{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013277006638503319, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.9957805907173, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The double-edged sword effect of psychological safety climate: a theoretical framework


Purpose
Psychological safety climate has been commonly conceptualized as a facilitative team property. Despite the literature review and meta-analysis conducted recently, little is known about the potential dark side of psychological safety climate. The purpose of this paper is to develop a theoretical framework to advance our understanding of both the bright and dark sides of psychological safety.


Design/methodology/approach
Drawing on extant theories and previous literature, the authors propose a conceptual framework of the mechanisms and boundary conditions underlying the relationship between psychological safety climate and dysfunctional team behavior.


Findings
The authors propose that the relationship between psychological safety climate and dysfunctional behaviors in the team is directly contingent on psychological safety climate strength, and indirectly contingent on task interdependence, group faultlines, group conflict asymmetry and team power distance differentiation.


Originality/value
First, the authors attempt to expand psychological safety climate literature by considering its potential damaging outcomes. Second, they contribute to the theory of psychological safety climate by suggesting a theoretical model consisting of the boundary conditions wherein psychological safety climate could reduce team effectiveness. Finally, the authors incorporate climate strength into the psychological safety literature to probe the antecedents of psychological safety climate strength and when it matters to the subsequent negative outcomes.
