Psychological Safety In The Agile Community

Sep 25, 2024

Dive into the crucial concept of psychological safety within Agile communities. The discussion reveals that in-person interactions generally foster higher psychological safety than online ones. Participants often feel rejected or unheard, leading many to withdraw. Interestingly, younger members report feeling safer, while older members experience a rebound in security. Strategies to enhance support and acknowledge diverse perspectives are highlighted, ensuring everyone can contribute meaningfully to the community.

Ask episode

Chapters

Transcript

Episode notes

Exploring Psychological Safety in Agile Communities

00:00 • 8min

Psychological Safety In The Agile Community

Summary of Key Results

We define the Agile community as a global knowledge-sharing community with many smaller subcommunities. Research has shown that psychological safety is an essential predictor of members’ intent to continue contributing to virtual communities.
For in-person interactions, most participants (N=160) experience a moderate to high level of psychological safety (3.9 on a scale from 1 to 5). For online interactions, most participants experience a low to moderate level of psychological safety (2.9).
The behaviors that participants typically experience are the rejection of (new) ideas (37.1%), tribalism (24.5%), and not feeling heard (19.6%). 4.2% reported no experience with behavior that lowered their psychological safety. The most common strategy for dealing with this is for participants to stop contributing or withdraw from the community (55.2%). A tenth of participants reported lowered emotional well-being (9.8%). 11.2% of participants report no effect on them.
We found no significant difference in reported psychological safety by gender. However, women report substantially more dismissal of their views and tend to withdraw more from further interactions. A significant difference was found when comparing between age groups. The youngest cohort (26–36) reported a high level of psychological safety, which then dips to the lowest level (36–45) and trends up from there to the highest level for the oldest cohort (66+). We also found significant differences between roles, with facilitators and trainers reporting the lowest level of psychological safety.
Participants identified three primary factors contributing to lower psychological safety: poor debating skills (36.4%), dogmatism (30.8%), and self-promotion (16.1%).
According to participants, the three primary strategies to improve psychological safety are more community engagement and leadership (21%), improving the quality of dialogue (19.6%), and personal coping strategies (10.5%).
Future studies can replicate this study to analyze trends and compare psychological safety between different communities.
We identified several limitations to our research, which primarily impact the degree to which the findings can be generalized to the global Agile community.
Whether the level of psychological safety is too low or good enough is a normative one that is up to the community. However, research shows that the intention to share knowledge is lower when psychological safety is low. If we combine this with observed differences in gender, role, and age, knowledge sharing may be harmed, lowering the diversity of those contributing.

How to connect with AgileDad:

- [website] https://www.agiledad.com/

- [instagram] https://www.instagram.com/agile_coach/

- [facebook] https://www.facebook.com/RealAgileDad/

- [Linkedin] https://www.linkedin.com/in/leehenson/