While uncertainty hung heavy in the air, our small team was unusually open with each other. We talked candidly about the challenges, the personal toll, and what it might all mean for the business. Without setting out to do so, we had built a foundation of psychological safety-one that made navigating a global crisis far less stressful than it might have been otherwise.
There were perhaps 30 people - mostly elderly, along with a few young families and some teenagers. What struck me was not devotion, but density: a quiet, shared weight of lived suffering. Not dramatic or loud - just present. Many faces seemed marked by difficulty. I had entered seeking calm. Instead, I encountered vulnerability. Then I looked up at the crucifix - Christ suffering on the cross - not as doctrine, but as an image.
There may be something unsettling happening on your team. Despite expected productivity gains from integrating AI tools, overall team performance appears to be declining. People are starting to second-guess themselves, and trust is eroding in ways that are hard to pinpoint. is a corporate scientist and first-ever chief science advocate at 3M who is the author of Jayshree Seth The Heart of Science book trilogy published by Society of Women Engineers (SWE).
Most afternoons, I came home to an empty house, let myself in with my own key, and figured it out-homework and snacks. There was inherent trust from my parents that I'd figure it out, and everything would be alright. You learned fast. If you got stuck, you improvised. If you were scared, you got practical. If you needed help, you decided whether it was "worth" bothering anyone. And if you were the oldest-if you were parentified-you were given responsibilities without guidance, expected to "just know."
The opportunity is enormous: to reimagine work, unlock creativity, and expand what organizations and people can do. So is the pressure. In response, many organizations are rolling out tools and launching pilots. Some of this activity is necessary. Much of it, however, misses the deeper point. Too many leaders are asking: how will AI change us? The better question is: what kind of leadership will we build to guide AI?
Continuous learning, adaptability, and strong support networks are the foundations for thriving teams, Matthew Card mentioned in his presentation about inclusive leadership at Qcon London. Trust is built through consistent, fair leadership and addressing toxic behaviour, bias, and microaggressions early. By fostering growth, psychological safety, and accountability, people-first leadership drives resilience, collaboration, and performance. Building an organisation where people can truly thrive starts with intention, Card said.
Let's stop pretending. Your Daily Scrum is a status report. Your Sprint Planning confirms decisions that a circle of people made last week without you. Your Retrospective surfaces the same three issues it surfaced six months ago, and nothing has changed. Your Sprint Review is a demo followed by polite applause, before everyone happily leaves to do something meaningful. You know this. Everyone knows this. And yet tomorrow morning, you'll do it all again.
A revealing example is the concept of " grudging respect."What is typically meant by the term is not respect at all but fear-based compliance. From a psychological perspective, behavior driven by fear is externally regulated; people comply to avoid negative consequences rather than because they feel heard, valued, or internally motivated. When someone obeys out of intimidation or pressure, the foundation for meaningful negotiation is absent (even if one party appears to win).
It's a compact that most organizations claim to honor. Yet despite investments in collaboration tools, team-building retreats, and carefully designed office spaces, something fundamental isn't working. According to Gallup's 2024 State of the Global Workplace report, one in five employees worldwide report feeling lonely at work often -a rate that hasn't budged despite all the interventions.
Their follow-up response usually depicts an organizational culture characterized by back-to-back, early-morning-to-early-evening meetings. Contrary to the more humane values listed on their organizational websites, the lived culture glorifies being busy as a badge of courage, strength, commitment, and competence. In reality, "busy time" leadership is reactionary, fragmented, transactional, and disrespectful. Ultimately, this approach negatively impacts leaders' ability to acquire critical information for effective decision making, foster a psychologically safe organizational culture, strengthen talent retention, and reduce burnout and quiet quitting.
The topic of mental health is a crucial one, as security team burnout is a top challenge for many organizations. Those in the industry know stressors can be abundant when working security roles, and without proper mental health practices in place, many professionals can burn out. And when one team member burns out, it's possible that more will follow. "We're pretty much [on] 24/7, being security professionals," says Rodriguez.
Universities were once celebrated as places where ideas could be challenged, debated, and refined. Classrooms were meant to be arenas for civil discourse -spaces where disagreement was not only tolerated but valued. Yet that ideal is under strain. Divisions between social and political groups have deepened, and polarization-especially in the U.S.-has reached historic levels. Many instructors now hesitate to invite disagreement for fear that conversations will spiral into conflict. But learning depends on dialogue. And dialogue depends on difference.
For years, innovation has centered on speed. Faster processing. Faster decisions. Faster communication. But as artificial intelligence reshapes the modern workplace, a quieter truth is emerging from neuroscience and behavioral psychology: as technology accelerates, people are slowing down emotionally. Across industries, employees report rising cognitive fatigue, decreased trust, and a growing sense of isolation despite being more digitally connected than ever before.
This wasn't a struggling junior employee; this was a leader at the pinnacle of his career, shouldering the same gnawing doubt we often relegate to the inexperienced. For decades, we've called this "impostor syndrome," treating it as a personal flaw to be fixed. But groundbreaking research reveals we've been thinking about it all wrong-and in correcting our misunderstanding, we find not just relief but unexpected advantage.
Recent research suggests that the influence of good mentoring goes way beyond improved vocational performance, although it certainly does that. Good mentors help mentees to feel safe, supported, and seen through feedback (both positive and critical) and other cues. This is how effective mentorship contributes to a sense of psychological safety. Mentees also enjoy a stronger sense of belonging and community, which is why having a good mentor is especially important early in our careers.
Something odd happened on our team five years ago that I now witness in many workplaces across the nation. One of our team members (we'll call her Dina) turned in a project that was so poor, her supervisor met with her to offer some corrective feedback. Dina wouldn't have it. Her reaction stumped me. She called out her supervisor on his correction, claiming she'd been attacked. Then, she claimed her supervisor wasn't psychologically safe.
Maureen's reactions make complete sense-both as a child and as an adult, she learned to stay guarded. Being alert likely protected her in harsh settings, and that deserves recognition. But there's also a toll: living in a state of high alert is exhausting. Bracing for criticism, decoding tone and word choice, and anticipating the next betrayal drains us physically and emotionally.
In an industry where men dominate, Dolly owned her narrative, writing her own songs, transcending genres, and fiercely protecting the privacy of her personal life in an era where everything was on display (Parton & Oermann, 2020). Refusing to relent, she famously turned down Elvis Presley's offer to record "I Will Always Love You," because he demanded partial songwriting rights (Scott, 2020), a bold refusal with a big payoff when, years later, Whitney Houston recorded the track and ran away with a Grammy.
Teams are one of humanity's greatest tools of innovation and discovery. One study showed that teams are six times more likely than individuals to produce breakthrough scientific innovations. But working in teams doesn't guarantee success. Groups can also make us less motivated, conformist, and polarized. In my new book, The Collective Edge: Unlocking the Secret Power of Groups, I rifled through decades of research about how to get the most from your teams.
It was at the Agency where I first truly understood the power of diverse teams," she says. "Success in the field depended on building inclusive, cross-functional units where every voice had value regardless of background, discipline, or rank. Just as critical was cultivating psychological safety: creating a space where people could speak truthfully, challenge assumptions, and innovate under pressure. That foundation of trust was essential to overcoming some of the hardest missions we faced, and it remains core to how I lead today.
I've been out for nearly 15 years. I write openly about queerness. I coach queer tech leaders. I've helped clients come out at work, come out again after trauma, and come out for the very first time. In fact, I'm even scheduled to speak on the main stage at a conference for 500+ LGBTQ+ tech leaders this year. On paper, I look confident and settled in my identity.
In complex systems, failure isn't a possibility - it's a certainty. Whether it's transactions vanishing downstream, a binary storage outage grinding builds to a halt, or a vendor misstep cascading into a platform issue, we have all likely seen firsthand how incidents unfold across a wide range of technical landscapes. Often, the immediate, apparent cause points to an obvious suspect like a surge in user activity or a seemingly overloaded component, only for deeper, blameless analysis to reveal a subtle, underlying systemic flaw that was the true trigger.
