But the two most frequently mentioned reasons for keeping silent were one, fear of being viewed or labeled negatively, and two, fear of damaging work relationships. These fears, which are definitionally the opposite of psychological safety, have no place in the fearless organization.

No one is fired for silence.’ The instinct to play it safe is powerful.

Rocha's statement captures a subtle but crucial aspect of the psychology of speaking up at work. Consider his words carefully. He did not say, “I chose not to speak,” or “I felt it was not right to speak.” He said that he “couldn't” speak. Oddly, this description is apt. The psychological experience of having something to say yet feeling literally unable to do so is painfully real for many employees and very common in organizational hierarchies, like that of NASA in 2003. We can all recognize this phenomenon. We understand why his hands spontaneously depicted that poignant vertical ladder. When probed, as Rocha was by Gibson, many people report a similar experience of feeling unable to speak up when hierarchy is made salient. Meanwhile, the higher ups in a position to listen and learn are often blind to the silencing effects of their presence.

Raising concerns that turn out to be unfounded presents a learning opportunity for the person speaking up and for those listening who thereby glean crucial information about what others understand or don't understand about the situation or the task.

The operative word here is “listening.” In the Chapters 5 and 6, you will read about eight flourishing organizations where leaders have created the conditions to make listening and speaking up the norm, not the exception. In these fearless workplaces, it's far less likely that employees will refrain from sharing valuable information, insights, or questions and far more likely that leaders will listen to rather than dismiss bad news or early warnings.