Psychological safety—originally created to protect workers from punishment for speaking up—is now, in some cases, being misused to protect those in power from discomfort.
Introduced by Harvard researcher Amy Edmondson, the concept was framed to make it safe to take interpersonal risks at work: asking questions, sharing dissenting views, and surfacing mistakes. It’s become a key pillar of inclusive workplaces for a reason—it helps people share their thoughts without fear. But lately, something’s changed. As workplaces reckon with shifting power dynamics—who gets heard, who holds influence, and who feels safe speaking up—we’re seeing more leaders invoke psychological safety not to protect truth-tellers, but to avoid accountability.
When “Safety” Becomes a Shield
Fast Company recently asked, “Is Psychological Safety Being Weaponized?” In the piece, Graham Winter points out that some people may invoke psychological safety to claim harm or a lack of safety in response to honest feedback. The issue isn’t the behavior being called out—it’s that someone spoke up in the first place, precisely what psychological safety is meant to support.
Here are other ways it can show up:
- A manager shuts down a conversation about microaggressions, citing their own discomfort.
- An executive reframes a racial equity discussion as “divisive,” calling instead for “unity” or “civility”.
- A senior leader says they want honesty, until it challenges their leadership style.
These are part of a broader cultural moment in which shifts in power are triggering discomfort and where calls for fairness and inclusion are sometimes recast as threats to the status quo.
Let’s be clear: psychological safety matters for everyone. No one should have to fear retaliation for speaking honestly at work—not frontline employees, not executives, not anyone in between.
But it’s worth noting that people in power often already benefit from built-in safety nets. Systems tend to cushion their risks. What has transpired over the past few years is that some leaders might be experiencing discomfort and a perceived lack of safety for the first time in their careers, and it’s unsettling. That discomfort isn’t inherently bad. In fact, for many employees, that lack of safety has been a daily reality, and speaking up has always carried risk.
What Real Safety Looks Like
Psychological safety doesn’t mean avoiding discomfort. Instead, it means knowing that discomfort won’t lead to punishment.
Real safety means:
- Leaders stay in the room when feedback gets hard
- Disagreement isn’t pathologized as “conflict,” but recognized as engagement
- Comfort isn’t prioritized over justice
- Accountability is seen as care, not cruelty
It also means asking better questions:
- Who regularly takes interpersonal risks in your workplace, and why?
- Who doesn’t feel safe unless others feel uncomfortable first?
When Power Gets Uncomfortable, Growth Is Possible
We’re living in a moment when power is being questioned, and not everyone is ready for what that means. Budget cuts, political pressure, and social media outrage are symptoms—not causes—of that discomfort.
The challenge for leaders now isn’t to make everyone comfortable. It’s to help their organizations get braver. That starts with prioritizing a true sense of psychological safety, where people can speak their minds without fear of retribution.
At Inclusion Geeks, we believe psychological safety must be rooted in justice, truth-telling, and courage, and it must serve everyone. We recognize that equity means some people may need more safety, not less scrutiny.
So, to the well-meaning leader who wants everyone to feel safe: we see you. To reiterate: the goal isn’t comfort—it’s capacity. When we commit to building workplaces where everyone can speak freely and safely, we create spaces that aren’t only more compassionate but also more effective and resilient.