How to Build a transparent Leadership Team
Psychological safety is the most practical defence for group think.
Groupthink is a risk for any close-knit team. Psychological safety is the most practical defence.
Small leadership teams often work well together, and that closeness carries a cost. When people like each other and share a history, they may stop challenging each other. Janis (1972) called this pattern groupthink: the pressure to agree overrides honest appraisal. The result is fewer options on the table and weaker decisions.
Why people stay quiet
Employees often withhold concerns because they fear the personal cost of speaking up (Morrison & Milliken, 2000). Leaders may think their door is open, but staff judge that by how past concerns were received (Detert & Burris, 2007). Edmondson (1999) named the antidote psychological safety: the shared belief that you can speak up, ask questions or admit mistakes without being punished. A meta-analysis of 136 studies found that psychological safety is linked to better learning, performance and engagement (Frazier et al., 2017). Google’s internal research on team effectiveness reached a similar conclusion (Duhigg, 2016).
Five practical steps
Steel and Chiang (2025) offer governance guidance that adapts well to SMEs.
Reverse the speaking order. Ask the least specialised person to speak first and the expert last. Everyone then forms a view before the loudest voice sets the tone.
Assign a challenger. Choose someone people like and respect to argue the other side. Their popularity makes dissent feel safe.
Share information widely. Give the whole team the same facts before decisions. Open disclosure narrows the gap between those who know and those who don’t.
Hire for difference. Teams with varied experience and thinking styles tend to solve problems better (Page, 2007). Look for gaps in your team before you look for more of the same.
Build emotional awareness. Leaders who read the room well notice when someone is holding back. Structured feedback and psychometric tools can help you see this.
What changes
A team that tells you the truth gives you earlier warnings and better ideas. Start with one change at your next meeting. Reverse the speaking order and watch what happens.
References
Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884.
Duhigg, C. (2016, February 25). What Google learned from its quest to build the perfect team. The New York Times Magazine.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta-analytic review and extension. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 113–165.
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Houghton Mifflin.
Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725.
Page, S. E. (2007). The difference. Princeton University Press.
Steel, A., & Chiang, A. (2025). Power dynamics on boards. SID Directors Bulletin, Q1, 46–49.
