Beyond Buzzwords
“Blameless postmortems” and “psychological safety” are terms that have grown familiar to many in the tech and business sectors. Like many other terminologies in Agile, SDLC, Infrastructure, and the broader platform & software engineering spaces, they’re often cited but not always deeply understood. Yet, delving into the core of these concepts reveals their profound impact on both our professional and personal lives.
The History & Evolution of Psychological Safety
Before exploring our real-life stories, it’s worth noting the origins of “psychological safety.” This term was first coined by Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson in the 1990s, emphasizes the importance of fostering an environment where team members feel secure in taking risks. Teams that maintained psychological safety encouraged open dialogue, mutual respect, and a culture where errors were viewed as learning opportunities rather than grounds for punishment. Research studies, such as those conducted by Edmondson, demonstrate a strong correlation between high levels of psychological safety and team performance.
Understanding Blameless Postmortems
In the world of software engineering and IT operations, when a system failure or an incident occurs, teams often conduct a “postmortem” or “RCA” (Root Cause Analysis) of the incident to analyze what went wrong and how to prevent it in the future. Traditional postmortems or RCAs can sometimes devolve into a blame game, where individuals or teams bear the brunt for the mishap. This is where “blameless postmortems” comes into play.
A blameless postmortem focuses on understanding the conditions and decisions that led to an incident rather than singling out individuals as culprits. The goal is to learn from mistakes without the fear of retribution.
Why Blameless Postmortems Matter
- Promotion of Openness: When team members aren’t afraid of being blamed, they’re more likely to speak honestly and thoroughly about mistakes. This creates a richer and more complete understanding of incidents.
- Encouragement of Innovation: Teams that aren’t paralyzed by the fear of blame are more willing to take risks and innovate, knowing that if they falter, the focus will be on learning, not retribution.
- Reduction in Repeat Incidents: By thoroughly understanding the root causes of issues (without the noise of blame), teams can implement more effective measures to prevent future occurrences.
An Interwoven Relationship
One obvious aspect of a high-performing team is the quality of talent it comprises. Hiring exceptional individuals has always been a challenge, but organisations must recognise that a skilled engineer does more than just contribute technically. They can uplift team morale and significantly enhance overall productivity. Their positive influence can permeate throughout the team, infusing it with energy and introducing innovative perspectives.
As Steve Jobs famously put it, ‘It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.’
Beyond individual talent, a wealth of research emphasises the importance of psychological safety within teams. A notable example is Google’s ‘Project Aristotle,’ which aimed to uncover the key factors behind successful teams. Their research unequivocally identified psychological safety as the most critical element in high-performing teams.
One manifestation of psychological safety is found in the practice of conducting blameless postmortems. These aren’t just procedural exercises; they’re powerful signals to each team member that their voice matters, their contributions are valued, and that mistakes, though regrettable, are viewed as opportunities for growth.
It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do — Steve Jobs
The Tale of Two Managers
The Downfall of a Fearful Environment
Korbin, a team manager at a retail company, might be familiar with many management techniques but misses the mark on psychological safety. Whether a product of past high-pressure environments or his non-technical background, Korbin’s team exists in a space of fear. Mistakes? Not tolerated. Autonomy? Restricted by continuous approvals. Ideas? Frequently shot down if they challenge the status quo. Postmortems? An excuse to find a scapegoat for the entire situation. Such an environment is a breeding ground for stagnation, especially in Agile and software engineering spaces where innovation thrives on diverse collaboration.
The Power of Trust and Collaboration
Simone stands as the antithesis to Korbin’s approach. With deep personal connections to her engineers, Simone embodies what it means to be both a leader and a colleague. Under her leadership, no question is “dumb,” and innovative ideas are nurtured rather than squashed. Mistakes? They’re seen as opportunities for collective growth and understanding. Her teams operate with a strong sense of camaraderie, accountability, and a shared vision of success. Incidents are seen as well documented training material to spread understanding (in some cases even shared with public) about the causes and effects of series of decisions made that led to it.
A balancing Act & and solving a cultural enigma
Drawing from personal experience, I’ve had the privilege (and sometimes the misfortune) of working under both management styles. The disparities in team morale, delivery speed, and overall motivation were palpable. In environments rich with psychological safety, even smaller teams consistently outperformed their counterparts, delivering superior results in lesser time. Absent were the tell-tale signs of developer burnout, replaced with motivation and a low team attrition.
Studies have consistently shown that organisations that prioritize blameless cultures and psychological safety outperform those that don’t. In fact, the previously mentioned Google’s “Project Aristotle” found that teams with high psychological safety were less likely to play the blame game and more likely to collaborate towards solutions.
For leaders and organisations keen on building resilient, innovative, and high-performing teams, the path is clear. Prioritize psychological safety. Cultivate environments where individuals feel valued, heard, and unafraid to take risks. The dividends, both in terms of team morale and business outcomes, are well worth the investment. In high-performing teams, psychological safety and blameless postmortems coalesce. Leaders who understand this foster environments where errors become stepping stones to excellence, and team members feel empowered to drive innovation without the overhanging cloud of potential blame.
Further Reading and Research:
- Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly.
- Duhigg, C. (2016). What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team. The New York Times Magazine.
- Sutherland, J. (2014). Scrum: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time. Crown Business.
- Allspaw, J. (2010). Web Operations: Keeping the Data on Time. O’Reilly Media.
- Decker, M., & Tynjälä, P. (2013). The Association of Relational and Collective Psychological Safety with Performance in Finnish Firefighter Teams. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology.
- Morgan, L., & Conbere, J. (2016). Blameless PostMortems and a Just Culture. Code As Craft, Etsy’s Engineering Blog.
