Psychological Safety and Leadership: Psychological safety as a mediator in the connection between leadership styles and organizational outputs
Translated title
Psychological Safety and Leadership
Author
Abild, Sofie Isgaard
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2025
Submitted on
2025-01-27
Pages
55
Abstract
Psykologisk tryghed handler om en arbejdskultur, hvor medarbejdere trygt kan stille spørgsmål, komme med ideer og indrømme fejl uden frygt for skyld eller sanktioner. Forskere har interesseret sig for dette i over 25 år, især i relation til ledelse og organisatoriske resultater. Tidligere reviews har ikke samlet set undersøgt, hvordan ledelsesstile, psykologisk tryghed og organisatoriske resultater hænger sammen. Denne systematiske litteraturgennemgang havde til formål at afdække disse forbindelser. Gennemgangen fulgte PRISMA 2020-tjeklisten og blev gennemført via Aalborg Universitets database PRIMO. Ud af 214 fundne publikationer blev 12 inkluderet efter frasortering af dubletter og irrelevante emner. Efter en biasvurdering blev endnu én artikel udelukket, så den endelige gennemgang omfattede 11 studier. På tværs af disse studier blev otte ledelsesstile undersøgt (etisk, ydmyg, inkluderende, spirituel, tjenende, transformativ, ambidextral og paradoksal ledelse). Alle blev forbundet med positive organisatoriske resultater. For etisk, ydmyg, inkluderende, spirituel og tjenende ledelse fandtes psykologisk tryghed som en delvis forklaring på sammenhængen til resultaterne; for transformativ, ambidextral og paradoksal ledelse blev der fundet en tilsvarende delvis mediering. Samlet set tyder fundene på, at psykologisk tryghed enten delvist eller fuldt ud medierer forbindelsen mellem ledelsesadfærd og organisatoriske resultater. I drøftelsen blev de fælles kendetegn ved ledelsesstile kvalitativt vurderet for at pege på specifikke ledelseskvaliteter, der formodes at fremme psykologisk tryghed; seks sådanne kvaliteter blev identificeret. På den baggrund foreslås en ny ledelsesstil, benævnt Psychological Safety Leadership. Konklusionen er, at der er en positiv sammenhæng mellem de undersøgte ledelsesstile og organisatoriske resultater, og at denne sammenhæng i alle tilfælde enten delvist eller fuldt ud går gennem psykologisk tryghed, hvilket understøtter hypotesen.
Psychological safety refers to a workplace climate where people feel comfortable speaking up, asking questions, and admitting mistakes without fear of blame or punishment. Interest in this topic has grown over the past 25 years, especially in relation to leadership and organizational outcomes. Prior reviews had not examined how leadership styles, psychological safety, and organizational outcomes connect in one picture. This systematic review set out to explore those links. Following the PRISMA 2020 checklist, the review searched Aalborg University’s PRIMO database. Of 214 records initially identified, 12 remained after duplicate removal and scope screening. After a risk of bias assessment, one more study was excluded, leaving 11 in the final review. Across these studies, eight leadership styles were assessed (ethical, humble, inclusive, spiritual, servant, transformational, ambidextrous, and paradoxical). All were associated with positive organizational outcomes. For ethical, humble, inclusive, spiritual, and servant leadership, psychological safety partially explained the link to outcomes; transformational, ambidextrous, and paradoxical leadership showed similar partial mediation. Overall, the findings suggest that psychological safety partially or fully mediates the connection between leadership behaviors and organizational results. In the discussion, the reviewed leadership styles were qualitatively examined to identify specific leadership qualities hypothesized to foster psychological safety; six such qualities were identified. On that basis, a new leadership style, termed Psychological Safety Leadership, was proposed. The review concludes that the positive links between these leadership styles and organizational outcomes, together with mediation by psychological safety in all cases, support the hypothesis.
[This summary has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords
Documents