PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY & FAILING WELL with Harvard Business School Professor Amy Edmondson (ep.175)

Talk About Talk - Communication Skills Training

Harvard Professor Amy Edmondson talks with Andrea about the significance of accountability in a psychologically safe workplace. Learn about the important difference between disappointment vs regret and between mistakes vs failures. Amy shares insights from her new book, “The Right Kind of Wrong,” including the three types of failure, and the one we should be striving for!

BOOKS & ARTICLES MENTIONED

• Amy Edmondson – “The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth” – https://amzn.to/4dYjz4R
• Amy Edmondson – “Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well” – https://amzn.to/4eGjOTc
• Daniel Kahneman – “Thinking Fast & Slow” – https://amzn.to/3UmQMjv
• Adam Grant (NYTimes) – “Women Know Exactly What They’re Doing When They Use “Weak Language” – https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/31/opinion/women-language-work.html
• Samuel Culbert – “Get Rid of the Performance Review!: How Companies Can Stop Intimidating, Start Managing–and Focus on What Really Matters“ – https://amzn.to/40glY7x

CONNECT WITH ANDREA & TALK ABOUT TALK

• Website: TalkAboutTalk.com
• Communication Coaching Newsletter: https://talkabouttalk.com/newsletter
• LinkedIn Andrea: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andreawojnicki/
• LinkedIn TalkAboutTalk: https://www.linkedin.com/company/talkabouttalk/
• YouTube Channel: @talkabouttalkyoutube

TRANSCRIPT

Yes, we all have work to do. In the next 45 minutes, you’re going to learn directly from Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson, a pioneer in psychological safety and failing well.

Wait – isn’t that an oxymoron? “Failing Well”?
Not necessarily.

I cant wait for you to hear my conversation with Amy

Welcome to Talk about Talk podcast episode #175
“Psychological Safety and failing well with professor Amy Edmondson.”

My name is Dr. Andrea Wojnicki and I’m an executive communication coach. Please just call me Andrea. Through my work at Talk about Talk, I coach ambitious executives to elevate their communication skills so they can communicate with confidence and credibility. To learn more about what I do, head over to talkabouttalk.com where you can read about the coaching and the workshops that I run. Plus there are lots of free resources for you, including the brand new archetypes quiz, where you can learn which archetype resonates with you and your professional identity. You can also free coaching from me by signing up for my free email newsletter.
Head over to talkabouttalk.com to sign up now.

OK,Let’s get into this.
Years ago, I had the privilege of taking Professor Amy Edmondson’s doctoral course called “Field Research Methods” at Harvard Business School. Fast forward to today. Many years later, I regularly coach executives – and medical and health care professionals, as youll hear, whether through 1:1 coaching sessions or corporate workshops, on some of the phenomena that Amy taught me, and some of the concepts that she pioneered, including psychological safety.

Recently, Amy published a new book called “Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing well”. After reading the book, I emailed Amy and asked her if I could interview her for this podcast. I was thrilled that she immediately agreed. To say Amy’s work is impactful and prolific would be an understatement. So my goal with this interview is to ask Amy the Qs that I know YOU would ask – Qs focused on communication skills, and possibly Qs that differ from the Qs she typically gets in many of the other interviews she’s done. Here, we focus on our communication and our mindset as leaders and as communicators.

We have a LOT to talk about here!

Let me introduce Amy, then we’ll get right into the interview.
At the end, as always, I’m going to summarize with three learnings that I want to reinforce for you. Sound good?
Ok.

Amy C. Edmondson is the Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at the Harvard Business School, a chair established to support the study of human interactions that lead to the creation of successful enterprises that contribute to the betterment of society. Amy is so perfect for this chair, I have to say.

Amy studies teaming, psychological safety, and organizational learning, and she’s authored 7 books and over 75 cases and articles. She’s been recognized by the biannual Thinkers50 global ranking of management thinkers since 2011, and most recently was ranked #1 in 2021 and 2023; She also received that organization’s Breakthrough Idea Award in 2019, and Talent Award in 2017.

In 2019, Amy’s published her seminal book, “The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation and Growth.” Her more recent book “Right Kind of Wrong – The Science of Failing Well,” is due to be translated into 24 additional languages, and was selected for the Financial Times and Schroders Best Business Book of the Year award.
Yes, I’ll leave links to these books in the shownotes, along with links to other books and papers that we mention in our conversation.

Here we go!

INTERVIEW

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Thank you so much, Amy, for being here today to talk to us about psychological safety and the concept of failing well.

Amy Edmondson: Thrilled to be here.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: I’ve already shared the definition of psychological safety, but I have a question. When I’m discussing this with my clients, especially when it comes up in coaching sessions, I often describe it as a culture where it’s safe to take risks. Is that a solid, short definition?

Amy Edmondson: It absolutely is.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Perfect!

Amy Edmondson: This topic has come up frequently in my work and research within organizations, largely due to the growing popularity of the concept. However, this also leads to many misunderstandings and misconceptions. There are two key points that people often raise that can be frustrating, both for them and for me. One is…

Amy Edmondson: People often say, “We love this psychological safety concept, but we have to care about performance.” The reality is that without a climate where risk-taking feels safe, it’s challenging to perform well.

In our world of uncertainty and interdependence, there’s another concerning trend: people are starting to misuse the concept as a weapon. They might say, “You can’t give me feedback, or you’ll undermine my psychological safety.” That’s completely incorrect.

Psychological safety actually encourages an environment where we provide feedback to one another. We should aim to give it respectfully and accurately, even though it won’t always be perfect. We need to accept that we might get it wrong sometimes, but we’re doing our best and will work through it together.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: I love how your two seminal books are not mutually exclusive; there’s so much overlap. You mentioned getting it wrong, which leads me to a question I was planning to ask later. Recently, I conducted workshops for physicians in Australia, despite the 14-hour time difference! I shared that I would be interviewing you, and they had some questions for you.

One physician mentioned that, in Australia—especially in medicine—while it’s not illegal to not create a culture of psychological safety, it’s increasingly coming up in courts of law. I see you nodding; this isn’t news to you.

Amy Edmondson: Yes, I’ve heard similar concerns. While the intentions are good, this situation can be deeply problematic.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: yeah. So is it against the law to not create a culture of psychological safety? Or is it that it comes up.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: One of the physicians mentioned that it seems to come up when people are accused of bullying.

Amy Edmondson: Yes, and that’s a complex issue. Bullying can sometimes be perceived very differently—what one person sees as bullying, another might view as directive management. Before labeling behaviors as bullying or linking the lack of psychological safety to legal issues, we need to be clear about what constitutes illegal behavior, rather than focusing solely on subjective outcomes.

It’s tricky because someone might say, “I don’t like you; therefore, you’re a bully,” leading to reports that might not reflect the true situation.

What worries me about these well-intentioned efforts to eliminate bad behaviors is that making it a legal matter can create a serious atmosphere. If the consequence of speaking up is something as severe as going to jail, people may feel compelled to hide issues rather than learn from them.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Unfortunately, and ironically, this could lead to negative outcomes. Yet, there’s a wealth of research—much of which you’ve contributed to—that shows psychological safety is critical for team performance.

Amy Edmondson: Absolutely. My own empirical research is just a small part of the broader literature. I developed a measure of psychological safety long ago, and many researchers have since built upon that work. If we include the healthcare literature, there are over a thousand peer-reviewed studies demonstrating that psychological safety is linked to higher-performing teams.

This connection exists because most teams require a level of risk-taking for success—not reckless risks, but behaviors like asking for help, admitting mistakes, or expressing dissenting views. Those actions are essential for performance but can be difficult for many people to engage in.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Returning to our earlier discussion about the challenges you’ve mentioned regarding the true spirit of psychological safety, it often comes up that we have business objectives to meet. I often use a 2×2 matrix that shows psychological safety on one axis and accountability on the other. I see you nodding your head.

Amy Edmondson: I remember I drew that. I I conceptualize that in like in the middle of a class one day 20 years ago because because I I realized that so many people have this kind of false dichotomy that either you know, care about or uphold high standards of performance and accountability, or we can have, you know.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah.

Amy Edmondson: Psychological safety and accountability are two different dimensions. Once you plot them, you realize there are four quadrants. There’s a zone where both are low, which I call the “apathy zone.” In this state, there’s no accountability and no psychological safety, leading to a lack of motivation.

Then there’s the “comfort zone,” where psychological safety is high but accountability is low. It might feel good for a short time, but it doesn’t foster growth or high performance.

The quadrant I see more often is the “anxiety zone.” Here, accountability is high, and there’s pressure to perform, but psychological safety is lacking. People want to do well, but they don’t feel safe enough to engage in the behaviors that would actually help them succeed.

This zone can lead to burnout, as it’s exhausting to operate under those conditions.

The ideal environment is the “learning zone,” or the “high-performance zone.” In this space, there’s a sense of ownership and commitment to high standards, paired with the freedom to speak up, ask for help, and share differing opinions. In an uncertain world, that’s the only culture that truly thrives.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Absolutely, and this applies beyond work. Think about family dynamics—when teenagers communicate with their parents, for instance.

Amy Edmondson: Exactly. I discuss this in my book Right Kind of Wrong, emphasizing that in family situations, you don’t want kids to be afraid to tell the truth. If they are, it can lead to dangerous situations—like not calling for help because they fear a negative reaction.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yes, the communication skills we talk about in coaching can be valuable in personal life as well.

Before we continue, I want to share a question from Dr. Janette Wright, an anesthetist in Australia. She’s familiar with psychological safety and her colleagues are as well. Here’s her question:

In an operating theater during a critical incident, psychological safety can diminish due to harsh words or urgent tasks that are ordered rather than requested. Even in a team with a great culture under normal conditions, what’s the best way to maintain or renew psychological safety during these circumstances?

Amy Edmondson: This is such an important question. These situations can occur not just in operating rooms but in families and relationships as well. If we expect perfection in our responses, that’s unrealistic.

Fortunately, there’s a path to recovery. The first step is to acknowledge what happened. If something was said or done that might have harmed psychological safety, it’s crucial to name it. Apologizing is also important; it shows that you recognize the impact of your actions and are committed to doing better next time.

The key is that these moments must be discussable. We will all make mistakes, but when we do, we shouldn’t feel ashamed or embarrassed. Instead, we should create an environment where these issues can be openly addressed.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: You know.

Amy Edmondson: Logical safety, or we find some optimal place in the middle. It’s like, No, no, no, it’s two different dimensions. And so.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, they’re orthogonal.

Amy Edmondson: They’re orthogonal and once drawn, then you realize, oh, there really are four quadrants here. There really is a zone where both are low, and you know that’s a pretty sad state of affairs. Nobody wants to work there. I call it the apathy zone.

Amy Edmondson: You know, no accountability, no psychological safety, and it’s you know you try to take care of yourself. But you’re not terribly motivated.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Right.

Amy Edmondson: And then, of course, the one that people are worrying about is the comfort zone, where it’s like high psychological safety, but no accountability, no commitment to high standards, and you know I always think that might be fun for a day or a week or so. But that’s not really what it means to be a thriving, you know, adult human being or child, for that matter, you know. So the one, of course, that I see far more often, and I want to come back to this in a moment is the anxiety zone where.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah.

Amy Edmondson: You know, the accountability is apparently high around here. The need to perform well is high around here, but psychological safety feels low.

Amy Edmondson: And so that’s you know. That’s the anxiety zone. That’s where I’d like to do a good job. But I really don’t feel safe engaging in the behaviors I need to do a good job.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Right.

Amy Edmondson: And and then.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: That’s like the burnout zone, too.

Amy Edmondson: That’s a burnout zone. Absolutely. It’s exhausting.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. And then the.

Amy Edmondson: You know, the place we all want our teams to be is the learning zone, or the which I also think is the high performance zone. And that’s where we feel a sense of accountability or ownership and a commitment to high standards, and we feel able to speak up to get help to, you know, offer a different point of view, and so forth. And in an uncertain world that’s like that’s the only kind of climate or or culture that’s going to work.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, I’m even thinking about, even in families, right? When children like teenagers are talking to their parents, or what? Like, yeah, it’s even beyond work.

Amy Edmondson: Oh, yes, in fact, I didn’t think you know I write about that in Right Kind of Wrong, because it’s the last thing you want is in a family situation is to have kids be afraid to tell you the truth, because then they might first of all, you don’t know what’s going on, and that’s dangerous. Second of all, they might literally, you know, get into the car of a drunk friend rather than call you, because they’re afraid you’re going to yell at them.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Right? Right? So we can extrapolate. I find that with most of the things that I coach, it’s communication skills. It’s that people are like. Oh, this would work in my personal life, too. I said, yes, it will.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: So before we go any further, I want to read this question from this this woman, Dr. Janette Wright. She is an anesthetist in Australia, and this is her question. She’s very familiar with psychological safety, and most of her colleagues are as well. So here’s her question.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: In an operating theater environment. During a critical incident there can be a loss of psychological safety, for example.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Harsh words or time-critical tasks that are ordered rather than requested.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Even in a team who, under normal conditions, have a great culture of speaking up and collegiality. What is the best way to maintain or renew psychological safety during these circumstances I read that word for word from what she sent me.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. So you can imagine her in this high stakes, or right.

Amy Edmondson: It’s such an important question. And you know, I think it happens in the OR but it also, we were just talking about families, and it happens in families, it happens in couples and relationships. Right? We will. We if we, if you and I had a theory that depended, or a practice that depended on being perfect and delivering the perfect response every time. That would be a lousy theory. Because no, we’re fallible human beings. So this situation will happen. Fortunately, I believe it is. There is a path to recovery, the sooner the better. But the most important steps on this path are, first name it acknowledge it.

Amy Edmondson: Oops, you know. That was not how I really wanted that to come out. Now you may not be enough presence to do that immediately, but do it as soon as you realize that something happened that is potentially harmful for the future, and then apologize and apology just means my in. I was scared, and you know my my I reacted too quickly, and I’ll I don’t think that had a positive effect, and I’ll do better next time, and then and then keep working at doing better next time.

Amy Edmondson: So the most important thing is that it’s discussable. We’re all going to fall off the balance beam, but when we fall off we shouldn’t be ashamed, embarrassed. We shouldn’t make it undiscussable, which it often is. It’s like, did you see that, you know? Behind closed doors.

Amy Edmondson: Remember. Oh, that was awful! Well, I’ll never feel safe again. There! It’s like, just get out, you know. Get get on top of it as quickly as possible, and speak truthfully about it. And the very act of doing that is demonstrating the kind of candor that, after all, is what we’re looking for.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Right? Right? So when I’m coaching my clients and they’re looking for almost like a prescription. So I understand what it is. I’ve seen the seven question survey. I understand the definitions the mistakes people make, and so on, and so on.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: What do I do? And so I say, think about your mindset. Think about your words and think about your actions, and you’re talk. You’re actually talking about and taking an action and and the words combination. Right? So you’re.

Amy Edmondson: Yeah.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Okay later on to admit fallibility. That’s one thing and the other one that I that I often mention that I’ve heard you say many times is when someone comes to you with an issue, or even a mistake, that they made you say thank you for telling me. Tell me more.

Amy Edmondson: Yeah, thank you for telling me.

Amy Edmondson: Maybe even depending on the situation. How can I help what ideas do you have? You know. So it’s all it’s it’s at least first and foremost about the what next I mean. Our instincts as humans, I think, is to look back like, well, how did that happen? Yeah. And you know, why were you so stupid? But no, we don’t say that. We, you know it’s it’s because you can’t do anything about the past, but you sure can do something about the future, and that’s your God. That’s your that’s your job, that’s your goal. So I I would say, you know it is. It’s, you know. Thanks for telling me. How can I help, or what? Now? What ideas do you have.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. So being future oriented is actually.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: I think I probably implicitly was coaching people to do that. But but I’m not explicitly so. I I love that be future, not past oriented, right. There’ll be enough.

Amy Edmondson: And I’m a big fan of after action review. Right? I I believe we can learn a great deal, and we must learn from the past, especially from failures.

Amy Edmondson: But it’s just that. It’s that. What we’re talking about here is, how do you react in that moment? Because in a sense. If someone’s coming to you with a mistake or any kind of bad news. This is already a difficult moment for them. Job is simply to not make it worse. Right? It’s to make it better. Demonstrate that you welcome it, to demonstrate that this is what we do. This is what good looks like around here.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, and back to the example from the question from the physician in Australia. If later on you go back and apologize, you’re demonstrating that you know fallibility firsthand, and if, especially if you’re a leader, you have a huge impact on the culture. So you’re reinforcing it in real time and your course correcting right.

Amy Edmondson: Yes, yes, and if you I mean, if you’re expecting others to admit mistakes, and you’re expecting others to ask for help and admit their human fallibility. I promise you it won’t work if you’re unwilling to do the same.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: So we keep saying the word mistake. And I wanna shift into failing. Well, and I wanna start by asking you what you think about this and it’s about vocabulary.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: And I think maybe because I’ve I’ve evolved my career into becoming a communication coach. I’m more conscious of and hopefully careful with the language and vocabulary that I use.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: And one thing that I talk about with my clients, and and especially if they’re in career transition, or they’re making plans for the future right, and talking about the difference between disappointment and regret. So I say, this is this is my take on this, which is, you make the best decision that you have with the information you have at the time. You may or may not be disappointed, but if you truly did make the best decision with the information you had then you really can’t have regrets.

Amy Edmondson: I love that. Yeah, I think that’s great. First of all, I love the word disappointment. I use it a lot because it’s a. It’s part of a self training practice to to not say, Oh, this is awful! This is, you know, this is the end of the world when it isn’t and to say instead, This is disappointing, right? I’d really I’d wanted that to work right. I’d want to, whatever. And so disappointment is a very powerful world word, because it’s clean and clear and not exaggerated. Right? And and regret. Yeah, regret is quite interesting. I hadn’t thought about it that way because it really it does imply that you would love to rewind the videotape and do it differently. I mean, that’s not always appropriate. It’s appropriate for some things like that that operating room story again, you’d you’d love to if you were that surgeon you would love to rewind the videotape and not lose your cool. But you didn’t. So that’s okay. Do your best. You go forward. But but for the things that we do and try in life that we think might work or will work. But they don’t. You must not feel regret, because if you do, you will then hold yourself back, and you’ll do what I call playing, not to lose rather than you know going for it, rather than do your best. It’s sort of I’ll just take the safe, you know. I’ll I’ll try the same things.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. So so both of your books and I. And I think maybe all of your research is really grounded in this kind of growth mindset. Right?

Amy Edmondson: Yes.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Really is.

Amy Edmondson: And I love the growth mindset work.

Amy Edmondson: You know, Carol Dwecks, and you know others, her students, and others as well, because it’s I think it’s so.

Amy Edmondson: It’s so consistent with what is needed in a world that keeps changing. And for people who want to keep achieving or doing better, you know.

Amy Edmondson: Learning and growing and improving, and it’s so tempting. And I think the world is constantly sending us messages that we’re supposed to be perfect, or we’re supposed to get it right, or hit our targets or win awards. And it’s it’s so tempting to get caught up in those rather than in this idea, which is true, that we can keep learning and growing.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Right learning. I say, learning, as opposed to performing.

Amy Edmondson: Yeah, yeah.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: So can you share with us the three archetypes of failure? I I first of all, I also archetypes. So you’re speaking my language so categorizing and defining. I think this also really helps people think about leveraging their growth mindset. By the way, I’m sure you notice this, too, in what you do. There’s like a self selection. People who are listening to this podcast probably have a growth mindset. Otherwise they wouldn’t select themselves.

Amy Edmondson: Probably true. It’s probably true, although I bet there are people who are, you know, growth, mindset. Curious, right?

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: I know.

Amy Edmondson: Because they know they know and want to learn and grow, but they also are like so many of us. Not immune to the pressures in their organizations, or the pressures in society that can re that can reinforce more of a performance mindset.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, I want to talk about that self awareness. But but first, can you share the definitions of.

Amy Edmondson: So. I’ll I’ll rewind for just a moment and say, Mistake, I’ll start with mistake. Then I’ll describe the three kinds of failure. So a mistake is an unintended deviation from a known practice or process.

Amy Edmondson: Right? And and and so I think that’s important, because a mistake is a kind of a particular category where it it’s a nonsensical word, unless there already is existing knowledge or process. Yeah, that gets the result. We want. Okay, mistake. And it’s got to be unintended, right? And an intended mistake is an oxymoron that doesn’t exist. It’s that’s just sabotage or carelessness, or whatever. Okay, so and forget careless. Let’s wipe that one out. So because that’s a different thing, anyway.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: You can.

Amy Edmondson: You can be careless and make a mistake. So, okay, so a but so so.

Amy Edmondson: I started with mistake because in ordinary talk people use the words mistake and failure interchangeably, and they’re not. A failure is an undesired outcome. There are three kinds. One is what I call a basic failure, which has a single cause, usually a mistake. It’s in familiar territory. If I text and drive and get into an accident, that’s a basic failure. I did something I shouldn’t have done, and I got a bad outcome.

A complex failure has a handful of factors contributing to it, any one of which wouldn’t create a failure on its own. But the unfortunate combination of factors gives rise to an undesired outcome. You know, supply chain breakdown, multi-causal—some workers are sick, weather patterns over there, and boom, it comes together.

Both of those kinds of failures are undesired and largely preventable. At our best, with incredible vigilance and communication skills, we can prevent most of those kinds of failures in familiar territory.

The third kind, intelligent failures, are the undesired outcomes of a thoughtful foray into new territory. These are the undesired results of experiments. You can’t have regrets about these because you could not have known in advance that it wouldn’t work. You had good reason to believe it could work. You’re a scientist in a lab running an experiment. You think, “This makes sense. Let’s get the data. Let’s see if it’s true.” Lo and behold, you’re wrong. Disappointing, to be sure—a failure, to be sure—but an intelligent one, and one that we need to learn to welcome and celebrate because they bring us new information.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: This categorization of the types of failures helps us reconcile the societal obsession with avoiding failure and performing at a high level, on the one hand, and what we keep hearing about failing fast and failing hard, on the other hand.

Amy Edmondson: There’s no bad idea in the operating room, right? Not something you’d want to do in passenger air travel. There are contexts in which we need to do everything in our power to ensure a successful outcome, particularly in high-stakes, high-risk situations. Part of the reason I articulate this typology and these archetypes is primarily to help us make the important distinctions we need to truly welcome the new knowledge that comes from intelligent failures. If failure is all lumped into our minds as one idea or one category, it’s not going to work psychologically to make us feel okay about failure. We can only feel okay about failure when we have cognitive distinctions around the types of failure, and then it frees us up to engage in more smart risks.

I point out in the book that, in fact, name a field—the people who are most successful are not successful because they’re failure-free. They’ve become most successful because they’ve failed more often than the rest of us. They’ve been willing to try hard things and stomach the disappointment of failure, getting better and better at their craft.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: When I hear you describing these archetypes, it occurred to me that there are kinds of wrong that we want to avoid and kinds of wrong that we are totally okay with.

Amy Edmondson: Exactly. They’re all wrong in a sense, in that they are all undesired outcomes. But only one type of undesired outcome is the right kind, or at least the productive kind.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: In part two of the book, you talk about self-awareness, situation awareness, and system awareness. I just gobbled up chapter five because I’m all about self-awareness—internal and external. I was going back and forth between feeling optimistic about the message and then feeling pessimistic.

Amy Edmondson: That’s exactly the experience I have. I toggle back and forth between feeling very hopeful about what we know and what we’re capable of doing, and also feeling very depressed about it because we do, we? I will repeatedly and consistently fall into the same traps. Even Danny Kahneman, of course, who wrote “Thinking, Fast and Slow,” falls into the same traps.

I think part of the solution is recognizing that it’s okay to have system one fast thinking. If you stop to pause—like which way should I brush my teeth every time you do it? You’d never get through the day. Many of our instincts are necessary for survival. You stop yourself from running out into traffic without even thinking about it, and that’s good. So we need all of these skilled routines to get through our days. We need to get continually better, and none of us will ever be perfect. But we need to get continually better at learning when to pause and slow down our thinking.

To me, the hopefulness comes in once we become aware that self-awareness is a thing and that thinking about your thinking is not a bad idea. For things where there’s uncertainty and reasonably high stakes, we really do want to challenge ourselves. I borrow from some of the great thinkers and those who spend time thinking about how to have healthy thinking.

I try to borrow some of the simple wisdom and say: how should we do that in business or in organizations? The simplest rubric I borrow from a former mentor, Larry Wilson, is stop, challenge, choose. Just pause. Learn to breathe, learn to say, “Okay, I’m feeling a little anxious. What’s going on?” Pause and take a look at your thinking.

Ask yourself, “How tethered to reality is this, or am I spiraling out?” What other ways might there be to think about this situation? Now pick the one that is in my best interests and health, and maybe happiness. If I can realize that, “Oh, that’s disappointing, but not fatal, and I’m going to try harder next time,” then that’s a healthy habit.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: So you’re shifting me a little bit over into the optimistic.

Amy Edmondson: Right with it.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: As you were talking, I was thinking it still relates to a growth mindset.

Amy Edmondson: Oh yes!

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: After coaching executives for a couple of years, I had an epiphany. At the end of the calendar year, I looked back and realized what really differentiates the most successful people is a growth mindset. A few years later, I recognized self-awareness as another key factor. These aren’t necessarily orthogonal; I think they’re correlated in some ways.

Amy Edmondson: Yeah. yes, I mean, I think, yeah, in order to have a growth mindset. I think you you have to be a little bit more thoughtful about what you’re doing, and why and why? The disappointment isn’t really so awful, because the spontaneous reaction to a failure or being wrong about something. And this is just well, you know. Well, well demonstrated in research, our spontaneous reactions are not are. It’s a negative emotion that’s just automatic. Right if I didn’t do as well as I thought. Whatever that’s I’m going to have a negative reaction. So the growth mindset is that superpower that comes back in and says, No, it’s it’s a learning experience, and not in a cliche way. But like, what what did I do that led to the outcome that I’m not happy about, and what might I do differently next time.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: I love that you use the word superpower. There, Amy. I love it. Okay, I’m I’m gonna ask you the 3 rapid fire questions. Now, are you ready.

Amy Edmondson: Okay. Yep.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: 1st question, are you an introvert or an extrovert?

Amy Edmondson: Introvert hands down!

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Hands down. Yeah. Have you taken.

Amy Edmondson: I have taken. I’ve taken the you know the the Briggs.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Briggs.

Amy Edmondson: Briggs. I was. Gonna say, Briggs, Myers, that’s wrong.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: And the Big 5. It’s also in the Big 5 of social psychology, right? Both of us.

Amy Edmondson: Yes, it’s 1 of the Big 5, and and I was. I was gratified to learn, though in as part of being trained as a psychologist like you that you know, that doesn’t mean you’re inept in social situations. It just means it takes more energy than. and that then I, as an introvert. It means I have to recharge, and I’m happy to recharge. I have lots of opportunities to recharge a lot of the work I do is solo at a keyboard.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. Yeah. And and also, you may have a superpower of being a fantastic listener, which probably helps you in your research. Right?

Amy Edmondson: That is true, I mean, I’m not sure I got that as good as I want it to be. But I but it is true that as an introvert you are a good listener, and and prone to listen.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, okay, that wasn’t so rapid. But I love hearing your thoughts on that. second one. I I’m curious about this one. What are your communication.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: pet Peeves?

Amy Edmondson: The up lilt. So that is let me tell you about my work. And I was just finishing this chapter. and I know it’s it’s gotten to be so common now that it almost is disallowed as a pet peeve, because it’s practically everybody and I find it so so much less compelling than than stating it as a sentence rather than asking, or, you know, implying it’s a question plus. I think it really requires. It takes it drains the listener because the listener is is sort of feeling, because it’s implied by the tone that they have to say something, or respond, or agree or disagree, and it’s it’s exhausting.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. So I’ve noticed, I labeled this Phenomenon, or the kind of increasing prevalence of it, the uptick and up speak.

Amy Edmondson: Okay.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, and it also.

Amy Edmondson: I like that.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: So Adam Grant had an article a couple of years ago in the New York Times, where he talks about women purposely using weak language. So with some of my senior female leaders, I assign them to read the article, and then I say, I want to talk to you about this, because, depending on who you’re talking to, it might be in your best interest to use up. Speak, but I hope you’re conscious of it. I hope that when you are, when you have conviction about something, you’re not asking them. Instead, you’re telling them

Amy Edmondson: Exactly, exactly.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Okay question number 3, is there a podcast or a book that you find yourself recommending the most lately?

Amy Edmondson: Yes, the book. Maybe it’s old fashioned to say a book, and it’s not a brand new book, but it is a brilliant book, and it is called, get rid of the Performance review.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Oh!

Amy Edmondson: Sam Culbert, Ucla emeritus. And it is not a book about why we shouldn’t have performance reviews. It’s it’s really a book about how the way most of them unfold is not learning oriented, not helpful, not forward looking. and does. And it’s a sham. Or it’s theater that isn’t working. So it needs to be replaced by what he calls the performance preview where we. Together and my job. If I’m your manager, my job is to help you think about growth mindset again. My job is to is to help you do well. so I need to know what you need from me. You need to know what I expect or what we’re trying to do, and I need to know how to most enable you. And so it’s a mute. There’s mutual learning, and it’s forward looking and it’s so. you know, it’s so profound and so rare, but but really a powerful way of of managing performance.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah, sound like, it sounds like this book made a real

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: real impression on you. That’s very. I can see how it’s very kind of interrelated with with your topics of failure, the right kind of wrong and psychological safety. I will put a link to that book in the show notes, and I just want to close by asking, is there anything else you want to share about the right kind of wrong failure, psychological safety, anything else.

Amy Edmondson: One thing, so I’ll go full circle back to psychological safety, which, as you said, it’s all interrelated. and say.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Right. Okay, that is beautiful. Thank you so much, Amy. I really appreciate your insights and your time. And it was wonderful to chat with you again after so many years. Thank you.

Amy Edmondson: Likewise. Thank you.

Andrea Wojnicki – TalkAboutTalk: Yeah. Oh, Amy, thank you so much. I just want to say also congratulations on having such a significant impact and influencing institutions and individuals at such a massive scale to be better people.

Amy Edmondson: Thank you. That makes my day.

The feeling is mutual, Amy!

OK – let me now highlight and reinforce
three of the INSIGHTS
from our conversation:

The 3 points are:
Focus on Performance
Focus on our vocabulary
Focus on Leraning and the future

Focus on PERFORMANCE
I want to reinforce first and foremost that the whol point here is performance.
Amy mentioned that “we love this psychological safety thing, but we have to care about performance. “ Yes, that’s the whole point.
Psychological safety is not about being comfortable and laissez-faire. It’s not about rejecting feedback. It’s not about weaponizing a woke excuse for performance. In fact, performance is the whole point.
The research consistently demonstrates that a culture of psychological safety contributes to team performance. And accountability is critical.
Even in Amy’s research on failures. It’s all about longer term performance. As Amy said, The people who are most successful – who are the highest performers, they’re not most successful because they’re failure-free. Rather their success and performance is because they’ve
been willing to,try hard things, and to stomach the disappointment of failure. But it’s a certain kind of failure, isn’t it? It’s intelligent failure.

Which brings me to the second point I want to reinforce:

FOCUSing ON OUR VOCABULARY
I brought up the distinction between regret and disappointment. Regret is wishing you’d done something differently. Disappointment is knowing things didn’t turn out the way you hoped, despite making the right decision at the time. This is analogus to Amy’s intelligent failure.

Amy started by distinguishing between mistakes and failures.

A mistake is an unintended deviation from a known practice or process.

A failure is an undesired outcome. There are 3 kinds of failures: basic, complex, and intelligent. I bet you can guess which one of those three is good!
A basic failure has a single cause. That cause is usually a mistake. You do something you shouldn’t hav, and there’s a bad outcome. You text and drive and get into an accident. That’s a basic failure.

A complex failure has a handful of factors contributing to it.

Intelligent failure is the undesired results of experiments. Think of a scientific experiment:
– hypothesis, action, undesired result, learning.

SO we encourage you to be careful of your vocabulary. Knowing that as humans we all fail at times and we all make mistakes. And we all experience disappointment and even regret. But if we consciously focus on taking smart risks, we can label our failures as intelligent failure and move on to learning.

Which brings me to the last point I want to reinforce – the Focus on LEARNING & THE FUTURE

Ultimately when you focus on learning and the future, you are cultivating a growth mindset.

This notion of cultivating a growth mindset, of focusing on the future and learning, is a key theme running through Amy’s work in psychological safety and in failing well.

That reminds me, I loved how when I mentioned that I think most of the Talk About Talk podcast listeners have a strog growth mindset – there’s self-selection there – Amy added that there are probably many who are growth-minded curious. Probably true. If that might be you, know this. Inasmuch as the research on team performance consistently shows that psychological safety contributes to team performance, the research by Carol Dweck and other consistently shows that whenou culativate a growth mindset – when you focus on learning and the future, this also can also improve your chance of success.

Thanks again to Amy.

Your work really is contributing to a more productive – high performing society. And a more enjoyable one too. .

As I said, you can find links to aAMy’s books aswell as the other books and articles we mentioned in our conversation, right in the shownotes for this episode.

My coordinates are there too. Please connect with me anytime. Check out the Talkabouttalk.com website or send me a DM on LinkedIn. I love hearing from you.

Talk soon!

The post PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY & FAILING WELL with Harvard Business School Professor Amy Edmondson (ep.175) appeared first on Talk About Talk.