Everything I wish Knew About People Before Becoming a Manager

In the context of organizations, high psychological safety drives performance and innovation, while its absence leads to reduced productivity and increased burnout. Google’s Project Aristotle demonstrated that IQ and financial resources are not always synonymous with effective outcomes. In fact, the study identified psychological safety as the most crucial factor in explaining high performance. — Excerpt from the book “The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety”.

The subtitle of the book is “Defining the Path to Inclusion and Innovation”, and in it, the author compellingly argues that innovation is limited in environments lacking psychological safety. Even if innovation is not a direct goal for you or your company, this discussion offers a renewed perspective on people and organizations. I was grateful and surprised by the opportunity to explore this theme more deeply, the most impactful aspects of which I share in this article.

Respect, Permission, and Psychological Safety

In the image above, observe two fundamental variables on the gragh axes: respect and permission. The permission to execute tasks and make decisions, without the element of respect, can lead to authoritarianism. In this scenario, permission is derived solely from the authority of the position, and often the leader shows little or no respect for the thoughts and feelings of people. On the other hand, a high level of respect combined with little permission results in paternalism, where there is a tendency to instruct people, almost as if they were children, on how to perform their tasks. Ideally, respect and permission should coexist and evolve together, forming an ascending diagonal line, similar to steps that need to be climbed. These steps represent different levels of psychological safety:

1. People need to feel included.
2. People need to feel safe to learn.
3. People need to feel safe to contribute.
4. People need to feel safe to challenge the status quo.

Fear in an organization is the first sign of weak leadership — Timothy R. Clark.

The Safety of Inclusion

The book raises a critical question: “How can we accept, include, tolerate, and connect with people who are strangers to us?” The answer follows: “Research indicates that the main factors promoting psychological safety are familiarity among team members and the quality of relationships, based on previous interactions.”

I noticed that many companies implemented individual meetings (one-on-ones). Although I have not studied in-depth the best practices for these meetings, I always sought, especially in initial conversations, to establish bonds and promote familiarity. Regardless of our differences, when we talk, we quickly realize our similarities. After all, we’re all human, right?

I remember the beginning of my career and the fear of interacting with prominent figures in the companies where I worked. Perhaps for this reason, when I became a reference, I sought to adopt a welcoming posture. Once, during an interview with a visibly nervous intern, I shared: “You know, I’ve been in your place and was very afraid to talk to people. I don’t know if you feel something similar, but something I learned is that deep down we are all the same. For example, I also fear not being useful in your interview.” This seemed to make her more comfortable, and the interview went very well.

If you are a leader and want your team to perform well, you must internalize the universal truth that people want, need, and deserve validation. The safety of inclusion requires that we condemn any negative prejudice, arbitrary distinction, or destructive bias that denies our equal value and the need for equal treatment.

Considering that inclusion is the first stage of psychological safety, it is important to reflect on the impact of hierarchical status.

• Does the leader’s status facilitate or hinder inclusion?
• Does the leader see themselves as equal to their collaborators?
• Do collaborators, at times, create bonds among themselves, excluding the leaders?

The Safety of Learning

To address learning safety, the second stage, the book mentions the example of an American calculus teacher who gained recognition for using TikTok. According to the author, the teacher, Craig B. Smith, expressed a striking thought: “I can’t teach students unless I like them. I can’t like them unless I get to know them, and I can’t get to know them unless I talk to them.”

The book details how Professor Smith dedicates the first period of each semester exclusively to learning the students’ names and knowing a bit about their lives, emphasizing the importance of the relationship in the learning process.

Furthermore, the book highlights a crucial aspect of learning safety: the tolerance of leaders or mentors towards mistakes made by developing individuals. “A leader can only sustain a learning culture if they minimize vulnerability through a consistent pattern of positive emotional responses. People closely observe how you react to disagreements and bad news. If you listen attentively, respond constructively, and demonstrate appreciation, participants will pick up on these signals and adapt their participation accordingly.”

Many technology teams with whom I collaborate include junior programmers, and it’s common practice to use online training and assign simpler tasks for their development. However, this approach has a significant limitation: these simplified tasks often do not provide the opportunity to apply the knowledge gained from studies. It would be more effective to adopt a work model that tolerates mistakes more gently. For example, establishing mechanisms that allow for the quick reversal of changes implemented in production that result in system failures. Creating an environment where programmers feel safe to make mistakes, without causing significant impacts, is essential for effective and productive learning.

The Safety of Contribution

The book offers an enlightening analogy to discuss contribution. Imagine that you are part of a soccer team: you already feel an integral part of the team, people know you well, and you have traveled together several times. Moreover, you feel safe to learn and give your all in training. However, you often find yourself on the bench. Unfortunately, reserves often perceive their contribution as less valuable than that of the starters.

The book also highlights the importance of interaction between the individual (follower) and the leader in relation to the safety to contribute. For the individual, contribution is a right that must be earned: “In stage 1, the safety of inclusion, we accept the individual on human grounds. In stage 2, the safety of learning, we encourage the individual’s learning also on human grounds. But the next stage of psychological safety is not a natural right. Instead, it is a privilege earned based on demonstrated performance.” Therefore, it is up to the follower to show in their first tasks that they are ready and deserve the opportunity to advance. Here, it is important to emphasize that, although many criticisms are directed at leaders, the role of the follower is also crucial.

To exemplify the ideal behavior of a leader, the author recounts his own experience: “When I became the manager of a consulting firm in San Francisco, my boss was in Boston, and we only saw each other four times a year. He rarely asked me ‘how’ questions, but often questioned the ‘what’ and ‘why’. Every quarter, he would ask me: ‘What is your vision? What is your strategy? What are your goals and why?’ If my answers were satisfactory, he would say: ‘Great, see you next quarter.’ If I faced any problem, he would delve deeper with me, but he hired me for the results, and that was clear to me.”

This leads me to a topic that I explored in another article: the difficulty many have in performing management focused on outcomes rather than deliveries or projects (outputs). In summary, the key to contribution and performance is to clearly define the expected results, not just monitor if people are progressing on something that was promised. There is no real autonomy without clear indicators of results. I touch on this subject a bit in this post about OKR.

The Safety to Challenge the Way Things Are

I often refer to the term “Status Quo” to describe the current state of affairs, an expression also used by the book. The most valuable lesson I took from this part was understanding the constant tension between innovation and the current state of things: “Innovation is not a comfortable and frictionless process. On the contrary, it aggressively challenges the existing regime. It means discarding the known in favor of ambiguity. Often, it implies accepting failure. This is just the organizational aspect. Now think about the personal side. What does it mean to ask your collaborators to challenge the status quo and innovate? Yes, there is a sense of adventure in exploration, but in reality, you are asking them to expose themselves to criticism, risk failure, show vulnerability, stand out and face difficulties, all without real control over the outcomes.”

The book points out that there are two types of innovation: intentional and forced. When things are going well, intentional innovation is extremely challenging, as the status quo fiercely resists it. On the other hand, in times of crisis, the pain of innovation is less than the problems faced, leaving the status quo with no other choice. In both cases, one of the fundamental aspects to stimulate innovation, from the perspective of psychological safety, is to protect people from the ridicule of new ideas or even the failure of their initiatives: “How to promote this innovation? First, value differences. Second, minimize the risk of ridicule.”

It’s About People, but What Does That Mean?

Many people nowadays emphasize that “it’s the people who matter.” However, I wonder if everyone, including myself, truly deeply understands what this means. A passage from the book made me reflect and at the same time motivated me to seek a deeper understanding of this issue: “The moment we start to devalue, objectify, or dehumanize each other, we lose our humanity. Don’t come to me with excuses that you have a company to run or results to deliver. Don’t tell me that your position is important, that you’re facing high risk, pressure, personal triggers, or a propensity for crises. If you use any justification to neglect psychological safety, you are choosing to prioritize something above human value.”

The book concludes in an inspiring way: “The greatest source of fulfillment in life is to include others, help them learn and grow, unleash their potential, and achieve deep communion together. This is the essence. Now, look around you and see others with a new perspective of admiration.”

Hello! If you enjoyed my text, consider subscribing to my newsletter.

There, I will be sharing the chapters of the book I’m writing. It’s a fiction inspired by my own story, when in 2013, during my divorce, I decided to walk 800 km over 35 days along the Camino de Santiago. Click here to get it for free.