Psychological Safety
上周看的一篇文章了解到一个概念，Psychological Safety，大致可翻译成「心理安全」。
文章标题是 What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team，发表在 The New York Times Magazine，具体内容这里可以找到，主要是 Google 内部一个研究高效团队有哪些共同点的项目（Project Aristotle）得出的结论。
针对如何打造一个好团队，研究者分析了很多数据，但无法找到某种统一的决定性模式。无论团队成员的性格类型、技能和背景如何，大家生活上是好朋友还是公私分明私下无交集，是强管理还是扁平结构弱管理等，都存在成功的团队。
文中的一个例子我印象非常深刻：
Imagine you have been invited to join one of two groups.
Team A is composed of people who are all exceptionally smart and successful. When you watch a video of this group working, you see professionals who wait until a topic arises in which they are expert, and then they speak at length, explaining what the group ought to do. When someone makes a side comment, the speaker stops, reminds everyone of the agenda and pushes the meeting back on track. This team is efficient. There is no idle chitchat or long debates. The meeting ends as scheduled and disbands so everyone can get back to their desks.
Team B is different. It’s evenly divided between successful executives and middle managers with few professional accomplishments. Teammates jump in and out of discussions. People interject and complete one another’s thoughts. When a team member abruptly changes the topic, the rest of the group follows him off the agenda. At the end of the meeting, the meeting doesn’t actually end: Everyone sits around to gossip and talk about their lives.
Which group would you rather join?
我想很多人会像我一样，第一反应，“当然 Team A 呀，高效、聚焦、能看出很强的执行力”。但按照文章的结论，长远看，Team B 可能会胜过 Team A。
因为研究者最终总结出对成为高效团队起关键性作用的是一种 group norms ，所有好团队都具备如下两个行为模式。
Norms are the traditions, behavioral standards and unwritten rules that govern how we function when we gather
Conversational turn-taking: On the good teams, members spoke in roughly the same proportion, a phenomenon the researchers referred to as ʻʻequality in distribution of conversational turn-taking.’’
Empathy: The good teams all had high ʻʻaverage social sensitivity’’ - a fancy way of saying they were skilled at intuiting how others felt based on their tone of voice, their expressions and other nonverbal cues.
这两种行为模式对构建心理安全的环境很重要。
The behaviors that create psychological safety — conversational turn‐taking and empathy — are part of the same unwritten rules we often turn to, as individuals, when we need to establish a bond. And those human bonds matter as much at work as anywhere else. In fact, they sometimes matter more.
文章的结论主要是基于 Google 内部的情况得出的，不一定适合所有企业，但当企业面临组织问题时，不妨作为一个思考视角。
比如重视战功，能推动领导者快速成长，但可能会导致一言堂文化，阻碍观点的百花齐放。末位淘汰，能激发和提升员工的执行力，但当发展速度降低，外部机会变少时，可能会出现大量内耗，何谈同理心文化。
每家企业都有自己的路径依赖，是坚持以往，相信苦难是暂时的，还是“刷新”自我，探寻另一种发展路径。我觉得要成为一家基业长青的公司，后者是一种核心能力。