Psychological Safety in Workplaces

Just by being Black, the level of latitude you're given for behaviour – especially behaviour deemed "bad" – is often completely different. The consequences are harsher and the scrutiny is sharper. Take disciplinary matters, for example. Black employees are often judged more harshly for the same behaviours as their white counterparts. A Black professional might be labelled “difficult”, “angry”, “intimidating”, or “unprofessional” for expressing frustration in a meeting, while a white colleague might be excused as “passionate” or “assertive”. You know the type of comments – “Elizabeth is just expressing how she feels,” or “Johnny was just a bit hot under the collar.” The disparity isn’t just anecdotal – it’s backed up by research into workplace racial bias. Then there’s career progression. Black employees are frequently held to higher standards to earn the same recognition. Feedback like, “You need to prove yourself more” or “be more of a team player” is often levelled at those who have already delivered exceptional results. Meanwhile, others are promoted based on potential or likeability rather than consistent performance. Not sure if this is (or has) happened in your workplace? 1) Look at patterns in employee relations cases – Are Black employees disproportionately disciplined or receiving harsher feedback compared to their peers in similar roles? 2) Examine promotion criteria – Are Black employees expected to overperform just to be considered for opportunities, while others get ahead based on vague ideas of potential or even subpar performance? How do performance and potential ratings for Black employees compare with others? 3) Observe how behaviours are labelled – Is there a difference in the language used to describe similar actions? Are words like “angry” or “unapproachable” disproportionately applied to Black colleagues? For Black women, how are their traits described compared to non-Black women? For Black men, what “advice” is given under the guise of mentorship to ensure they aren’t perceived as “intimidating” or “scary” – particularly when they express frustration or anger? To address this, the first step is noticing the patterns (or not dismissing or acting defensively when it’s pointed out), the second is to question and avoid making assumptions that it is an “unfounded accusation” and the third? Well, that’s up to you. You can either take action or ignore it. I say that only because too many organisations are still struggling to get past the first step 🤷🏾♀️ 📹 Sterling K. Brown

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗼𝘅 𝗼𝗳 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗻 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗹��𝗵 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘅𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝘄𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲. We track our bodies 24/7. Count every calorie. Measure sleep, HRV, glucose, stress. From Apple Watch. To Oura Ring. To the latest “temple” device. Somewhere along the way, awareness turned into obsession. Here’s the paradox no one talks about: We have the best health-tracking tools in history, and some of the worst health outcomes. Something doesn’t add up. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝘀 𝗦𝗹𝗲𝗲𝗽 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗻 𝘀𝗹𝗲𝗲𝗽 Studies on orthosomnia (an obsession with “perfect” sleep metrics) show that people who fixate on sleep scores experience more sleep anxiety, lighter sleep, and poorer recovery—even when objective sleep doesn’t improve. Trying to optimize sleep can literally break it. 𝗛𝗥𝗩 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘀 HRV is a useful trend marker—but daily fluctuations are normal. Research shows that constant HRV checking can heighten health anxiety and perceived stress, especially when users don’t understand variability or context. Ironically, stressing about HRV often lowers HRV. 𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 ≠ 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 Behavioral science research consistently finds that excessive self-monitoring leads to hypervigilance, loss of bodily trust, and decision fatigue. When every sensation becomes a data point, people stop listening to internal cues and start deferring to dashboards. In short: 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿-𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗻𝘅𝗶𝗲𝘁𝘆. So what actually creates health? The same fundamentals that worked 5,000 years ago: • Deep, peaceful sleep • Regular sunlight • Real, nourishing food • Daily movement • Time with people you love These don’t need algorithms. They need presence. Use wearables if they serve you—I do, occasionally. But don’t let them become your master. Your life isn’t an algorithm waiting to be optimized. It’s a system meant to be felt, explored, and course-corrected. The best health coach you’ll ever have is already inside you. Trust it.

POSH complaints in India jumped from 71 in 2013-14 to 1,160 in 2022-23, across just 300 listed companies (Centre for Economic Data & Analysis, Ashoka University). That’s a 620% increase in a decade. It might sound like progress in reporting. But after four decades in HR, I can tell you this: The real danger isn’t what’s reported. It’s what’s endured in silence. Because 75% of workplace harassment incidents still go unreported. The real story isn’t in annual compliance reports. It’s in the things people whisper about but never file. + An intern who never came back after her first project. + A series of small, humiliating jokes that weren’t funny. + Proximity that felt off and power plays disguised as feedback. And what makes it worse is that the burden of avoidance is almost always on the person being harassed. Avoid that corridor. Decline that meeting. Smile through discomfort. Globally, 23% of workers experience violence or harassment at work, as per Gallup. But 55% never report it to anyone. That gap between what happens and what gets reported isn’t just a statistic. It’s a leadership failure. We’ve built systems that are excellent at documenting problems, but terrible at preventing them. And while companies lose millions in productivity, we keep treating symptoms instead of fixing the culture. Zero complaints doesn’t mean zero harassment. It means zero psychological safety. Real POSH isn’t about perfect paperwork. It’s about building cultures where speaking up doesn’t feel career-ending and where bystanders become allies, not silent witnesses. So what can you do? ✔️ Train your managers to spot early signs of discomfort ✔️ Create safe, informal channels to raise concerns ✔️ Make your leadership accountable, not just compliant Because at the end of the day, silence isn’t a sign of safety. It’s a symptom of fear. And any culture that counts silence as success is complicit. #poshawareness #thoughtleadership

When Mary Barra took over GM's HR department, she found a 10-page dress code policy. She replaced all 10 pages with just two words: "Dress appropriately." The HR team panicked. A senior director sent an angry email demanding more detailed rules. But Barra held firm. When the director called to complain that his team wore jeans to government meetings, she didn't cave. Instead, she told him: "Have a conversation with your team." Two weeks later, he called back excited. His team had solved it themselves...they'd keep dress pants in their lockers for important meetings. Here's what happened across GM: 1. Managers started making decisions instead of following rulebooks 2. Employee engagement improved as people felt trusted 3. Bureaucracy dropped as leaders focused on outcomes, not compliance Barra realized: "If they can't handle 'dress appropriately,' what other judgment decisions are they not making?" She built a culture where thinking mattered more than rule-following. Most companies write longer policies to avoid problems. Mary wrote shorter ones to create leaders.

Black employees aren't exhausted from racism and microaggressions alone. We're exhausted from being asked to comfort the people who caused them. This Black History Month has felt particularly heavy. Between the gaslighting, the attacks on our history, and people playing in our faces while expecting us to smile through it, I'm watching Black colleagues everywhere carry a weight that keeps getting heavier while the world asks us to make it lighter for everyone else. Let me share what the research tells us. Studies show that 73.6% of employees experience microaggressions in the workplace, and one in four Black workers report experiencing discrimination at work. Here's the part that should trouble every organisation: 80% of Black Americans say Black people face significant discrimination, while only 38% of White Americans agree. That gap isn't just a difference of opinion. It's the chasm Black employees fall into every time they try to name their experience and get met with disbelief. The harm itself is exhausting enough. The comments about our hair, our tone, our "attitude." Being mistaken for the delivery person. Watching our ideas get ignored until someone else repeats them. Having our competence questioned in ways our white colleagues never experience. What makes it unbearable is what comes after. 🌸 We raise a concern and suddenly we're responsible for managing the feelings of the person who caused it 🌼 We name racism and get asked to consider the "intent" of the person who harmed us 🌺 We express frustration and get labelled "aggressive" while our pain gets labelled "sensitive" 🌷 We're expected to educate, explain, and reassure, all while still bleeding from the cut Black employees spend significant emotional energy preparing themselves for potential racial encounters and processing them afterward. That's labour. Unpaid, unrecognised, and utterly depleting. 🥀 Grace is beautiful when it flows both ways. It becomes something else entirely when it's only ever demanded from the people experiencing harm, never from the people causing it. This Black History Month, I'm not interested in making racism comfortable for the people who refuse to see it. I'm interested in workplaces that stop asking Black employees to shrink their pain so others can avoid their discomfort. 🌱 We deserve environments where our experiences are believed, not debated. Where our boundaries are respected, not resented. Where our presence is valued beyond the photo opportunities. That's the culture worth building. AA 🌼 We bloom together or we wilt alone™️ ———————————————————— 🙏🏾 Read more: Substack link in the comments 📙 Pre-order Culture Blooming - link in comments

I'm Not Yelling Chapter One: Systems This work begins with a simple premise: persistent silence in organizations is not accidental. It is designed. Across industries and roles, the same mechanisms appear with striking consistency: • Informal norms that penalize deviation from the dominant culture more harshly than poor performance • Feedback systems that prioritize tone, delivery, and “fit” over the substance of ideas • Leadership pathways that favor familiarity in communication style rather than effectiveness or insight • Cultural narratives that frame adaptation to dominant norms as “growth,” without accounting for its cost None of these mechanisms are typically written into policy. No document instructs employees to self-censor. And yet the outcomes repeat. Over time, employees learn which voices are safe, which styles are rewarded, and which forms of expression quietly stall careers. Participation narrows. Advancement slows. Compensation gaps widen. Retention suffers. When silence becomes a condition for safety, voice becomes a liability. This is not an interpersonal issue. It is organizational design.

A few weeks ago I posted about the quiet "takedowns" of high-performing talent, especially women, inside organizations. It struck a chord. The response was overwhelming. Tens of thousands of views and my DMs full of women (and a few men!) from around the world who reached out to share personal stories of being sidelined, overburdened, lied to, gaslit, and ultimately pushed out—not for underperforming, but for being too honest, too bold, too willing to challenge the status quo, too unwilling to play along. Listening to their stories in an effort to help others has been an incredible privilege. That got me thinking: How are Boards assessing the true cost of this behavior? Because while these takedowns might be invisible to most, they leave a trail: - Severance and legal settlements buried in G&A or hidden in a different P&L - Leadership tables that are suddenly younger and less diverse - Costs related to recruiting and onboarding replacements (often more than one!) - Loss of institutional knowledge and momentum - Erosion of culture, innovation, and trust - Leaders who consistently churn talent but escape scrutiny Boards are responsible for more than financial performance—we're stewards of people, reputation, and long-term value. If we’re not asking the right questions, we might be missing the red flags that are eroding performance from the inside out. Questions worth asking in the boardroom: - As executives are hired, what reputation do they bring with regard to talent?  - How are executive turnover patterns being monitored and explained? - How are executives measured with regard to talent? - How is the organization surfacing cultural risks in a way the board can see? - Are we rewarding leaders who build resilient, trust-based teams—or just those who hit short-term targets? It’s time to connect the dots between talent risk and enterprise value. What else would you want Boards to ask? ***2026 update*** A huge thank you to everyone who engaged on this topic in 2025. Because of you, we interviewed over 100 people and ended up devoting an entire chapter of our book to takedowns. The book came out September 14th and we're so glad that the words are making women feel seen, heard, and validated. Julia and I appreciate you joining us on this journey. #BoardOversight #Governance #ExecutiveAccountability #WorkplaceCulture #TalentRisk #WomenInLeadership

Most teams aren’t unsafe— they’re afraid of what honesty might cost.👇 A confident team isn’t always a safe team. Real safety feels like trust without fear Psychological safety isn’t about being nice. It’s about building an environment where truth can exist — without penalty. Where people speak up because they believe they’ll be heard, Not just to be loud. Here’s how to create a space where honesty doesn’t feel risky: 10 Ways to Foster Psychological Safety in Your Team 1️⃣ Acknowledge mistakes openly ↳ Normalize imperfection so everyone feels safe owning up. 2️⃣ Ask for feedback on your own performance ↳ Leaders go first. 3️⃣ Celebrate questions, not just answers ↳ Curiosity signals trust. 4️⃣ Pause for the quiet voices ↳ “We haven’t heard from X yet. What do you think?” 5️⃣ Replace blame with ‘Let’s find the cause’ ↳ Shift from finger-pointing to problem-solving. 6️⃣ Speak last in discussions ↳ Let others lead; you’ll hear their raw perspectives. 7️⃣ Reinforce confidentiality ↳ Discuss ideas without fear they’ll be shared publicly. 8️⃣ Encourage respectful dissent ↳ Conflicting views spark creativity. 9️⃣ Admit you don’t know ↳ Authenticity paves the way for others to do the same. 🔟 Offer thanks for honest feedback ↳ Show appreciation for candor, even if it stings. 1️⃣1️⃣ Set clear expectations for respectful communication ↳ Clarity creates comfort and consistency. 1️⃣2️⃣ Create space for personal check-ins, not just work updates ↳ Human connection builds trust faster than status updates. 1️⃣3️⃣ Invite rotating team members to lead meetings ↳ Empowering others signals trust and grows confidence. 1️⃣4️⃣ Support team members who take thoughtful risks ↳ Reward courage even when outcomes aren’t perfect. 1️⃣5️⃣ Recognize effort and growth, not just outcomes ↳ Celebrate the process, not just the win. Psychological safety doesn’t grow from good intentions, It grows from repeated proof that honesty matters more than perfection. ❓ Which one will you try first? Let me know in the comments. ♻️ Repost to help your network create safer, more trusting workplaces. 👋 I write posts like this every day at 9:30am EST. Follow me (Dr. Chris Mullen) so you don't miss the next one.

Leadership through fear isn't leadership. It's a recipe for toxic culture. Fear might drive short-term results, but it's not worth the long-term damage. When people are afraid, they choose: - safety over success - silence over solutions - survival over excellence. What to avoid as a leader: ❌ Creating fear around job security ↳ Avoid saying, "Many people would love to have your role." ❌ Using subtle threats ↳ Skip the vague "We need to talk about your career here." ❌ Manufacturing pressure ↳ Stop using fake deadlines for control. ❌ Keeping your employees uncertain ↳ Don't leave them guessing where they stand. ❌ Using shame and criticism ↳ Don't treat performance reviews as threats. What to do as a leader: ✅ Recognize and appreciate ↳ Ensure your employees feel valued. ✅ Invest in their growth ↳ Create clear paths for career advancement. ✅ Share the bigger picture ↳ Help them see how their work creates a meaningful impact. ✅ Give your team ownership ↳ Trust them to make decisions and take risks. ✅ Stand behind your team ↳ Protect them from politics and have their backs. Leadership isn't about making people fear losing their jobs to meet numbers. It's about empowering your team to do their best work. Be the leader you would follow. ♻️ Repost to help your network ➕ Follow Dora Vanourek for more

For the first time, a PCBU (Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking) has been charged with exposing workers to psychosocial hazards in the form of poor organisational justice - and has failed to block key evidence of the workers' subjective experiences, including their reported stress, before they both tragically died. Western Sydney Local Health District (WSLHD) argued that admitting the workers’ statements about their feelings was "hindsight reasoning" and not relevant to the case. But the Court rejected this argument, confirming that how workers feel during poorly managed workplace processes - like investigations - is directly relevant to assessing risk under WHS law. Key lessons for all leaders and organisations: 👉 Psychosocial hazards are real and prosecutable. Poor organisational justice - including unfair, inconsistent, or poorly handled processes - can expose workers to risks of psychological harm. 👉 Investigations, disciplinary actions, and performance management processes are recognised psychosocial hazards. If not handled properly, they can cause harm and create liability. 👉 Failing to follow your own policies and procedures can lead to charges under WHS laws, even if no direct injury is alleged. PCBUs are expected to manage foreseeable risks, and manage psychosocial hazards proactively, not wait until harm occurs. This case confirms that organisational justice is a critical part of workplace safety - not just a "HR issue." If you’re a leader, ask yourself: ➡️ Are we following our policies when managing people? ➡️ Are our investigation and grievance processes fair, transparent, and safe for all involved? ➡️ Do we consider the psychosocial risks when managing sensitive issues? If this story has affected you, support is available. Contact Lifeline Australia on 13 11 14. Caselaw: https://lnkd.in/ggQ8Qv22 #WHS #psychosocial #leadership SafeWork NSW LinkedIn News Australia #linkedinnewsaustralia