"There's no team without trust"

Paul Santagata, Head of Industry at Google, said, "There's no team without trust."  Google conducted a study in which they interviewed over 200 Googlers (as Google employees are commonly known) and examined more than 250 attributes of nearly 200 different Google teams over a 2 year study period.  They wanted to find out what makes a Google team effective?  What they found may surprise you.

As it turns out, "who is on a team" matters a whole lot less than you think.  What's really important is how the different team members interact.  One of the most important variables was something called psychological safety.  Timothy Clark (not at Google) defines four stages of psychological safety, in which humans feel (1) included, (2) safe to learn, (3) safe to contribute, and (4) safe to challenge the status quo.  

Let's break those four stages down.  First, everyone wants to have a sense of belonging or to be part of a group.  As Clark states, "The need to be accepted often precedes the need to be heard."  We want to be included.  Recall one of my old posts about the "Jeep Wave" ("Why didn't you tell me about the Jeep Wave?").  I felt really great the first time a fellow Jeep Wrangler driver passed me and gave me a wave - it's great to share a group identity with others.  Similarly, when we bring others into our group, we in turn give them a sense of identity and belonging.  That builds respect and trust.  And psychological safety depends upon mutual respect and trust.

Second, we are all lifelong learners.  Learning new knowledge and skills sometimes means that we will fail.  We can't have learning without failing at least once or twice.  When we learn that failing is okay, especially when we are part of a group, we become more comfortable with taking risks.  We stretch our limits a little, and we push others in the group to do as well.  Taking risks means that we will fail at times, and when we realize that failing is perfectly acceptable, we further build a psychologically safe environment.

Third, we all want to contribute.  We need to contribute.  Sharing our knowledge with the other members in our group, and in turn recognizing the knowledge and skills of those members is the essence of teamwork.  Again, if we aren't willing to take some risks - in other words, if we are stuck in the previous stage of psychological safety - we won't be comfortable stepping up to contribute to the group.  Google conducted another study, which they called Project Oxygen in which they found that the most effective team leaders are the ones who empower the team and don't try to micromanage.  We don't like to be micromanaged, because we want to contribute.  

The last stage of psychological safety occurs when we are willing to challenge the status quo.  When we reach this particular stage, we feel empowered to speak up, to dissent, and to respectfully disagree.  Speaking up or speaking out takes a great deal of courage, and if we don't feel like we are in a psychologically safe environment, we just won't do so.  If members of the group don't feel comfortable challenging the status quo or disagreeing with the leader, we end up with groupthink. 

Psychological safety is incredibly important, and it may be one of the most important characteristics found in so-called high reliability organizations.  Given all of what we know about high-performing teams, it may be one of the most important determinants of team chemistry and team culture.  Google was absolutely right - "who is on a team matters less than how the team members interact, structure their work, and view their contributions."