Where Psychological Safety, Sport and Business Collide

1. Encourage Open Communication: The Impact of the ‘Invisible Check-List’

Winning team performances in elite sport competition require physical dominance, skilled interactions, rapid decision-making under pressure, and excellent execution. In field sports, successful execution is a highly complex blend of anticipation and reaction, tactical acuity and team cohesion under physical duress. Sports like rowing or synchro diving add in the demand of maintaining precision timing in complete unison, while pairs ice skating requires one partner to quite literally take a giant spinning leap of faith that their communication was on every plane – perfect.

But before a team can hope to perform well in front of thousands of people, they practice and refine their technical, tactical and team approach under the watchful eye of coaching staff. There are daily performance appraisals, team talks, and constant technical corrections. Poor performances are analysed, discussed and picked over. All with the intent of delivering an athlete or team to their peak performance. Athletes are often asked to provide their input in front of teammates in highly charged environments, or given direct and public feedback. It can be awkward and uncomfortable, but necessary for improvement.

If a psychologically safe container has been set up, where everyone is operating on the model of genuinely caring deeply before challenging directly (see Kim Scott’s work), then it is productive and sustainable. If there is not a safe container, and there has been no ‘work’ on how to communicate, what is said and how it is said can be damaging and undermining. And then, there is what isn’t said….

Former head of Manchester United Football Academy, Tom Statham (coach of Marcus Rashford among others) talks about the damage of setting players up against an ‘invisible check-list’. His suggestion is that when players are left guessing what the expectations of the coaches are, it hinders their capacity. Mental energy is spent on living up to assumptions of what is on the coaches ‘check-list’ for selection. They self-monitor and show up only as they think the coach wants – infallible, indestructible, robotic. This might play out, for example, as hiding an injury that is later irreparable, or not admitting that they are not clear on their role in a set play. Sounds similar to hiding a small problem in a project that escalates to an unsalvageable mess, or feeling unable to declare the need for help on a task that then becomes overwhelming?

If the team/coach/leaders goal posts and expectations are not clear, the performance is likely to be close, but ‘hit the post’. If the rules of engagement within the team are ambiguous, or the experience of being open and honest feels unsafe, then important explorations, team learning and useful course corrections are off-limits. That ramps up unhelpful internal dialogues and figuratively sends players off in different directions. It risks undermining both general team cohesion and the high level of task cohesion required to succeed at an elite level.

To underestimate the value of open communication at every point of preparation and performance is to add an unnecessary degree of difficulty to an already difficult task. Teaming and team cohesion works best when the rules are clear, the purpose and values are co-created and explicit, and the ways of working together are regularly and robustly examined – for both what is working well AND what isn’t. This lines up pretty nicely with Amy Edmondson’s idea of ‘framing the work’. Open communication demystifies the ‘invisible checklists’ that undermine psychological safety and reduces the likelihood of impression management. Everyone knows where the goal posts are, how to engage in the plays that are needed to score a goal, and how to suggest a change in play when needed.

How is your team checking in on the invisible check-lists and setting up the conditions for open communication?

2. Emphasise Learning from Mistakes: Failure is an MVP

In sport, athletes and teams will typically make more mistakes and have more failures than wins. At an elite sport level, failures are painful and often highly public. Failures are ruthlessly scrutinised, and often have wide impacts – the team’s position on the ladder, a medal, a trophy, financial endorsement. Mistakes in training might be tolerable, but mistakes in competition can be career-ending. And creating an environment where mistakes in training are taboo will hamstring any athlete’s progress, and, if encouraged, open up the pathway to improvement.

In sport, failure and mistakes aren’t just likely, they are often a necessary step towards better. Few great sporting performances happen overnight. They are the result of a continuous process of trial and error towards better, failed attempts representing opportunities for correction and improvement. It doesn’t feel nice to fail, but in sport it is often the springboard to performing a little better next time. By definition, improvement requires us to learn how to do things we can’t currently do, and to attempt to do things that we are not currently capable of. By default, that means that failure is the inevitable and necessary bedfellow of success.

Small and multiple failures are good learning companions in sport…trying different set plays to identify weaknesses, attempting to execute a complex skill by practicing small parts of it, pushing for a PB in the gym and not getting it – the process of efforting towards better, even with failed attempts, produces incremental but continuous gains.

Large and catastrophic failures, the result of not welcoming learning failure early on, are exposing and harder to recover from. The scar tissue (literally and figuratively) can be too painful to bounce back from. Or, the prodigiously talented youth athlete never feels that they can be below par or make an error – so they never fully explore their potential. It becomes the ‘should have/could have’ hamstring that restricts capacity to bring everything in the contest, and everything is what gets you to high performance.

The same applies to business, when mistakes are not allowed at any point, and the bigger the perceived likely fallout – from the boss, from colleagues – the harder it is to even begin to approach mistake-making as a welcome and valuable part of the process. The threat of ‘losing’ inhibits the self-same behaviours that may actually do more to support success in the long run.

Engaging in ‘risk of mistake’ behaviours, such as trying new things, suggesting an unusual idea, asking to try something a different way, till the soil for learning and innovation. The ability to gather data for course correction is prioritised, and by default then so are the learning opportunities for better performance. Failure and mistakes become the Most Valuable Player in pursuing progress.

How are you welcoming efforts that come with mistakes in your business, and what failure information are you mining for continuous improvement?

3. Build Trusting Relationships: The Story of the Kiwi Men’s 8+

In sport, it is not entirely necessary to like your team mates in order to perform well. However, for sustainable performance, there does need to be team cohesion, respectful behaviour, and a shared common purpose. Deeper trust seems to build cohesion. An abundance of research in sport connects higher team cohesion to better performance. More recently, research on the role of the coach-athlete relationship in creating an environment fit for the purpose of getting athletes to their physical, technical, and tactical peak has made clearer what elite athletes already know….when the climate is one that is psychologically safe, and underpinned by trust and respect, athletes and teams thrive. They can even do exceptional and unexpected things.

In 2021, the COVID-delayed 2020 Tokyo Olympics saw such a performance. The New Zealand Men’s Eight only qualified to race in Tokyo via the ‘last chance’ qualification regatta several months prior to the games. Despite the constraint of quarantining protocols on return from Europe to NZ for the final precious few months of training, the crew demonstrated physical discipline combined with unwavering commitment to coming together as a team.

Their path was guided by last minute appointed coach Tom O’Conner. O’Conner noted to the crew after his initial sessions that ‘your problem is not how hard you work, it’s how you are doing it together, how your team culture lines up….. which means you can’t go as fast as what you could go’. From that moment, coach and crew upended traditional hierarchy in sports teams where the oldest most experienced athlete calls most of the shots. The new young recruits, with minimal track records, instigated a team culture shift to a higher level of collaboration, collective ways of working, and professionalism. Pivotally, their input was encouraged by the elder statesman of the crew, Hamish Bond, already a rowing dual gold medallist.

O’Connor’s approach to creating an environment in which to thrive, one that was psychologically safe, was immediately noted by the athletes…‘Some coaches come in and want to break athletes down to build them back up. Tony came in and just wanted to get to know us ….you realised this was a uniquely caring and driven individual…we realised he had real faith in us..’

The crew made the Tokyo Olympic final via the repechage system. That is, their first race in the Olympic heat wasn’t good enough for a straight-through-to-the-Final qualification. Undaunted, they actually reflected on this as a positive, stating that their first round underperform was a perfect opportunity to sharpen their plan of execution (a strong cut-through to ‘learning from failure’!). Come the Olympic Final of the Men’s Eight, the NZ crew dominated the second half of the race, powering ahead to claim gold and usurping the much favoured British and German crews in the process.

In sport, the quality of interpersonal relationships influences how well individuals can come together and genuinely collaborate as a team. This impacts how collective potential is unlocked and demonstrated, regardless of how good each individual is. In the case of the NZ men’s eight, it seems that mutually afforded trust and high quality relationships was the foundational glue that propelled them to an outstanding performance.

What is the quality of the team relationships underpinning your performance?

4. Model Vulnerability: Carlo Ancelotti

Carlo Ancelotti, the ‘architect of football’s greatest moments’ and only coach to win the UEFA Champions League title 5 times, is well known for his quiet leadership style; ‘the most important role is never that of the coach…there are two types of coaches, those who do nothing, and those who do damage….the game belongs to the players…the coach has to focus on the importance of teamwork’ (Ancelotti).

True to his ethos, Ancelotti reportedly often consulted with players on who to substitute, and when. This included in the midst of Real Madrid’s highly charged Champions League semi-final against Manchester City. In the rapidly closing minutes of the game, Real Madrid needed two further goals in order to progress to the Final.

Ancelotti unorthodoxly relinquished control of the substitution roster to his players, something unheard of in a sport steeped in traditional models of hierarchy and omnipotent managers. That Ancelotti was comfortable to do this in full view of a packed stadium of some 60,000 fans, could be considered a peak moment of sharing responsibility and modelling vulnerability.

In Ancelotti’s example, modelling vulnerability meant having the grace and humility to engage others in the decision-making process, and appreciating the different perspectives of those who might not normally be considered. Real Madrid won, by the way.

While it might challenge the status quo and typical leadership expectations, when leaders set up the conditions for vulnerability to engage meaningfully in other perspectives and inputs, something positive also happens to engagement, accountability, motivation ….and opens the possibility of tapping into new resources because people feel safe and valued. The question shouldn’t be what will it cost you to be vulnerable and share the load on occasions, but what might you gain?

5. Promote Inclusivity: The Story of Eric The Eel

While the Olympics represents the pinnacle of athletic performance, the founding father of the modern Olympic Games, Pierre de Coubertin stated that: ‘The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not winning, but taking part; the essential thing in life is not conquering, but fighting well.’ A shining example of de Coubertin’s ethos is the exploits of ‘Eric the Eel’ at the Sydney 2000 Olympics.

Eric Moussambani was a wild card entrant, and the first ever swimmer to compete for Equitorial Guinea at Olympic level in swimming. He trained for the 100m freestyle in the only pool available to him in central Africa…one that was just 13m long. He arrived at the games without proper competition swimming trunks or goggles. Alone in his Olympic heat, Eric struggled to complete the 100m……but did so to a roaring ovation from the crowd! While not the typical image of Olympic prowess, Eric’s spirit of competition, hope and struggle became a powerful allegory for the value of inclusion.

Eric went on to improve his swimming capability, but perhaps more importantly, he became the catalyst for the construction of two 50m pools in Equatorial Guinea to foster the swimming aspirations of the kids of his country. He harnessed his popularity to raise thousands of dollars for charitable work and opened the World’s eyes to a joyous celebration of inclusion. His participation in the Olympic Games reflected the notion that ‘all efforts are welcome here’, and what transpired was both heart-warming and instrumental in promoting broader change.

Without inclusion and diversity, the catalysts for transformation can be overlooked. When expectations about ‘the way things are done around here’ are challenged, it can be just the spark that is needed to ignite wider beneficial outcomes.