In recent weeks, I've noticed a shift in how the term psychological safety is being used in the workplace. Originally coined to support learning, collaboration, and open dialogue, it's now at risk of being misunderstood and, in some cases, weaponised. I've heard stories where it's used as a defence mechanism, or worse, as an accusation. Leaders are left navigating murky waters when the phrase gets thrown in their faces during difficult conversations.

For example, a manager giving constructive feedback might be met with, "You're impacting my psychological safety," or, "You're always criticising me, this team doesn't feel psychologically safe."

These statements can shut down further dialogue and leave the leader questioning whether they’ve crossed a line or simply held someone accountable. It becomes a minefield. When is it a valid concern, and when is it weaponisation?

And that’s where the nuance comes in. If someone says they feel psychologically unsafe, who are we to say they shouldn’t? What if the majority of the team feels safe, but one person doesn’t? Does that invalidate their experience? Should we question it or interrogate our assumptions about what safety actually means?

These are difficult questions because psychological safety is both a collective state and a deeply personal experience. It lives in the shared culture of a team but is felt individually, and often differently, depending on personality, background, and past experience.

While it's essential to protect the concept from misuse, it's equally important not to dismiss genuine feelings of discomfort. The challenge is to stay curious. To explore, not shut down. To notice patterns without rushing to label them. And to hold space for complexity.

That’s exactly why we need to be more thoughtful about what psychological safety really is, how it’s created, and how it can be misused.

That led me back to the original definition and into a deeper reflection on what we might be getting wrong, and how we can create something better.

What Psychological Safety Really Means

The term was first introduced by Amy Edmondson in her 1999 paper, Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams:

"A shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking."

At its core, psychological safety means people feel they can speak up, ask questions, raise concerns, or admit mistakes without fear of embarrassment, rejection, or punishment.

Her research showed that psychological safety is vital for learning, innovation, and team performance. When it’s present, people are more likely to take interpersonal risks, share ideas, and raise issues. When it’s absent, silence wins, even when someone has something valuable to contribute.

But here’s the key: psychological safety isn’t just a personal feeling. It’s a shared team property. It emerges through consistent, respectful interactions.

Leaders have a critical role, but they can’t build it alone. Teams create safety together through behaviours, norms, and the way they respond to one another.

So, how is it fostered?

By leaders modelling fallibility: admitting mistakes and asking for input
By framing work as learning, not just performance
By inviting diverse voices and ideas
By responding with openness, not defensiveness

Let’s not oversimplify. A leader might genuinely be open and respectful, yet someone with past experiences of exclusion may still feel unsafe. That doesn’t mean the leader has failed. It means safety, while shared, is not experienced equally.

When Good Intentions Go Sideways

I started noticing this shift when clients and friends described moments where psychological safety became a shield against feedback. Then I listened to an episode of Adam Grant’s WorkLife podcast (top recommendation, by the way), "Is It Safe to Speak Up at Work?"

In it, a manager explained that some team members deflected feedback by saying their psychological safety was being impacted. Adam Grant responded:

"It’s a two-way street—true psychological safety enables tough conversations, not avoids them."

It reminded me of Brené Brown, who advocates for radical candour:

"Clear is kind. Unclear is unkind."

Avoiding discomfort might feel safe in the moment, but it undermines the honesty needed for trust and growth.

Real Stories That Show the Tension

A friend recently told me about a senior male team member who stormed into her office, shouting about the lack of psychological safety. She paused, then said:

"I hear your concern, but you’re shouting at me. What about my psychological safety?"

We talked about the pressure she felt to protect her team’s emotional safety while also holding them accountable. When everything gets labelled ‘unsafe’, where do we draw the line?

In another job, I worked under a leader who responded to nearly every suggestion with blame or deflection. Even when no blame was implied, he took all feedback personally. Over time, the team stopped raising issues. Why bother, if nothing could be received without defence?

That’s the real cost of low psychological safety. Creativity and contribution shrink. Teams go quiet.

What Can Leaders and Teams Do?

Here are some simple, powerful ways to build psychological safety that work both ways:

✅ 1. Model it from the top

Acknowledge mistakes
Ask, "What am I missing?"

✅ 2. Make learning the default

Celebrate questions and experiments, not just results

✅ 3. Use meta-feedback

Ask, "How did that land?" or "Could I have delivered that differently?"
This makes feedback a dialogue, not a download.

✅ 4. Set and revisit team norms

Agree on how feedback is given
Create space for challenge, not shutdowns.

If You’re Told You’ve Impacted Someone’s Psychological Safety

This can feel confronting, especially when you intended to provide respectful and constructive feedback. But rather than defend or shut down, try getting curious:

“Can you help me understand what felt unsafe?”
“What would help this land differently in future?”

And perhaps most importantly:

“Can we talk about what psychological safety means to each of us?”

Sometimes, people use the term as shorthand for other difficult feelings, like embarrassment, insecurity, or fear of failure. Exploring the language can reveal the underlying issue.

These moments are where deeper trust is built.

Final Thoughts

Psychological safety is essential, not just a feel-good phrase. It’s the foundation for challenge, honesty, creativity, and growth.

But it’s also complex. It’s a team condition and a personal experience. It requires careful attention, continuous dialogue, and shared responsibility.

Key Takeaways

Psychological safety means people can speak, question, and challenge without fear.
It’s not about comfort; it’s about respectful candour.
It’s a shared state, but experienced individually.
Leaders go first but can’t do it alone.
Feedback is a two-way skill.
Low safety costs creativity, trust, and performance

So here’s a question I’d love to hear your take on:

When have you seen psychological safety used as a shield or as a source of strength? What helped build it, and what got in the way?

Fortem Blogs

Is the term “Psychological Safety” Being Weaponised at Work? By Clare Harris