Cultivating psychological safety: fostering better partnerships with women-led organisations

In the dynamic landscape of humanitarian action, psychological safety emerges as a foundational element that has often been overlooked within the sector. Creating an environment where people can voice concerns and propose solutions without apprehension is crucial, especially in settings characterised by uncertainty, a condition all too familiar in the humanitarian sector. This principle of psychological safety extends beyond internal team dynamics, to the relationships between women-led organisations (WLOs) and international agencies and donors in the humanitarian system. Establishing psychological safety in these interactions is key, as it builds a foundation of open communication that can enhance collaboration and potentially strengthen the impact of humanitarian efforts. By promoting transparent dialogue as well as mutual respect and trust, we can unlock more opportunities for mutual learning that highlight the unique contributions that women-led organisations bring to the table.

Psychological safety

In technical terms, psychological safety describes individuals’ perceptions of the consequences they could face when taking interpersonal risks in work-related settings. Interpersonal risks can be understood as asking questions or making mistakes; being able to do so without shame or embarrassment enables people to better connect, engage, change and learn in the workplace. Essentially, psychological safety is about how people feel when they take social risks in a work environment, such as sharing new ideas or speaking up, without the fear of being judged or worrying about negative consequences. For example, in a collaborative team with high psychological safety, a member can suggest a new approach to solve a problem without worrying about their colleagues dismissing the idea or being admonished if the approach does not work. Similarly, another team member can openly admit mistakes they have made rather than hiding them, which can potentially lead to a productive discussion on how to avoid similar situations in the future. In the longer term, when this team member admits their mistake, it may even prevent furthering its negative results and corrective actions may be taken on time. In climates of psychological safety, individuals are more likely not only to admit mistakes but also to offer ideas, provide feedback and ask for help, as they perceive it to be safe to do so in collaborative relationships.

In contrast, within a low psychological safety context, a member of a team might notice a significant flaw in the design of a social project as it may lack cultural sensitivity and it has overlooked existing local services. However, due to past experiences where colleagues were reproached for pointing out problems, this team member might feel anxious about reporting the issue. Fearing the possible negative consequences of speaking up, such as risking their job, they may decide to remain silent and the issue remains unaddressed. An absence of psychological safety can lead to a lack of trust, resulting in less knowledge sharing, siloes, and reduced efficiency.

Research indicates that when groups can speak without fear of backlash at work, they are more likely to engage in difficult conversations, innovate in their roles, and contribute more meaningfully to their collective goals. Psychological safety not only facilitates the exchange of ideas but also enhances creative problem-solving and enables organisations to navigate challenges. It encourages open discussions and the exploration of new approaches without the fear of negative outcomes. This can foster mutual learning, effective collaboration, and high-quality work.

Psychological safety in WLOs

In my experience working with women-led organisations located in the Global South, I have witnessed the pivotal role WLOs play in addressing emergencies in humanitarian settings. Working amidst conflict environments, WLOs are deeply rooted in the communities we serve, engaging as first responders, providing essential supplies and life-preserving services, and enhancing awareness and risk communication. While our organisations may vary in size, form and geographical location, and operate at different levels with diverse strengths, we collectively embody the core principles of humanitarianism.

Despite being essential to the humanitarian sector and bringing unique insights, WLOs often experience low psychological safety when faced with scepticism from agencies about our capabilities, which can hinder open communication. For instance, in South Sudan, WLOs working on gender-based violence (GBV) prevention in protection-of-civilian sites have repeatedly proposed community-led initiatives for GBV prevention that were initially dismissed by a leading international agency as too ‘unstructured’ and ‘informal’. In this case, the leaders of the women-led organisation felt that their insights, rooted in cultural understanding, expertise and a community-based approach, were not taken seriously. To better cultivate psychological safety, one of the first steps is for agencies to address the implicit biases within their staff and fully recognise that WLOs possess not only a deep understanding of the needs of affected populations, but also have the capacity to participate in the designing phase of initiatives, provide culturally appropriate responses, and implement innovative approaches.

It is also essential to rethink how partnerships are currently structured. Donor funds are typically received by WLOs through international organisations, limiting direct funding access for local organisations with the capacity to design and manage humanitarian responses. Too often, WLO participation in internationally funded humanitarian programming is limited to pre-designed projects, with agencies favouring sub-granting approaches that distribute minor amounts to local entities, rather than fostering long-term relationships aimed at enhancing organisational strength, leadership and autonomy.

Improved partnerships

To better address the needs of the communities we serve, there is a pressing need to foster improved partnerships in the humanitarian system. There are power dynamics embedded in these interactions, where the international organisation has overwhelmingly more resources and influence. There have been multiple efforts to balance them out; however, the financial dependency in the system and the limited spaces for WLOs to be part of the decision-making process are significant limitations to advancing in this regard. In many cases, to be taken into account within the humanitarian ecosystem, it has become an unspoken agreement to conform to the agendas dictated by donors rather than advocate for approaches that we consider to be more effective based on our local experience and knowledge. There is an ongoing fear of losing resources, and this prevents WLOs from discussing anything that might contradict funder priorities.

For example, a Syrian WLO mobilising resources to implement its mental health programme for conflict-affected women and girls received ‘suggestions’ from its main funder to focus instead on more quantifiable health outcomes such as vaccination rates, which was a main concern for the donor organisation. As there was low psychological safety in this partnership, the WLO was hesitant to express strong disagreement, which could potentially risk their present and future funding. This led to deprioritising a service that was repeatedly requested by survivors in the community. You can reread this paragraph and find similar examples in any country with humanitarian responses around the world. I can assure you that the WLOs in the country you have in mind are facing exactly the same challenges regarding partnerships.

To leverage the potential of such partnerships, it is crucial to start prioritising the cultivation of psychological safety within the humanitarian sector. When there is a high psychologically safe environment, there is an honest feedback loop with WLOs that can enable donors to make more informed funding decisions. Likewise, open dialogue can promote greater accountability regarding resource allocation. They can support more innovative and potentially high-impact initiatives without a fear of failure as open communication can facilitate learning and adaptation. Working closely with women-led organisations in this type of space can ensure solutions that are more contextually relevant and have the potential to address the root cause of issues rather than the symptoms. Building trust, promoting learning, and encouraging open communication are key in this process.

Building trust

Recent studies have suggested that trust and cooperation are predictors of team learning, where trust positively influences team effort and monitoring, ultimately leading to team effectiveness. In short, as trust increases, inefficiency decreases. It is our starting point; part of that trust lies not only in WLOs as humanitarians but also in our knowledge. We have experience with local communities and expertise in diverse areas, which need to be taken into account, especially with early engagement at the planning stage of a project.

There is a need to recognise the difference between participation and consultation. The former seeks sustained inclusion from the planning stage and involves sharing input and priorities regarding the conceptualisation and design of policy and programming, implementation, monitoring, and the evaluation process. Participation entails a deeper, ongoing involvement where WLOs are seen as equal partners, actively contributing to every phase of a project or process. This approach fosters psychological safety by creating an environment where local voices are respected, integrated into decision-making processes, and most importantly, heard.

On the other hand, consultation often involves seeking input at specific stages of a project or process without guaranteeing that this input will influence the final decisions. It can be more superficial, where WLOs are asked for their opinions but do not have a continuous role in shaping the project’s direction. This limited engagement can hinder the development of trust and psychological safety, as the leaders of these organisations may feel their contributions are undervalued.

For example, WLOs in Jordan report they are rarely involved in the planning stage of projects, and the input they could provide is limited to enabling access to communities or providing background information on the local context. This reflects a consultative approach, which does not fully leverage the insights of local organisations. It emphasises the need to broaden the possibility of partnerships and widen communication channels, recognising women-led organisations as knowledge experts. Through psychological safety, there is an opportunity to foster more meaningful participation, specifically including women’s voices by engaging them at the earliest stage. By transitioning from consultation to true participation, humanitarian agencies can build trust, ultimately leading to more inclusive projects or processes.

Promoting learning

Psychological safety is associated with learning at individual, group and organisational levels. Extensive research suggests that psychological safety can enable team learning and effectiveness, while psychologically safe environments can foster creativity. WLOs adopt innovative approaches in their work with communities, resulting in many creative solutions within our interventions. Our strong connections with the local community provide us with insights that may be challenging for organisations outside our context to grasp, offering valuable learning experiences for international donors. However, these strengths are often overlooked, requiring the implementation of strategies to facilitate more meaningful interactions and ensure the inclusion of local expertise in programming efforts.

Psychological safety can cultivate environments conducive to trying innovative approaches and fostering a culture where mistakes are viewed as growth opportunities. Additionally, it can promote open and transparent communication, leading to enhanced collaboration. Studies have demonstrated that psychological safety is particularly important for learning behaviours such as knowledge sharing, speaking openly, fostering creative and innovative outcomes, and cultivating a supportive diversity and inclusion climate.

Encouraging open communication

People are more likely to speak up in organisational contexts when they experience greater psychological safety, and their voices can help identify opportunities and challenges, as well as provide ideas for improvement. Community-based organisations, such as WLOs, have the capability to drive significant social change by not only delivering services but also mobilising communities, advocating for policy reforms, and challenging societal norms that enable harmful practices. Within psychologically safe spaces, it is imperative to include the voices of women at the centre of policymaking.

There is a practical need for broader and more diverse involvement of WLOs in participatory processes, even though focusing on the most readily available groups may seem faster, simpler, and less resource-intensive. The lack of representation can significantly limit the variety of insights, knowledge and experiences that can contribute to the process. Humanitarian actors have recognised that the absence of women in policy processes is problematic and can result in policies that fail to integrate the needs of women. If WLOs had the opportunity to be at the centre of policymaking, this could begin to redefine power dynamics and potentially help equalise the power-imbalanced relationships that exist.

Next steps

Organisations and each and every person within the humanitarian system have a shared role in creating more psychologically safe spaces. All can work together in joint planning sessions, promote more honest dialogues, and engage in collaborative problem-solving to build a stronger foundation of trust and mutual respect. This culture of respect can be encouraged by agencies when they acknowledge the deep expertise women-led organisations have regarding local realities and behave in ways that demonstrate that they value WLOs’ contributions. When flexible funding is provided, it allows WLOs to adapt their actions to evolving community needs. This flexibility is a way to demonstrate trust in the expertise and judgement that women-led organisations have to make appropriate resource allocations. It is important to create safe spaces for WLOs to express ideas or concerns without the fear of negative consequences. In that sense, it is essential to encourage honest feedback and have a process in place to address it. Women-led organisations can also cultivate psychological safety within their own teams, which can be achieved when funding can be invested in their organisation’s resilience and staff.

Agencies can actively work to mitigate power imbalances by involving the voices of WLOs in strategic discussions and decision-making spaces that they would otherwise have limited access to. Moreover, people working in international organisations should embrace a mindset of continuous learning and invest in capacity-sharing programmes for their own staff on topics such as cultural sensitivity competencies, effective intercultural communication, and community-based approaches, among others.

Conclusion

Psychological safety can empower WLOs to voice their ideas confidently and to propose innovative solutions without the fear of repercussions, which can potentially lead to more contextually appropriate and effective interventions at a local level. Similarly, feeling safe to speak up allows WLOs to advocate more effectively for the needs of the communities they serve, influencing practice and policy in meaningful ways.

Therefore, fostering better partnerships between agencies in the humanitarian sector and WLOs is not just a matter of equality, but necessary for effective humanitarian action. As frontline responders deeply embedded in the communities we serve, WLOs offer invaluable insights and innovative solutions that are often overlooked. However, to unlock the full potential of these partnerships, cultivating psychological safety is paramount. Psychological safety not only builds trust and promotes learning but also empowers individuals to speak up, driving meaningful change at every level. By prioritising psychological safety, we can transcend traditional power dynamics, amplify diverse voices, and co-create solutions that truly address the complex needs of the affected communities in our countries. It is time to recognise the expertise and agency of WLOs, inviting us to the forefront of humanitarian decision-making.

Maria Luisa Ramirez is an international psychologist from Bogota, previously working with the Colombian women-led organisation GENFAMI. She is currently based in Washington DC.