Real Talk on Psychological Safety—What It Is, and Isn’t

If you’re talking workplace culture, chances are you’re talking psychological safety. This concept, introduced 25 years ago by Dr. Amy Edmondson, centers on creating environments where people feel they can speak up, share ideas, and take risks without fear of backlash or ridicule.

In a recent Talking Talent panel discussion, workplace leaders shared their insights on whether psychological safety is still relevant and how to apply it—especially in diverse and polarized work settings.

Panelists included:

• Katie Giachardi, Head of Talent EMEA at Invesco
• Erneshia Pinder, Vice President of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging at CVS Health
• Mary-Clare Race, CEO of Talking Talent

Panelists Agree: It’s Table Stakes

Psychological safety isn’t just a “nice-to-have”—it’s essential for building a culture where people can thrive and companies can grow.

“I think of it as the foundation of the culture we need if we want to get good performance out of people—whatever good performance looks like,” Giachardi said. For her, that applies not just in the workplace, but in families, schools, and communities as well.

Testing the Waters: How Psychological Safety Shapes Who Speaks Up and Who Stays Silent

Panelists shared their own experiences with psychological safety, and Pinder spoke about her journey as a Black woman in corporate America.

“Early on in my career, being assertive or confident as a woman of color could be mistaken as anger,” she shared. “And so you retreat into a sort of self-inflicted invisibility. And you never really get to test out the environment to see if it’s an environment of psychological safety, because you can’t afford to be career limiting.”

She talked about the murder of George Floyd being a watershed moment for some people, because it opened the door to conversations about inequities.

“It gives you license, and it gives you permission to then test the waters to say, ‘Okay, let me see if I can have this conversation. Let me see if this is a psychologically safe environment for me to show up authentically as myself.’”

Giachardi, on the other hand, talked about having a sense of freedom to “speak hard truths” and being valued for it. Some of that is built into her role, but also because her leaders set the conditions for open dialogue.

“I get a bit of license to do that because of the job I have,” she explained, “but ultimately I wouldn’t be able to if they weren’t also setting up the conditions for me to feel that’s acceptable.”

Linking Psychological Safety with Inclusion

Next up, Race pointed out that psychological safety has become part of the vernacular around DE&I. Studies show that diverse teams are more effective, higher performers.

“But there are certain ingredients that need to be in place, inclusion being one of them,” Race said. “There’s no point in having a diverse team if that diverse talent isn’t able to have a voice.”

Giachardi concurred, referring to psychological safety as a spectrum, with inclusion being the first necessary step. “If you don’t have that, you can’t get any further,” she said. “You can’t get to the point where people are really contributing and challenging each other.”

Pinder emphasized the need to welcome diversity beyond what’s visible externally. “It’s one thing to have a diverse look, but it’s another to have diverse perspectives and diverse thinking, which is what you really need.”

“We’re quick to code things as mainstream or not. So if someone presents with an opinion or perspective that goes against that, those opinions are not always welcome,” she continued. “So what we really have to do is take a step back and reflect on what does it mean to have inclusion for all?”

Race suggested that overlooking ‘inclusion for all’ mayhave fueled backlash toward the DE&I agenda. “We’ve got to take everyone on the journey,” she said. “That’s where psychological safety plays a part. For individuals who were for centuries the majority, maybe they don’t know how to navigate this new world of work—they don’t know what language to use or what questions they can ask.”

Myths and Misunderstandings

While psychological safety is crucial, panelists agreed there’s a tendency to misuse or misunderstand it in key ways:

• It’s not about keeping people comfortable: Psychological safety isn’t about creating a cushy, conflict-free environment. True psychological safety allows team members to challenge one another, give and receive feedback, and hold each other accountable without fear. It’s about encouraging constructive discomfort, where people feel safe to address tough topics.
• Not about mental health: Although environments lacking psychological safety can impact mental well-being, the goal isn’t to protect people from every difficult or challenging experience.
• Not an excuse to withhold information: Some might think they’re preserving psychological safety by holding back critical information to “protect” people from difficult truths. However, transparency is essential in building genuine trust.
• Not an excuse to say whatever you’re thinking: Psychological safety doesn’t mean a free pass to express any thought without regard for impact. Respect and civility remain essential, and psychological safety should support open, constructive exchanges, not unchecked opinions.

“I think the word ‘psychological’ throws people off,” Giachardi said. “Some assume it means never feeling challenged, but the reality is that psychologically safe spaces are often where difficult conversations happen.”

Key Takeaways from the Q&A

The Q&A brought out some important themes on how to apply psychological safety across diverse roles and settings:

• Remote workers: To build psychological safety on remote teams, panelists talked about creating intentional time for conversation and connection beyond task-focused meetings. Including “blue-sky” thinking sessions or dedicated time for team members to share ideas and challenges can help foster belonging, even in a dispersed work setting.
• Frontline workers: Panelists discussed the challenge of driving psychological safety to hourly workers. Pinder talked about the importance of meeting employees where they’re at, soliciting feedback, and making sure you’re creating experiences with these workers at the
• Normalizing grief: Grief remains a sensitive and often overlooked issue in the workplace. Respecting individual approaches to grief can support psychological safety, allowing employees to feel seen and supported during difficult times. “For a manager, I think it’s just hold the space, allow the conversations, and ask what the person needs without making assumptions,” Giachardi said.
• Different political and ideological beliefs: Creating a culture where all opinions are respected and accepted is vital, but how those opinions are shared must align with the organization’s core values. For customer-facing teams, this balance is particularly important, as they interact with a wide array of customer beliefs and identities. The goal is to foster respect for diverse viewpoints while upholding shared standards of civility and respect.

The Future of Psychological Safety

Psychological safety is here to stay, but it requires continued effort.

“We need clarity on what it actually means, and leaders need to be upskilled in psychological safety,” says Pinder. Giachardi agrees, noting she wishes we had a different, more accessible, word for the concept.

Ultimately, for our panelists, psychological safety is not just a buzzword—it’s the foundation for healthy, productive teams. The more organizations understand and invest in it, the better prepared they are to foster inclusive, high-performing cultures.