Term: Psychological Safety
Psychological safety refers to a person’s perception to think, feel and behave in a healthy manner in the workplace without fear of consequences. According to Edmondson and Lei a central theme is that a healthy sense of psychological safety facilitates the willingness of employees to contribute and share ideas, take initiative to develop innovative products and services and present suggestions for organizational improvements (Edmondson & Lei, 2014). The first step in obtaining psychological safety in the workplace is to identify the signs and reduce the psychological hazards within the workplace. Common psychological hazards include:
Perceived high workload
Lack of influence or autonomy in how work is performed
Lack of support by management
Perceived and/or actual lack of respect
Unclear, conflicting or continually changing expectations
Compare and Contrast:
Extended exposure to psychological hazards, also referred to as burnout, such as those stated above can have a cumulative effect on the psychological and physical health of employees. Mental Health experts agree that job burnout can precipitate mental illness. It is estimated that between three percent and seven percent of the working population experience a severe degree of job burnout. Those who suffer from burnout and lack of psychological safety will exhibit fatigue, change in appetite, change in sleep habits, loss of motivation, detachment, a sense of helplessness or hopeless and a lack of satisfaction or feeling of accomplishment from their job (Smith, Segal, Robinson, & Segal, 2017).
While these signs of burnout would seem to be easily observed behavior, Biron, Ivers, Brun, and Cooper point out in their article that these changes in behavior or work performance occur slowly and over a long period of time. These behavioral changes might be so slight that many may contribute these attributes to their personality. But much of this behavior can be influenced by factors in the workplace environment such as stress, bullying or disrespect (Biron, Ivers, & Cooper, 2007).
Tim Austin asserts that it is one of the essential roles of the manager to improve the psychological safety in the workplace. Managers are authoritative and powerful figures; therefore their influence on psychological safety is great and must be sincere. Promoting psychological safety by managers is as simple as four beneficial practices:
Accessibility – Managers create a sense of safety and cohesiveness by being accessible to their team members
Admit imperfection – Managers who readily admit mistakes and acknowledge they lack all the answers provoke lower team members to play a role in the process
Present failures as learning opportunities – Genuinely frame failures as learning opportunities and eliminate blame
Set boundaries – Boundaries provide team members the freedom to raise critical issues without fear of negative consequences (Austin, 2017)
Managers and leaders should build their team members up. Developing team members and creating a psychological safe workplace is as directed by Hebrews 10:24 “And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds”. Living by example will bring others to have a positive sense of themselves and hopefully they will feel the need to pass on this positive sense of self.
How managers respond when team members put themselves on the line is the soul of psychological safety. Creating a supportive environment where team members have the confidence to communicate freely without fear of retribution or negative criticism will foster psychological safety within the workplace.
Austin, T. (2017, March 9). Making It Safe: The Importance of Psychological Safety. Retrieved February 05, 2018, from safetydifferently.com: http://www.safetydifferently.com/making-it-safe
Biron, C., Ivers, H., & Cooper, C. (2007, January 3). Risk Assessment of Occupational Stress: Extensions of the Clark and Cooper Approach. Health, Risk & Society, pp. 417-429.
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014, January 10). Psychological Safety: The Histroy, Renaissance, and Future of an interpersonal Construct. Organizaitonal Behaviour, pp. 23-43.
Smith, M., Segal, J., Robinson, L., & Segal, R. (2017, October). Burnout Prevention and
Treatment. helpguide.org, pp. 1-4.
Discussion # 2
Definition of term
Organizational redesign involves the integration of structure, processes, and people to support the implementation of strategy and therefore goes beyond the traditional tinkering with “lines and boxes.” (Aronowitz, De Smet, and McGinty, 2015).
In the “Getting organizational redesign right” by Aronowitz, De Smet and Mcginty (2015) discuss the successful and unsuccessful organizational redesigns as well as explain some rules of the road for executives looking to improve the outcome of organizational redesign. The article goes on to illustrated how when the organizational redesign of a company matches its strategic intentions, everyone will be primed to execute and deliver them (Aronowitz, De Smet, and McGinty, 2015). The need for organizational redesign sometimes is apparent, for example when a merger takes place, however there might be signs that are less obvious such as policy changes not being embrace by their employees. The authors of the article outline nine pitfalls to avoid ensuring the process is successful, these include focus on longer-term strategic aspirations, take time to survey the scene. Next is selecting the right blueprint and go beyond lines and boxes (reporting structure) and be rigorous about drafting in talent. The last three pitfalls outlined in the article are identifying the necessary mind-set-shifts and change those mind sets, establish metrics that measure short-and long-term success and manage the transitional risks. Corporate redesigns give organizations give organizations a rare opportunity to identify the stable backbone and set up those elements ripe for dynamic change (Aronowitz, De Smet, and McGinty, 2015).
In the article “Redesign, Development and Organizational Learning” by Jaap Boonstra, the author compares two processes of redesign; the business process and the sociotechnical process. The business process redesign focuses on achieving changes by means of a linear top down approach and it tends to underestimate the importance of learning process in organizations (Boonstra, 2013). The sociotechnical redesign model primary purpose was to improve organizational effectiveness, improve the quality of work life and levelling of power. The article concludes that in order for redesign to be successful it needs a process of learning to analyze market demands and organizational problems and to design information systems, business processes by self-designing teams and dedicated management of the change process (Boonstra, 2013).
Tkaczyk (2015) discusses the importance of leaders becoming change designers and energizers in the article “A playbook for Positive Organizational Change: Energize, Redesign and Gel.” The author states “Seeing that change is now the norm, that all organizations are in flux, and that change is happening more and more rapidly, to execute successful transformations which deliver and sustain improved performance, organizations need to change the way they change (Tkaczyk, 2015).
Effective organizational redesign is possible when leadership is able to paint a clear picture for the future and how the restructuring will benefit them. Just like Jeus often did as its written in Mark 8:34-35, “And he summoned the crowd with His disciples, and said to them, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.”
In the video “ How to achieve the best organizational design- in a nutshell” by Chris Lorimer, he explains the importance of planning redesign and change effectively and providing adequate communication from leadership emphasizing the progress made.
Boonstra, J. (2013). Redesign, Development and Organizational Learning. doi:10.18411/a-2017-023
Steven Aronowitz, Aaron De Smet, and Deirdre McGinty. (2015, June). Getting organizational redesign right. Retrieved February 05, 2018, from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/getting-organizational-redesign-right
Tkaczyk, B. (2015), A Playbook for Positive Organizational Change: Energize, Redesign, and Gel . Strategic Change, 24: 527–540. doi:10.1002/jsc.2041
Discussion # 3
This article provides various definitions of “Organizational Silence” as proposed by other scholars in the field. The authors define the term “Organizational Silence” as the “act of employees choosing to withhold their ideas, opinions, and concerns about organizational problems (Morrisson and Milliken, 2000) Others such as Pinder and Harlos (2001) define it ” as a reaction to injustice and unfairness”.
The organizational silence of midwives and nurses: reasons and results.
Given the importance of communication in the health care industry, the authors wanted to determine if some nurses or midwives were more prone to stay silent and if so why? Ty also wanted to further examine how organizational silence impacted hospital operations. The authors found that employees’ age and level of education determined their tendency for organizational silence. Employees, nurses in this case, remained silent on ethical issues or job responsibilities. Most of the responders in the study conducted said that they remained silent because they did not think that they had the experience necessary to state their views. The authors suggest that hospitals create reporting systems where nurses can report any issues without fear of reprisal.
In another paper published in 2015, Morrison et al found that individuals who had a low sense of power were more likely to remain silent on organizational issues or would not share their ideas with others. However the authors found that when encourage to speak employees would break their silence. A verbal encouragement to speak is not enough , therefore businesses should find ways to encourage upward communication among their employees. it is important that companies understand organizational silence. Kirrane et al (2017) argue that organizational silence can have either positive or negative impact on a business operations. the authors go a step further and recommend that managers consider the emotions behind employees silence. For example some employees when angry will voice their anger, whereas others will adopt a “defensive silent”.
Today we live in a world where everything is permissible; bullying, profanity and sexual misconducts are now everyday occurrences. Obscenities and immoralities are the calling cards of our elected officials, parent, kids and everyday citizens. As Christians we re called to live in this world but not to be part of it. But is our silence too much? Are we allowing the devil to have dominance over us in the name of democracy and free speech? 2 Corinthians 4:4 and John 2:16, explains the importance of denouncing and removing ourselves from a corrupt value system.
This is an event hosted by the Arthur and Toni Rembe Rock Center for corporate governance. The two presenters discussed research findings showing that employees often scared of retaliation would not report serious misconducts or share their ideas on how to improve their organization.
Kirrane, M., O’Shea, D., Buckley, F., Grazi, A. and Prout, J. (2017) Investigating the role of discrete emotions in silence versus speaking up. J Occup Organ Psychol, 90: 354-378. Retrieved from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/10.1111/joop.12175/full
Morrison, E. W., See, k. e. and Pan, C. (2015), An Approach-Inhibition Model of Employee Silence: The Joint Effects of Personal Sense of Power and Target Openness. Personnel Psychology, 68: 547-580. Retrieved from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/10.1111/peps.12087/full
Morrison, e. w. & Milliken F.J. (2000) Organizational Silence: a barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. The Academy of Management Review 25 (4), 706-725. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/259200
Pinder, C. C. & Harlos K. P. (2001) Employee silence: quiescence and aquiescence as responses to perceived injustice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management 20, 331-369. Retrieved from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1016/S0742-7301(01)20007-3
Yurddakul, M., Besen, MA., & ErdoGan S. (2016)The organizational silence of midwives and nurses: reasons and results. Journal of Nursing Management 24, 686-694. Retrieved from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/10.1111/jonm.12374/full
Your Discussion Board replies must follow these guidelines:
Post a substantial reply to a minimum of 3 of your classmate’s threads (meeting the minimum will not earn a full score). Each reply will include at least 2 original references and be approximately 300 words in length. The response should NOT be merely an agreement or disagreement with the thread, but an evaluation of the author’s analysis. All assertions must be supported by research and should not be based upon one’s ‘feeling’ or ‘opinion’.
Integrate a biblical concept into an aspect for each of the discussion replies using the Course Scriptures. (attached)
Use current APA format for in-text citations, references, and be sure to write in third person.