Blog #101
“Thank you for tolerating that discussion.” Not a common sentiment (I hope!) near the end of a collaborative meeting, but one that was a recent reality for a group planning session I participated in.
Here was the scenario: A group of 5 colleagues, including myself, were meeting to fine-tune an upcoming presentation to a large group. It was to be an information session and we were carefully attending to all of the requisite details and nuances. We were “in the weeds”, so to speak. Our process included anticipating the kinds of questions that participants might pose and calibrating on how we could respond. In a sense, we were role-playing the event.
We were moving along at a pretty quick pace. Until we reached “that” question. The one where the 5 of us agreed the question might come up, but we held different responses. We had reached a moment of dissonance. As I recognized the moment, I recall a flood of thoughts and feelings that I tried to sort through as quickly as they came. The minutes left in our meeting were waning. Would we be able to find a shared understanding in the time we had left? Would we be able to unite in our response or would we be a group divided? Would we be able to have this conversation with respect and dignity for differing ideas? More personally, was I out of step with the rest of the group? My senses were heightened and I was trying to find the balance between my own self-regulation and our group’s interactions.
I look back on our group’s exchange with a sense of gratitude and accomplishment for each of us. With my heightened awareness, I remember noting that every person in the room contributed their own thoughts and feelings to the discussion. Each comment built upon or extended a previous comment, even when the points of view were varied. I remember feeling listened to, which fueled my desire to reciprocate and listen carefully.
Our group reached a common understanding for our dilemma. As the conversation was concluding, one member commented, “Thank you for tolerating that discussion.”
Which led us to an in-the-moment debrief of what we had just experienced together. The real success of our exchange wasn’t reaching common understanding. Nor was it tolerance, because no one in the room had “tolerated” the discussion. Rather, every person in the room showed up, fully present. Each of us leaned in: contributing, listening, asking questions, remaining open to possibilities and different ideas. We stayed in the moment together, invested in reaching an agreeable outcome. We discussed that this had not been a meeting of tolerance, but a meeting of complete presence.
As a leader and a coach, I am always looking for opportunities to notice and name what is happening. The group interaction I just described has many hallmarks of an environment characterized with a high level of trust and psychological safety. Psychological safety is often described as the shared belief that it is safe to share concerns, questions, ideas, and feelings within the group. It’s a state that groups work hard to cultivate and maintain. It’s a state that is an ongoing process and commitment.
Much research has been done on team dynamics and psychological safety. A guide that is easily accessible and adaptable for many contexts comes from Google’s re:Work project. The link includes a definition of psychological safety, a Tedx Talk from Amy Edmondson on the topic, and a downloadable tool for managers about how to foster psychological safety in teams. It’s a succinct collection of useful resources on the topic.
Here is one more thing. In the group exchange I described above, it was not the group leader/manager attending to psychological safety on behalf of the other group members. Group leaders/managers certainly have a role in creating and establishing these kinds of conditions for team success. I also think that other members of a team have the opportunity to actively engage, demonstrate understanding, be inclusive, and show confidence.
I’m not naive to the experience of feeling stifled by system structures and power dynamics that make the work of showing up and contributing to the psychological safety of a team a challenge. I’m in groups where I must work H A R D to engage, speak my truth, and present with confidence. I don’t always succeed. But when I practice and hone my skills in groups where my comfort level is higher, I begin to gain the courage to apply the ideas in other settings.
So, here is a challenge: look at the list of ideas on the guide for psychological safety in teams and think about your week ahead. What are some groups or teams that might be spaces where you can try 1 or 2 of the ideas listed? If you feel so inclined, come back and share your experience in the comments.