When we self-censor (exercise control over what one says and does, especially to avoid criticism), it is potentially a sign that we lack psychological safety. We perceive it to be unsafe to dissent, a potential career killer. In particular in uncertain times, we are likely to say only what we think meets the expectation of others – maybe to obtain or retain our boss’ goodwill. This articles is about how we can reduce the amount of self-censorship we exercise in the workplace, but it is not a call for senseless verbal diarrhoea.
Some years ago we researched that leaders influence up-to 58% of their employees’ sense of psychological safety, while 33% is influenced by peers. (How Leaders Influence Their People, 2021). With this, it seems clear that the leader is the culprit when the environment is unsafe, and when people chose to self-censor and keep their head down.
But, there is another perspective to this, which seriously damages organisations.
Self-censoring in middle management.
The phenomenon of self-censorship is not only seen in employees, as also super important mid level managers are cautious to the extreme about their words. Some are acutely aware of “saying the right thing” and fit in at any cost. They self-censor out of strategic considerations, motivated by career planning and having less “trouble”.
Their strategy follows two steps: Firstly, contribute in meetings with “safe” statements, with no potential for neither controversy, nor real impact. Secondly, they try to influence in 1:1 conversations after the meeting, as this is safer. Et voila, here comes another political player that organizations already have enough of. Good luck with the transformation, which will be watered down from its original intention in order to preserve a stagnating equilibrium.
How to stop self-censoring.
We self-censor to fit in and to avoid trouble, often being manipulated by our own negative self-belief. If you suspect that you sometimes self-censor, reflect on these points:
Identify a moment where you held back on your view, where you wanted to speak, but didn’t.
What was your reason for staying silent?
What was the worst thing that could have happened? How likely is it to happen?
What could have been the potential upside of speaking up?
What wisdom, perspectives and importance did you keep from your “audience”? What is the potential negative impact of that?
Next time you have an opportunity to speak, how will you make sure that you don’t self-censor again?
Regrettably, self-censorship and silence has its merits in terms of career building. But that doesn’t make it right, and it is highly problematic for an organization. It robs a vital opportunity to hear the managers true and important views, and it creates an environment of suspicion and distrust. The systemic side effects are immense, as it shows the rest of the organization that it is better to “stay in line”. It leads to poorer collaboration, stalled innovation, diminished performance, and eventually it makes people unhappy.
it‘s your choice: be your best OR BE SMALL.
I cannot recall who said something along the lines of “As a true leader, be prepared to lose your job”, and for some this may create anxiety and disbelief. But see it from a different perspective: Apart from the salary, what is a career worth if it is founded on keeping your mouth shut and try to fit in?
Through my development work I have the privilege to meet truly impactful leaders. They are not super-humans, but people with flaws like you and me. I observe three traits that are central to their ability to create positive impact:
They are intentional about their actions, and design their approaches to create positive impact with and on people, for the sake of the business. They do not self-censor. Instead they make sure that their views are heard and take ownership, while they fully support the taken decisions as it would be their own.
They are empathic, both “downwards” and “upwards” in the organization. They are curious and conscious about what other people say, feel and want, and strive to create common ground with.
They are courageous enough to take risk, dissent and push things further. But they are not foolish to take themselves too seriously. They are not contrarian, but rather they do not allow themselves and others to accept mediocrity and silly processes.
These (non-self-censored) leaders get things done. They are present, connected and entrepreneurial. They are not silent, not always easy to work with. Because they have opinions and facts that requires everyone to think and work harder to create better decisions.
As a professional, irrespective whether you are an employee, manager or leader, you can make your own choices. Even if Psychological Safety is questionable. Here are some of the choices you have:
Will I create impact?
Will I be my best self?
Will I leave?
Or will I try to shrink into what I think people want me to be.
Yours,
Henrik