comfort zones.
✅ Environments with only pressure become fear zones.
✅ Environments with psychological safety and accountability become growth zones — where people want to be, contribute, and evolve.

5. Psychological Safety Is NOT a Policy — It’s a Daily Practice
❌ A common mistake:
Believing a memo, policy, or manual is enough to “establish” psychological safety in an organization.

5.1. Why this fails:
Just as trust can’t be decreed, empathy and truth-telling courage can’t be regulated. Policies help define unacceptable behavior, but they do not generate the inner sense of safety needed for someone to raise their hand and say, “I need to say something uncomfortable.”

5.2. DCCO perspective:
In Cognitive Behavioral Organizational Development, we understand that real change emerges in practice — in micro-moments of interaction, in how we handle tough feedback, in the courage to admit, “I messed up here.”
Example:
Scenario: A large corporation implemented an “Open Door” policy and launched an anonymous suggestion channel.
– Result: Few useful ideas emerged. People said they “spoke up,” but didn’t feel their voices mattered. The channel became just another ignored form.

5.3. Necessary reframing:
Psychological safety is built in every meeting, every DM (direct message), every “How are you really doing?”. It requires:
• Leader modeling: Show vulnerability first (“I’m still learning…”).
• Feedback rituals: Regular spaces where praise and criticism are expected and welcome.
• Active mentorship: Leaders and peers who track how people feel when they speak up — celebrating courage and correcting defensive reactions.

5.4. Immediate practical application:
• Mini-exercise: Instead of launching a new policy, challenge leaders to share, in the next meeting, one professional regret and the lesson learned.
• Weekly ritual: Begin each team meeting with a “Courage Moment” — invite a member to share a risk they took in the last sprint and what they learned.

6. Psychological Safety Is NOT Democracy — Confusing This Destroys Teams
❌ A common mistake:

The biggest illusion? Thinking that “being heard” means “being right.”
In practice, psychological safety is like a laboratory for dangerous ideas:
• Where an intern can challenge the VP’s plan.
• Where a “I disagree” is the highest form of praise.
• Where conflict becomes fuel — not fire.

6.1. The fatal myth:
Leaders who conduct “popular consultations” but decide alone create the worst scenario — the illusion of participation. The result?
• Masked frustration: (“Why bother speaking if they won’t listen?”)
• Fake innovation: (Brainstorms that turn into monologues)
• Disguised conformity: (Debates where everyone knows the ending)

6.2. The antidote (DCCO in action):
• Set the game rules upfront:
✅ “We’ll hear EVERY voice — but the final decision will follow X, Y, Z criteria.”
• Acknowledge crucial contributions:
✅ “Your objection saved us from a big mistake — even if we don’t adopt your suggestion.”
• Make the process transparent:
✅ Show how divergent ideas shaped the decision, even if they didn’t “win.”

6.3. Painful data:
• 82% of employees have withheld criticism thinking it would be pointless (Harvard).
• Teams that debate openly make 37% fewer mistakes (MIT).

6.4. Real psychological safety looks like:
• Meetings where a junior interrupts the director with “This will fail because…”
• Retrospectives that reveal errors without seeking “culprits”
• Leaders who say “thank you” when someone proves them wrong
P.S.: If all your meetings end in consensus… your biggest risk is already real.
When was the last time someone on your team killed one of your ideas — and lived to tell the tale?

7. Psychological safety is not “an HR thing” — it’s everyone’s responsibility
❌ Common mistake: Believing psychological safety is limited to trainings, policies, or HR initiatives.

7.1. The DCCO Truth:
Psychological safety is built in everyday practice — in each daily interaction, not in isolated workshops.

7.2. It happens when:
• A developer says “I don’t know” during the daily sprint, exposing vulnerability in real time.
• A trainee questions the VP without fear of backlash, trusting they’ll be heard.
• A leader says “I was wrong” before a retrospective, showing that mistakes are opportunities for learning, not shame.

7.3. Positive impact:
• Shared vulnerability: When even the most experienced admit uncertainties, it legitimizes the collective pursuit of solutions.
• Accelerated learning: Mistakes are seen as valuable data, not flaws to be hidden.
• Systemic trust: Reciprocal openness strengthens relationships and enables continuous feedback loops.

7.4. How to promote it in practice:
• Weekly exercise: “Discovery Moment” — each person shares something they don’t know, so the team can help figure it out.
• Vulnerability check-in: Start meetings with “One thing I did wrong this week and what I learned.”
• Reverse mentoring: Young talents share insights with senior leaders, reinforcing that every voice has value.

8. Psychological safety is not a leadership monopoly — it’s a shared responsibility
❌ Common mistake: Thinking “only leaders can create psychological safety.”

8.1. DCCO Refutation:
Psychological safety is local — it varies from team to team, meeting to meeting. It’s not enough for the CEO to talk about a “safe culture” if, in practice, peers ridicule unconventional suggestions.

Why this matters:
• Living systems depend on reciprocal interactions. If only the leader makes an effort but the group doesn’t follow, safety becomes an illusion.
• Collective self-efficacy — the belief that the group can overcome challenges together — only strengthens when everyone feels they have a voice and a choice.

8.2. When anyone can trigger psychological safety:
• A peer does a “role play” with a colleague to rehearse a risky presentation.
• A team member praises and publicly supports someone’s idea, even if they don’t fully agree.
• Colleagues invite each other to share: “What’s stopping you from speaking now?” and help break down those barriers.

8.3. Powerful impact:
• Shared ownership: Everyone sees themselves as co-creators of a trusted environment.
• Networked resilience: When any node in the network can reapply psychological safety, the whole system becomes stronger and more adaptable.
• Exponential growth: Creativity flows when each voice knows it will be welcomed and constructively challenged.

8.4. How to spread it within the team (DCCO rituals):
• Co-construction pairs: In each meeting, two peers take turns justifying each other’s point of view — strengthening empathy and active listening.
• Permission signal: A gesture or code word (“safe pause”) that anyone can use to respectfully interrupt and request space to speak.
• Cross-mentoring network: PAIRS from different hierarchical levels meet biweekly to discuss dilemmas, creating multiple safety points.

9. Psychological safety doesn’t “weaken” accountability — it boosts performance
❌ Common mistake: Believing a safe environment means lower responsibility or lowered expectations.

9.1. The uncomfortable data:
MIT studies show teams with high psychological safety exceed their goals by 17% — not despite the freedom to fail, but because of their agility in recognizing and correcting mistakes.

9.2. Essential reframing:
Psychological safety accelerates the learning cycle:
• Fast error → Fast correction → Fast learning → Superior delivery.
Instead of “coddling,” you create a system where the right to err comes with the duty to repair — and accountability becomes a shared commitment, not a paralyzing ghost.

Example: Imagine two teams launching the same project.
• Team A is afraid to expose issues: hides mistakes until it’s too late. End result: delays and 30% cost overrun.
• Team B acknowledges errors the day they occur, makes immediate adjustments, and sticks to schedule — delivering a product 20% above expected quality.
Which team would you rather lead?

9.3. How to apply it (DCCO in action):
• Real-time feedback:
✅ When you spot a mistake, ask:
“What did we learn here, and how do we avoid it in the next cycle?”
• Continuous improvement goals:
✅ In addition to KPIs, define “correction time” goals to enhance agility perception.
• Lightweight post-mortem ritual:
✅ Run guilt-free micro-retrospectives — focus on learning, not blaming.

Psychological safety doesn’t lower the bar — it changes how we demand results: from punitive pressure to collaborative responsibility, where everyone takes risks with mutual commitment to excellence.

How to Identify (and Fix) a “Sick” Team

Sick teams don’t collapse all at once. They emit silent signals that something is wrong — and ignoring them is an open invitation to mediocrity. Below are the main symptoms and how to reverse each one with DCCO practices.

1st. Meetings are monologues with an audience
Red flag: Only one or two voices dominate; others sit quietly.
• Why it’s dangerous: An environment with passive listening deactivates the social brain — the amygdala takes over and silences courage.
• Consequence: Unilateral decisions, lack of innovation, and group disengagement.
How to fix it:
• “Lightning Round” Ritual: At the beginning of each meeting, every member gets 30 seconds to share a concern or insight — no interruptions.
• Permission signal: Agree on a gesture (e.g., raising the pinky finger) that anyone can use to respectfully interrupt and request space to speak.

2nd. “I didn’t know” is the most common excuse
Red flag: Doubts and issues only surface at the last minute, with “I didn’t know” as the default justification.
• Why it’s dangerous: Reinforces a victim mentality and shows a lack of questioning culture — essential for continuous learning.
• Consequence: Unpleasant surprises, rework, and collective frustration.
How to fix it:
• Cognitive check-in: Start each day with a “clarity moment”: everyone lists what they don’t understand or need to confirm.
• Uncertainty board: Keep a visible space (physical or digital) where all open questions are registered and tracked until resolved.

3rd. Feedback only happens during formal reviews
Red flag: Praise, criticism, and corrections are limited to quarterly performance meetings.
• Why it’s dangerous: Scheduled feedback gets lost in bureaucracy and doesn’t correct behaviors in real time; the brain doesn’t retain long-term learning as effectively as immediate correction.
• Consequence: Mistakes repeat, and trust in the development process erodes.

How to fix it:
• Pleasure & Pain Pulse: After every interaction (meeting, delivery, or call), encourage a quick pulse:
1. One pleasure point: something that worked well.
2. One pain point: something needing immediate attention.
• Flash mentoring: Set up weekly 10-minute slots where peers exchange constructive feedback, celebrating wins and offering improvement routes.

Questions for your reflection:
✓ Which of these symptoms resonates most with your team?
✓ What action can you put into practice in your next meeting to start reversing the pattern?

“Home Remedies” (Tested and Approved in Agile & High-Pressure Environments)

1. The Bad News Festival
Replace a weekly meeting with a round where the winner is the one who brings up the most embarrassing problem (yes, seriously).
✓ Goal: Normalize vulnerability as a valid part of the job.
✓ Neurobehavioral effect: Reduces the social threat linked to mistakes — and transforms errors into drivers of collective learning.

2. The Question Every Brave Leader Must Ask:
“What are we ignoring for fear of sounding stupid?”
✓ Goal: Generate healthy psychological disruption and access to what’s “unspoken.”
✓ DCCO Application: Ideal at the start of strategic cycles or during high-risk decisions. It strips away the polish and reveals invisible risks.

3. Reaction to Disagreement:
When someone challenges your decision, say:
“Thanks for thinking differently. Here’s what I considered before deciding this way…”
✓ Goal: Train your team’s brain to associate challenge with social reward — not punishment.
✓ Applied Neuroethics: Every response that validates interpersonal risk reinforces the desired behavior.

Remember: True psychological safety isn’t born from rules. It’s born from rituals.
Rituals that teach the brain that staying silent is more dangerous than speaking up.
And when the team internalizes this truth, the impossible starts becoming executable.

Psychological Safety Is Not a Trend — It’s a Pillar of Sustainability

Far from a corporate buzzword or an act of “organizational kindness,” psychological safety is now a strategic, ethical, and legal requirement.
Starting May 26, 2025, all companies in Brazil will be legally obligated — per the revised NR-1 regulation — to identify, prevent, and manage psychosocial risks, including chronic stress, harassment, overload, and fear of speaking up.
But don’t be fooled: psychological safety is not about building comfort zones.
It’s about building zones of courage and awareness, where discomfort is guided with relational intelligence, and conflict becomes a catalyst for learning, innovation, and true belonging.

Core Insights You Can’t Ignore:

• Growth requires safe discomfort.
There is no true innovation without hard conversations — and a space to have them with respect and clear intent.
• Culture lives in the details.
Every question you avoid, every feedback you shelve, silently shapes your team’s atmosphere. The absence of candor is also a message.
• High performance is not the absence of conflict — it’s the presence of focused candor.
Direct, structured, respectful feedback is not a personal attack: it’s a collective investment.
• Leadership shapes the environment.
Those who lead with humility, listen with curiosity, and decide with clarity, transform fear into trust — and passivity into ownership.

If your team never has conflicts… you may have a bigger problem than you think.
Real psychological safety doesn’t feel like constant calm.
It reveals itself when:

• Someone says “I don’t understand” without fear of looking incompetent.
• An idea is dropped early, avoiding million-dollar waste.
• A tough decision is made after plural listening — and accepted without resentment.

Final Thought (and Call to Action):

With the new NR-1 in effect, neglecting mental health and psychological safety is no longer just a moral risk — it’s now a legal one.
But more than meeting regulations, this is the moment to transform your workplace into a living, conscious, and adaptable system.
This is not about trends.
This is about organizational survival, sustainable performance, and putting humanity at the center of strategy.

And if you, as a leader or cultural agent, truly grasp the depth of this theme, your organization won’t just comply with the law — it will lead the way.
Because at the end of the day, the companies that will survive aren’t the fastest or strongest — they are the ones with the greatest capacity for dialogue, learning, and human reconnection.

If this conversation sparked something in you — it’s time to act.

#marcellodesouza #marcellodesouzaoficial #coachingevoce
#PsychologicalSafety #ConsciousLeadership #OrganizationalCulture
#NR1 #MentalHealthAtWork #PeopleManagement
#HealthyWorkplace #CulturalTransformation
#HighPerformance #ImpactLeadership #HumanDevelopment