top of page

By:

Rahul Kulkarni

30 March 2025 at 3:32:54 pm

Psychological Safety, The Prerequisite for Modernisation

If people can’t tell you the truth, your dashboards will lie for them. So now you finally have what most leaders think they need: a system. And yet… the system still doesn’t show the truth. Numbers look “clean”. Reports look “reasonable”. Problems show up late. Bad news arrives only when it becomes a fire. This is where many leaders get fooled. They look at the dashboard and think, “Great, we’re improving.” And then reality punches them. A shipment fails. A customer escalates. A vendor...

Psychological Safety, The Prerequisite for Modernisation

If people can’t tell you the truth, your dashboards will lie for them. So now you finally have what most leaders think they need: a system. And yet… the system still doesn’t show the truth. Numbers look “clean”. Reports look “reasonable”. Problems show up late. Bad news arrives only when it becomes a fire. This is where many leaders get fooled. They look at the dashboard and think, “Great, we’re improving.” And then reality punches them. A shipment fails. A customer escalates. A vendor refuses. Cash gets stuck. Quality blows up. The issue is not your tool. The issue is fear. Which Seat? Inherited seat: people fear disappointing you, so they hide issues until they’re unavoidable. Hired seat: people fear you’ll judge them, so they show you what looks good. Promoted seat: people fear the relationship has changed, so they become careful and political. Different seats. Same outcome: silence. Doctor-Patient Problem Think about a doctor. The doctor can be brilliant. The hospital can be world-class. The tests can be advanced. But if the patient hides symptoms, the diagnosis will be wrong. Not because the doctor is bad. Because the input is false. That’s what modernisation looks like without psychological safety. You can buy software. You can design processes. You can set up dashboards. But if people can’t tell you the truth, your “data” will become polite fiction. And you’ll make confident decisions on top of fiction. What Is Safety? People hear “psychological safety” and imagine a soft HR concept. It’s not soft. It’s operational. Amy Edmondson, who researched this deeply, describes it simply: a climate where people feel safe to speak up, admit mistakes, ask questions, and raise bad news without being punished or humiliated. In MSME language, it means: “If I report a problem, I won’t be insulted.” “If I admit a mistake, I won’t be made a permanent example.” “If I raise a risk early, I won’t be told I’m negative.” “If I tell the truth, I won’t lose my standing.” If those beliefs don’t exist, people will still “cooperate” but it will be theatre. Hidden Blocker Low-data firms don’t naturally produce truth. They produce stories. Why? Because stories protect people. A late dispatch becomes: “customer changed plan”A defect becomes: “labour issue”A missed purchase becomes: “vendor problem”A cash delay becomes: “accounts is slow” Each story may contain some truth. But the function of the story is usually protection. So when you introduce digitisation, something changes: Now the story has to match a number. And if the number can expose someone, the system will do the only thing it knows: It will manage the number. That’s how dashboards become lies. Not because people are dishonest by nature.Because honesty has become unsafe. The Signs Bad news comes late, always. Meetings are full of explanations, not facts. “No issues” is the most common update. Problems are discovered by customers, not internally. People speak more in corridors than in review meetings. Everyone looks busy, but nothing is owned. If you see these signs, your modernisation effort is at risk. Because the system will look healthy until it breaks. Most leaders don’t wake up and say, “Let me create fear.” They kill safety through small habits: Sarcasm in meetings Public scolding Reacting emotionally to bad news Asking “who did this?” before asking “why did this happen?” Using pilot data for appraisal Praising only “good numbers” and punishing messy truths One harsh moment teaches the room a long lesson. After that, people stop volunteering reality. They start managing perception. Field Test Pick one recent failure. Not the biggest scandal. A real, medium-sized problem. Gather the involved people for 30–45 minutes. Then follow three rules: Start with the line: “This is not a blame meeting. This is a learning meeting.” And mean it. Ask only these questions: What happened, in sequence? Where did the handoff break? What made the wrong action feel reasonable at the time? What one change reduces the chance of repeat? No names, no insults, no ‘how can you’ If someone makes it personal, you bring it back to the process and the moment. Now the most important part: Track whether people volunteer issues unprompted in the next two weeks. That is the real signal. If people start bringing small problems early, safety is rising. If they stay silent and “all good”, your system is still running on fear. (The writer is a Chartered Accountant based in Thane. Views personal.)

Why is Mamata Seeing Ghost of Bangladesh?

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

Why is Mamata Seeing Ghost of Bangladesh?

Mamata is seeing a ghost of Bangladesh behind the massive outrage and waves of protest over rape and murder of the trainee doctor. And the reasons are many.

It’s been over a fortnight. Yet with each passing day the voice of protest is getting louder and stronger. From the streets of Kolkata it’s pouring into roads of hinterland. The cry for justice for a rape victim has consolidated into a wail of demands to set a lot of wrongdoings right. Here in lies the fear and trepidation. Wasn’t the issue that brought the youth of Bangladesh out on the thoroughfares a simple, innocent one of quota reform?

The chief minister of Bengal, known for understanding the pulse of people better than many, was quick to read the signages floating in the political horizon.

The most obvious reason for her to be tensed is that both the regime change in Bangladesh and the mass protest in Bengal, were student-driven to begin with. The two incidents---end of 15 year old Sheikh Hasina government and turbulence in West Bengal, over the heinous crime, falling back to back, the first on August 5th and the latter from August 9th onwards, give natural scope for comparisons. More so, because in both the cases the movement strayed beyond an affected constituency to include aggrieved people at large, cutting across socio-economic demography. If the quota reform protest started by students in Bangladesh became a mass uprising against an autocratic regime, the campaign demanding justice for the rape victim and overall safety and security of women in Mamata Banerjee’s Bengal soon snowballed into a movement of no-confidence against the government. Slogans--”Mamata must resign” also got floated in social media much in line with the call for ouster of Sheikh Hasina. In fact “Resignation of Hasina” became the single point agenda into which all other fringe demands coalesced.

Incidentally, even before people started drawing parallels, that there could be a thread of commonality in the way the upheaval in Bangladesh and Bengal played out, Mamata was quick to point out that the Opposition were trying to pull off a Bangladesh by politicizing the tragic incident: “A coordinated approach has been executed by the BJP and the CPIM with support from the Centre to defame Bengal and exploit the situation....They want to make a Bangladesh here. They are taking cues from student unrest in Bangladesh and are attempting to capture similarly. I have no longing for the chair. I came here to serve people.”

Not only Mamata, her political lieutenants are consistently equating the turmoil in Bengal with the mayhem in Bangladesh. Cabinet minister for North Bengal development Udayan Guha threatened to take stern action against those, who would be trying to exploit the situation by emulating a Bangladesh like movement. “ Even after the hospital was vandalised, the police did not open fire on anyone. The police will not allow a Bangladesh type situation. We will not allow Bengal to turn into Bangladesh, Guha thundered.

Is the government’s fear unfounded?

Apart from the similarities on ground zero, as to how and where the future course of events are heading to, there are ample reasons for Bengal to mull on-- as to what led to a Bangladesh like boiling point. To begin with, it’ll be appropriate to talk of Bangladesh and the prevailing situation, that made the students’ protest become big in magnitude. The students were out on the streets because of a high reservation in public jobs. Unemployment and stagnant job market in private sector coupled with a high rate of inflation drove the educated youth to rebel against the government.

But soon the students found enormous number of sympathisers, who were equally at the receiving end. According to Bangladesh citizens, the last two terms of the Sheikh Hasina government were a mockery of democracy. Even elections would be compromised. As Hasina grew from strength to strength, she politicized institutions. The rank and file of police owed allegiance to the ruling dispensation. Extortion, harrassment and raids by police and people in power became rampant. An atmosphere of fear and repression reigned and people got restless to overthrow the government.

Politicization of institutions has been happening in Mamata government too. Allegations are quite strong that police in Bengal functions at the beck and call of political bosses. The lapses and alleged loopholes on the part of police in handling the rape and murder of the young doctor have yet again revealed a sense of confused or misplaced loyalty.

But above everything else both Hasina and Mamata governments allegedly seem to have twined in accepting corruption as a way of life. In Bangladesh jobs of primary and secondary teachers got sold at premium, Rs 10-12 lakh in the Hasina regime. Even police had to pay up for prized postings and transfers. In Bengal busting of the teacher’s recruitment scam has revealed how unsuccessful and ineligible candidates got government jobs in schools in exchange of bribes.

Similarities are multiple and inescapable. Mamata has good reasons to be apprehensive. It’s not only she, who can see and connect the dots. People, out on the streets, clamoring for justice, can see a providential pattern somewhere in the unfolding of future events in these two places-- Bangladesh and Bengal. True, they share more than 2,217 odd km of border. They share the same umbilical cord, other than language, culture, ethos, icons. Even emotions are the same. So she cannot take any risk.

(The writer is a senior jounalist based in Kolkata. Views personal)

Comments

bottom of page