I’m a nerd for both neuroscience and leadership, so you can just imagine how jazzed I was when I found out about the NeuroLeadership Institute! The term NeuroLeadership was coined by its CEO David Rock, and he has also written Quiet Leadership, Your Brain at Work, and Coaching with the Brain in Mind.
A model that really resonates with me is David Rock’s SCARF® Model, which he introduced in 2008. It is perhaps best described as a psychological theory of motivation, because it helps us understand how people react to threats and rewards.
This is perhaps not scientifically rigorous of me, but I’ve somewhat hijacked the model to inform my thinking about psychological safety. I’m not going to argue that it maps perfectly and I definitely acknowledge the constructs are separate. But bear with me.
The Research
Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research, researchers can see which areas of the brain “light up” in response to different stimuli. For example, research participants can be shown images that register as a threat or reward, and relevant parts of the brain will light up (registered as increased blood flow to that area).
One theme that emerged from research is that much of our social behaviour is motivated, even governed, by minimizing threat and maximizing reward. This might not shock you, given what we know of early humans trying to avoid creatures that might eat them, and maximize their exposure to delicious, calorie-rich foods.
A really cool finding that goes hand-in-hand with the threat/reward theme is that the same parts of the brain used for primary survival needs (food, water, physical safety) are also used to calculate threats and rewards in social settings. Social/relationship needs are treated by the brain in the same way as survival needs.
The same parts of the brain used for primary survival needs (food, water, physical safety) are also used to calculate threats and rewards in social settings.
So, whether you are facing down a saber-toothed tiger or facing a social threat such as public speaking, the same area of your brain will register that danger. On the flip side, physical survival needs are attended to by the same brain structures as walking into a room full of people who accept and appreciate you.
The Leadership Nexus
Brains function better in the absence of threat: we are more relaxed and creative when we feel safe. One of my pet definitions of leadership is that leaders create the conditions in which people can thrive. We thrive when we feel safe, when our brains register “reward” more of the time. We come up with great ideas and we can be productive when we aren’t constantly in survival mode: will I lose my job, do my colleagues accept me, do I fit in here. In other words, when we feel psychologically safe.
Leaders create the conditions in which people can thrive.
How do we use this information? Well, the research provides a handy list of categories in which leaders can minimize threat/maximize reward (create a psychologically safe environment). These five categories – called domains – conveniently spell the word SCARF.
- Status – our relative importance to others
- Certainty – our ability to predict the future
- Autonomy – our sense of control over events
- Relatedness – how safe we feel with others
- Fairness – how fair we perceive the exchanges between people to be
As leaders, we need to be aware of, and sensitive to these domains so that we can create a psychologically safe working environment. When psychological safety is low, we can look through these five lenses to help us identify what might have raised the threat level – what has created the sympathetic nervous system to go into fight/flight/freeze response.
The same domains help us think about how to lower threat, and eventually replace it with a “reward” feeling that soothes the brain and starts to create a feeling of safety. In other words, how to activate the parasympathetic nervous system, the “rest and digest” response in the brain and body. This lowers the stress hormone cortisol, and releases more positive neurotransmitters so that people no longer feel on edge and no longer have to be on the defensive.
The fundamental task of leaders, we argue, is to prime good feeling in those they lead. That occurs when a leader creates resonance, a reservoir of positivity that frees the best in people. At its root, then, the primal job of leadership is emotional.
From primal leadership: realizing the power of emotional intelligence
by daniel goleman, richard e. boyatzis, and annie mckee
Applying the SCARF® Model to Psychological Safety
To create the conditions in which people can thrive or, as Peter Drucker famously put it “managing energy, first in yourself and then in others”, we can look to the five domains briefly described above.
STATUS. We care about our ranking in relation to others. We care if we are valued, considered worthy. Losing status is experienced as a threat, whereas gaining it registers as a reward.
On the surface it might sound hierarchical, or like someone has to lose for someone else to gain. However, I think this can work in any relationship structure, even a flat organization. To create safety/reward, show respect and appreciation. Express that each member is viewed as capable, and they are valued for their unique perspectives and skillset. Refrain from judgmental criticism, free advice, and of course insults
CERTAINTY. When we know what’s going on, we can relax. We feel better when we know what to expect from the world around us, and especially from other humans. If you hear people commenting about a “lack of transparency”, it’s another way of expressing the anxiety produced by uncertainty. People likewise get very restless when it’s unclear who is responsible for what.
To create a positive environment for people to do their best work, practice open communication. Even though we cannot create absolute certainty for people, we can at least acknowledge that change is difficult, here’s what is known and unknown, and we’re going to move through this together as best we can. Or, it can be as simple and mundane as letting people know what “done” looks like, who has what role, and what are the rules.
AUTONOMY. You might also think of this as agency, but it is essentially our sense of control over our environment. An easy example of low autonomy (registered as a threat) is micromanaging! Ironically, the micromanager is probably grasping for a sense of control over their own environment, which is what often leads to this unhelpful coping strategy.
To create a sense of safety and reward, provide an opportunity for input, especially for decisions that directly affect people (even if they only perceive is as affecting them). Steer away from micromanagement: you’ll have to find another way to reduce your anxiety and deal with your trust issues!
RELATEDNESS. I wish it wasn’t so common to hear people emphasizing “professionalism” in the workplace, because it usually means avoiding social interaction and certainly any sense of emotional vulnerability. It’s particularly frustrating to observe this behaviour, because most people I work with just want the people around them to be authentic. Inauthenticity is gross and fake: how can we feel safe around someone who is always hiding something, pretending to be something they aren’t?
We feel safe and rewarded when we can build connections with other people. This requires each person to have the courage to practice a little vulnerability in being authentic. I’m not advocating for over-sharing, just being real. This allows team members to feel seen, heard, and understood. It also fosters a sense of a commitment to one another, that starts with the commitment to accept you for who you are.
FAIRNESS. I have often said I have a “justice bone”. When things aren’t just and fair, it makes me feel a little crazy. I wonder where are the adults, why isn’t anyone enforcing the rules? I feel all wobbly. Not everyone is as sensitive to it, depending on their personality and upbringing, but we are all affected to one degree or another.
As with the domain of certainty, people need to know what to expect. We feel threatened when we don’t know the rules, when the rules change or don’t make sense, or when they aren’t applied equally. Transparency is also key in this domain, so that goals and guidelines are clear and there is permission to discuss them openly.
Try it Out
- In your workplace, which of the 5 domains could people benefit from the most?
- What norms can be brought in to create more Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness, Fairness?
- How can you eliminate threats associated with each of the 5 domains?
I invite you to brainstorm some open-ended questions to help you “research” your team and find out what feels rewarding/threatening. You’ll be surprised how many simple little things you can do that will have outsized effects on people’s nervous systems and boost positivity and creativity.
Further reading:
- Some great work has been done on the SCARF model by Scrum.org, and I invite you to check out their quick-reference toward the bottom of this article.
- David Rock’s SCARF Model at mindtools.com
- What is Psychological Safety at Harvard Business Review
Annalise 