Being Nice and Being Kind Are Not the Same: How to Foster Psychological Safety

In these very uncertain times, many leaders are noticing their staff struggling to feel safe, connected, and included. In organizations where leaders are comfortable creating a sense of psychological safety, staff remain engaged and tend to thrive. The opposite is true in organizations who consistently undermine or under value psychological safety. Some old school leaders might think their staff are too soft or too fragile and should simply straighten their spine and carry on. But that approach is damaging to an organization and is missing some very key concepts. A recent article in Harvard Business Review (https://hbr.org/2025/05/what-people-get-wrong-about-psychological-safety) entitled “What People Get Wrong about Psychological Safety” points out six key misconceptions leaders (and people in general) have about psychological safety.

Of the six, two key misconceptions really stood out for me.

The first is that people mistake being nice with being kind.

Psychological safety has little to do with being nice or with feeling comfortable. “Nice” is often code for not telling the truth, not being honest, and avoiding conflict. It’s the opposite of candor, which is often lacking in organizations. According to the authors, safety and comfort are not synonymous. In fact, being nice often results in mediocrity. Without candid feedback, without information, ideas, and opinions being discussed openly (and with respect), the quality of work suffers as do relationships. Studies show that when people withhold their ideas, questions, and doubts, the team’s risk of making mistakes and experiencing failure increases. So, it’s a bit of “hard now or harder later.”

The second key point is that psychological safety is not about getting your way.

If you voice your opinion in a meeting and the decision doesn’t go your way, that doesn’t mean you don’t have psychological safety. In this context, if you are able to voice your opinion in a professional and respectful manner, if your colleagues and your boss are able to listen with respect and respond with their own views, then you have psychological safety. You may not be comfortable with disagreement or with not having your idea prevail, but that’s a different matter altogether. Being able to have open discussions with respect and curiosity is part of psychological safety. Getting your way is not.

As a leader, how can you foster psychological safety?

1. Notice whether people on your teams are sharing information and opinions candidly. Do they know how to respectfully disagree or debate? You might need to coach them on these skills. I consistently coach my team on how to get comfortable having uncomfortable conversations. It's key to good leadership.

   
   

2. Do people tend to hold back, remain silent or only weigh in when they agree? This might point to an environment that is not yet safe. It might also point to challenges individuals have with expressing opposing views. You might start by having these conversations one on one to coach them through expressing their views while remaining respectful and open. Once they practice with you (or a peer), they'll be ready to do so in a larger group setting. Help them take small steps toward genuine expression.

   
   

3. How often do people advocate for their ideas? How often do they exhibit genuine curiosity about others’ position? Asking questions to better understand and remaining open to new information and ideas is how teams get stronger and deliver better results. Modeling this behavior in team meetings is key. Asking open questions, listening to responses and following various conversation threads is sometimes the best way to demonstrate this. Of course, not every meeting can (or should) follow this format, but these types of meetings build rapport and trust, which are underpinnings of psychological safety.

   
   

4. Conversely, how often do people stay stuck trying to advocate for their original position without accepting different views or possibilities? Often these folks become known as the squeaky wheels, but they frequently have legitimate concerns. Rather than dismissing them, coach them privately on how to approach the conversation in a way that allows their position to be heard without being dismissed because of the delivery. Naysayers often are the early warning system of a bad decision, so learning to incorporate their views in a more positive, collaborative way can be beneficial.

   
   

5. Are conversations systematic and data-driven? Do they help the team get closer to making an informed decision? Swirling around with anecdotal impressions can be a distraction. Though not all situations have solid data to inform the decision, many do.

I'll leave you with the last sentence from the article:

“Ultimately, psychological safety is about changing the expectations for how we work together to successfully navigate the storms ahead.”

As we face unprecedented uncertainty on so many fronts, creating psychological safety within your teams will help you, your team and your company thrive.