Team Truth #2: Psychological Safety Isn’t Created by Leaders. It’s Co-Created by Teams.

Psychological safety has become one of the most talked-about concepts in leadership and team development.

Leaders are told to create it.
Organizations invest in training to build it.
Teams are encouraged to speak up because it supposedly exists.

And yet, many teams still struggle to say what actually needs to be said.

The problem isn’t the concept.
It’s the assumption behind it.

Psychological safety is often treated as something a leader provides, a condition handed down through behaviour, tone, or intention.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth:

Leaders can invite psychological safety.
Only teams can sustain it.

Why the “Leader Creates Safety” Narrative Falls Short

Leadership behaviour matters. Immensely.

When leaders listen, admit mistakes, respond with curiosity, and avoid punishment, they signal that speaking up is welcome.

But anyone who has worked in teams knows this isn’t the whole story.

Because safety doesn’t disappear when leaders aren’t present.
It disappears when teams don’t protect it with each other.

I’ve worked with teams where leaders did everything “right," and yet, safety still eroded.

Why?

Because safety was quietly undermined in moments like these:

• A colleague’s vulnerability is later referenced sarcastically
• A difficult comment is met with eye-rolling or silence
• Someone raises a concern and the team moves on too quickly
• Conflict is watched, not entered
• Feedback becomes performance instead of inquiry

None of these behaviours come from the leader alone.

They come from the team system.

Psychological Safety Lives in Micro-Moments

Psychological safety is not a value statement.
It’s not a workshop outcome.
It’s not something you “have.”

It lives in micro-moments.

In how a team responds when someone:

• Admits uncertainty
• Makes a mistake
• Challenges the prevailing view
• Names a tension in the room

Safety isn’t measured by how often people speak but by what happens after they do.

Does curiosity follow?
Or defensiveness?
Does the team stay with the discomfort?
Or rush past it to maintain harmony?

These moments are shaped collectively, not individually.

When Teams Unknowingly Erode Their Own Safety

Here’s one of the paradoxes of team dynamics:

Teams often say they want psychological safety while simultaneously engaging in behaviours that make it risky.

For example:

• Silence is rewarded because it keeps meetings efficient
• Agreement is valued more than exploration
• Emotional reactions are quietly judged
• Conflict is avoided in the name of “respect”

Over time, the message becomes clear:

Some things are safer to leave unsaid.

Not because the leader is unsafe, but because the team hasn’t built the muscle to stay in dialogue when things get uncomfortable.

Safety Is a Shared Practice, Not a Personal Trait

One of the biggest misconceptions about psychological safety is that it’s about individual courage.

“People just need to speak up more.”
“They need to be braver.”
“They need more confidence.”

This puts the burden on individuals while letting the system off the hook.

Psychological safety is not about courage alone.
It’s about collective capacity.

It’s the team’s ability to:

• Stay present when emotions surface
• Hold disagreement without escalation
• Respond with inquiry instead of defence
• Repair when something goes wrong

In other words, safety is something teams practice together, not something individuals summon on demand.

What Co-Created Safety Looks Like in Practice

Teams that sustain psychological safety tend to do a few things consistently:

• They name the tension instead of pretending it isn’t there
• They talk about how they’re working, not just what they’re producing
• They intervene when safety is threatened, not just when leaders do
• They see silence as a signal, not compliance
• They repair quickly when trust is strained

These teams understand that safety is fragile and worth protecting.

A Shift in Responsibility

This Team Truth invites a subtle but powerful shift:

From asking,
“Is our leader creating safety?”

To asking,
“How are we, as a team, contributing to or eroding safety right now?”

That question changes everything.

Because when teams take shared responsibility for psychological safety, it stops being an abstract ideal and becomes a lived experience.

An Invitation

If you’re part of a team, consider reflecting on this together:

• What happens when someone takes a risk here?
• How do we respond to discomfort, disagreement, or emotion?
• Where might we be unintentionally making it unsafe to speak?

You don’t need perfect safety to move forward.

But you do need shared ownership of it.

Because psychological safety doesn’t live in leadership alone.

It lives in the space between us.

This article is part of Team Truths, a weekly TEAMshift series exploring the unspoken agreements, shared practices, and systemic patterns that shape how teams really work.