Why Psychological Safety, Not Surveillance, Drives Team Performance, According to Florence Divet …

In a recent LinkedIn post, Florence Divet ☀️ shares critical insights into why many teams underperform, arguing that the root cause is often a lack of psychological safety rather than a deficit in employee motivation or effort. Florence Divet ☀️ posits that excessive oversight and tracking, while often well-intentioned, can stifle the very environment needed for innovation and high performance.

The post highlights a common managerial mindset, particularly evident before the widespread adoption of remote work. Florence Divet ☀️ recalls conversations with managers who expressed anxiety about not knowing what employees were doing when visibility was reduced. “I remember conversations with managers before COVID when remote work came up. Many of them said the same thing: ‘I’m not against it… but how would I know what people are doing?’” Florence Divet ☀️ writes.

This sentiment, according to Florence Divet ☀️, reveals a deeper need for managers to “see work happening to feel comfortable.” However, the pandemic forced a shift, demonstrating that work could indeed get done, often more effectively, without constant observation. Florence Divet ☀️ explains the detrimental impact of feeling constantly observed:

“Because when people feel observed, they don’t take risks. They go with the safest option. They become cautious and compliant. They stop taking initiative or bringing ideas that could backfire.”

The Systemic Issue of Control vs. Trust

Florence Divet ☀️ distinguishes between watching and leading, and between seeing and trusting. The core issue, as Florence Divet ☀️ argues, is not a lack of individual drive but a flawed system that prioritizes surveillance over trust. “That’s not a motivation issue. That’s a system issue,” the post emphasizes.

Florence Divet ☀️ stresses that effective leadership involves creating an environment where employees feel secure enough to think, take initiative, and even make mistakes without undue personal consequence. The author clarifies that high expectations are not the problem; rather, it’s the perceived personal cost of failure that leads to disengagement.

“People don’t shut down because expectations are high. They shut down because the cost of getting it wrong feels personal.”

Shifting Conditions for Optimal Performance

Instead of lowering performance standards, Florence Divet ☀️ advocates for changing the underlying conditions. The post offers practical strategies for leaders to foster trust and psychological safety:

• Replace vague status checks like “status?” with outcome-oriented questions such as “what does good look like by Friday?”
• Clearly define decision-making authority.
• Establish agreed-upon checkpoints for midway progress and final review, focusing on learning and adaptation.
• Actively observe when communication dwindles and address the underlying reasons.
• Reflect on the behaviors that the current management system inadvertently rewards.

Florence Divet ☀️ concludes by asserting that true performance improvement stems from the alignment of responsibility and trust. When employees feel genuinely trusted, they are more likely to rise to the occasion and deliver their best work.

“Performance rarely improves under pressure alone. It improves when responsibility and trust move together. And when people feel trusted, they tend to rise to it.”

The insights shared by Florence Divet ☀️ provide a compelling argument for leaders to re-evaluate their management practices, moving from a model of constant oversight to one built on a foundation of trust and psychological safety.