Psychological safety is widely recognised as key to high performance, a positive culture, and team success - and for good reason. Google’s Project Aristotle identified it as the number one factor in high-performing teams. When people feel safe to speak up, ask questions, raise concerns, admit mistakes, and challenge ideas, teams learn faster and perform better. But as the concept has gained traction, something else has happened. It’s being misunderstood - and in many workplaces, that misunderstanding is quietly killing accountability.
At its core, psychological safety is about creating an environment where people can speak up without fear of humiliation or punishment. It’s not about avoiding discomfort. It’s about protecting people from being silenced or mistreated. Somewhere along the way, we’ve started confusing the two. And in some cases, we’ve lost the plot.
We’re increasingly seeing discomfort labelled as unsafe. A leader raises a performance issue and is told the conversation feels “unsafe”. A colleague challenges an idea and it’s labelled “inappropriate”. Someone receives feedback they don’t like and shuts the conversation down.
Sometimes that reaction is genuine because discomfort can feel confronting. But discomfort on its own doesn’t mean something is unsafe. When we treat it that way, we create a different problem. We create avoidance.
Words are being weaponised
Calling something “unsafe” can become a convenient way to avoid a conversation, dismiss feedback, or deflect accountability. And when that happens, psychological safety isn’t the problem – the term has been weaponised. Instead of helping people speak up, it shuts conversation down. It becomes avoidance dressed up as safety.
That’s where the real damage begins. Leaders start to second-guess themselves. They worry about saying the wrong thing, being labelled a bully, or triggering a complaint. So they pull back. They soften the message, dance around the issue, or let things slide altogether.
Silence has consequences. Standards slip. Poor behaviour goes unchecked. Performance issues linger. And resentment builds, particularly among those doing the right thing who can see others aren’t being held to the same standard.
Cultures don’t get healthier when leaders avoid hard conversations. They get weaker. This is the part many workplaces are getting wrong: psychological safety should not weaken accountability - it should strengthen it. Done well, it creates the conditions for honest, constructive and sometimes uncomfortable conversations to happen safely.
What psychological safety should look like
Psychological safety is not about being “nice” or avoiding tension. It doesn’t mean everyone agrees. Psychologically safe teams debate. They challenge. They disagree. But they do it with respect, not personal attack. They get curious, not furious. They are willing to say what needs to be said with care and clarity, even when it’s uncomfortable. They stay hard on the issue, soft on the person, balancing empathy with accountability.
In these teams, people feel safe to speak up early when something is off track. They ask questions instead of guessing. They own mistakes rather than hiding them. They give and receive feedback in a way that improves performance, not damages relationships. That’s what high-performing teams do.
But if the term is being misunderstood or weaponised in your workplace - and it’s leading to silence, avoidance, or lowered standards - it needs to be addressed. Now, not later.
Reset the standard
Start by separating discomfort from danger. Have an explicit conversation with your team about what psychological safety is and isn’t. Not as a lecture, but as a discussion.
Ask:
- What does psychological safety look like here?
- What’s the difference between feeling uncomfortable and being unsafe?
- What behaviours do we expect from each other?
By surfacing assumptions and getting aligned, you reduce the risk of the term being used – intentionally or not – to avoid accountability.
Be clear about your intent
To stop psychological safety being used as a shield in difficult conversations, be clear from the outset. If you’re giving feedback, explain why. You might say, “I’m raising this because I want you to succeed,” or “I’m giving you this feedback because I want to help you improve.” Acknowledge the reality of the conversation: “This might be uncomfortable to hear, but it’s important.”
When people understand your intent, they’re far more likely to hear your message and less likely to get defensive. Clarity helps to remove ambiguity, and ambiguity is where misunderstanding thrives.
Another trap is assuming that if someone has an emotional reaction, something has gone wrong. It hasn’t necessarily. People can feel defensive, embarrassed, frustrated, or upset when receiving feedback. That doesn’t mean the conversation was wrong. It means they are human. Your role as a leader is not to remove discomfort. It’s to handle it well. Stay calm, respectful, and focused on the outcome. Be empathetic, but don’t back away from what needs to be said.
Raise, don’t lower standards
Psychological safety was never meant to lower standards or make everyone feel comfortable all the time. It was meant to create an environment where people can perform at their best. Good teams are not built by avoiding tension. They are built by creating an environment where people can speak honestly, hear difficult things, learn, improve, and still feel respected.
Leah Mether is a communication and human skills speaker and trainer who helps make the people part of leadership and work life easier. She is the author of Soft is the New Hard: How to Communicate Effectively Under Pressure and Steer Through the Storm: How to Communicate and Lead Courageously Through Change. Visit www.leahmether.com.au
