Gen Zers often feel unsafe because of unrealistic expectations at work.

They can mistake "safety" to mean they won't have to endure a negative emotion.

Growth requires a transparent space for all parties to give and receive input.

When Ethan showed up late to work one day, his supervisor, Stan, asked to meet with him. In their conversation, Stan asked Ethan if everything was OK at home. Ethan replied that things were fine at home. Stan then inquired if there was anything going on in Ethan’s personal life that would prevent him from being on time for his job. Ethan grew nervous as he confirmed that nothing in his personal life was a problem.

That’s when the conversation became enlightening.

When Stan calmly asked Ethan if he could be more punctual, Ethan balked. His hands grew clammy, and he began to search for words. After a moment or two, Ethan explained that he didn’t feel “safe” at work. Stan was caught off guard and began to probe what Ethan needed to make him feel safe, so he could focus on getting his job done. What they both learned carries a lesson for us all.

A Growing Number of Generation Z Workers Feels Unsafe

According to a Verkada Study of 1,000 professionals across major industries in 2023, there is a significant divide between employers’ perception of job safety and the experiences and concerns of their team members. I've written about how some Gen Zers are weaponizing the idea of safety. Sixty-nine percent of leaders report feeling very safe at work, and 67 percent think their direct reports feel equally safe. Yet, only about a third of workers (37 percent) say they feel safe at work. The largest percentage of those concerned workers are the youngest members of the team — people like Ethan. Generation Z workers are two times more concerned about safety than their Boomer counterparts.

This divide requires us to understand what kind of safety Gen Z seeks.

There’s no doubt that employers and managers need to recognize how safe their workplaces feel to staff. In this process, leaders must distinguish if people feel concerned for their:

Something sinister has occurred, which psychologist Nick Haslam calls “concept creep.” It has impeded healthy cultures at work and hindered Gen Z from staying on the job.

A new generation of employees brings a modified expectation of the workplace. Some of this is good, and managers should adjust to improve the work culture. Some of this, however, represents unrealistic expectations of what it means to serve on a team. The fact is, we need to ditch some old ideas we have about psychological safety.

For most of the 20th century, the word “safety” almost always referred to physical safety. In the 1980s, however, the term “emotional safety” surfaced, referring to an inward sense of safety in people. While this is positive, the concept has crept in its meaning and has adversely affected teams, especially members of Gen Z. I believe there is a tangible difference between “emotional safety” and “psychological safety.”

Psychological safety, according to NYU psychologist Jonathan Haidt, is among the best indicators of a healthy work environment. On a psychologically safe team, however, members can disagree with each other and criticize ideas respectfully. That’s how ideas get vetted. What emerged on the university campus as emotional safety, in contrast, was a much broader concept that came to mean this: I should not have to experience negative emotions because of what someone else said or did. I have a right not to be “triggered.” Do you see the difference?

Psychological safety: we can debate ideas and disagree respectfully and civilly.

Emotional safety: I expect not to experience negative feelings that will trigger me.

Emotional safety may be what some college campuses and therapists seek, but it is not the real world. Because life is hard and even harsh, we will experience negative emotions, but that does not mean our workplace is unsafe. It means we can “fuss and discuss” ideas to find the best one. It’s often negative emotions that help us to grow and better ourselves. Criticism forces us to improve. Rejection helps us identify superior ideas. When we can’t handle it, we become fragile. I chuckled at a cartoon showing an educator and two parents standing next to their kid. The smiling teacher said, “We’ve created a safe, nonjudgmental environment that will leave your child ill-prepared for real life.”

I suggest some policies and decisions we made here at Growing Leaders:

Everyone has a voice, but not everyone has a vote. Leaders must still run point.

Everyone can weigh in, but not everyone has equal influence. This is a fact of life.

Everyone deserves to be heard, but everyone does not need to get their way.

Everyone is more important than their job, but no one is more important than the mission.

I met a new friend who just served seven years in the U.S. Navy. When I asked him how he enjoyed his time in the military, he told me it was different from what he expected. When I asked what he meant, he replied, “Well, in boot camp, we were all given a card to hold up whenever the drill sergeant said something that made us feel uncomfortable.”

Do we plan to send these soldiers into battle with little cards to hold up?

Let’s get this issue right.

Amy Edmonson, The Fearless Organization, 2018.

Verkada, Workplace Safety Report 2023, Verkada Inc., 2023. verkada.com/resources/reports/workplace-safety-report/

There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.

By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

© Psychology Today