Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Disclosure of abuse to empowerment: exploring psychological safety as a leadership tool to support women struggling with workplace performance
(USC Thesis Other)
Disclosure of abuse to empowerment: exploring psychological safety as a leadership tool to support women struggling with workplace performance
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Disclosure of Abuse to Empowerment: Exploring Psychological Safety as a Leadership
Tool to Support Women Struggling with Workplace Performance
Barbara Diane Hansen
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2024
© Copyright by Barbara Diane Hansen 2024
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Barbara Diane Hansen certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Mary Andres
Helena Seli
Eric Canny- Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024
iv
Abstract
Women who experience intimate partner violence (IPV) or psychological aggression (PA) at
home are more likely to struggle with performance at work. Few studies have examined the
experience of performance struggle, IPV-PA, and demonstration of psychologically safe
leadership behavior. Fewer studies examine disclosure. Thus, this study examined the lived
experiences of women who experienced IPV-PA and disclosed the experience at the workplace
to understand whether leaders created dyadic psychological safety to support these women when
they struggled with workplace performance. I interviewed 11 women who, at some point,
experienced struggle with workplace performance and disclosed the experience of IPV-PA to
their supervisors. The research questions concern the participants’ perceptions and the
psychologically safe behavioral characteristics of a leader who empowered them and the
participants’ experience of their performance self-efficacy. The study resulted in four findings on
the connection between psychological safety, trust, disclosure, performance self-efficacy, and the
workplace environment. Transparent and consistent psychologically safe leadership behavior
helped the participants build the trust to disclose IPV-PA and receive accommodation, which
helped improve their performance. Leaders’ proactive and positive leadership communication
supported the participants’ performance. The positive leadership experiences empowered the
participants’ career success. The workplace acted as a compartmentalized safe zone that helped
the participants improve their performance outcomes. Leaders made a difference in the
participants’ self-efficacy, performance, and future career outcomes.
Keywords: intimate partner violence, psychological aggression, workplace performance,
psychological safety, dyadic psychological safety, interpersonal psychological safety, workplace
disclosure, performance self-efficacy, leadership, trust
v
Acknowledgements
This dissertation is dedicated to any woman who believed in the power of love only to
have her vision of it crumble into a sea of self-doubt. As someone who has experienced intimate
partner violence and psychological aggression, sister to sister, I see you. In many ways, we are
all one. We have been tousled about upon a hidden sea of tribulations. And we are still here
breathing and contributing to the world in our individual ways one day at a time. Know there are
people in the world you can speak to. You will know in your heart when the person and the time
is right. And, leaders, I challenge you to learn and grow into the psychologically safe leader
women desperately need. This dissertation proves one person, one leader, can change a life.
I am grateful to the psychologically safe leaders I had, Andy and Tiffany, who saw the
hole in my boat, my lack of belief in myself, and helped me start the journey to rebuild it all. The
names of the participants of this study were changed to those who have helped me. My mom and
sisters, Barbara, Sandy, and Claudette, have been ever the lighthouses of spirituality and
resilience. Sean, my forever friend, has seen me through it all since 1999. My wonderful friends
Cathy, Connie, and Holly are a crew who support me through thick and thin. My best cohort
mates Carrie and Dionne have provided encouragement, academic and otherwise, to make it
through the rigorous process of becoming a doctor. And Isabell, my little in the Big Brothers Big
Sisters program, mentee, and a young woman who has taught me more than I ever imagined.
To those always by my side, thank you. Since I have more people to thank than
participants in this study, thank you to Chris for the pomodoro timer and reminders to stay
focused and Allyson for the Friday Finishers. Thank you to my long-time friends Amanda and
Dawn Renee for the gratitude texts. And for the encouragement to go on regardless of the
obstacles in my path, thank you to my brother David and to his wife Sheri. Thank you to my
vi
sister’s husband Scott and my friend Zach for the time in mock defense. I’m also deeply grateful
for the clients I have had during this dissertation period, especially Ester and Dottye. My hope is
that my firm will grow to matter to many more executives like you and the people they serve. I
also want to thank Cohort 23 and The Avengers study group. You are all superheroes. Also,
many thanks to Jacquelyn Pruet, who raised my awareness about flaws in open door policies.
Last but never least, thank you to my committee. Dr. Seli, your recommendation to go a
little broader on my study helped me include women who were not managers to capture a wider
variety of lived experience. Dr. Andres, I was inspired by your comments during my proposal
defense about the importance of this study. I am honored that the first few chapters helped you
with one of your clients. I am also honored to have a practicing PsyD on my committee. Finally,
Dr. Canny, I won the lottery having you as a chair. You became an exemplary case of the leader
I needed to get this done. You aligned with every aspect of this study and more. Everything I
experienced during this dissertation process you not only made ok, but you also made it a gift.
Thank you to Dr. Smita Kumar and Dr. Amy Edmondson both for communicating with me
during this process. And to Dr. Guadalupe García Montaño, thank you for the ultimate polish. I
do not know how I was so blessed to find an editor who helped write a law that supports
survivors of domestic violence. I am grateful to stand on the shoulders of giants.
I now see every aspect of my experience as a gift, those leaders I have had who provided
high levels of psychological safety and those who did not. I honor the relationships I have had
for their moments of love and of deep learning. I stand today with a deep appreciation for every
aspect of my experience as a woman, a birthmother, a sister, a friend, a professional, and a proud
two-time Trojan. To all those who are reading this work, I mean it deeply and truly when I say,
“Fight On!”
vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................v
List of Tables................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures..................................................................................................................................x
List of Abbreviations..................................................................................................................... xi
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice.....................................................................1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................2
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions.....................................................................4
Significance of the Study.....................................................................................................5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .....................................................6
Definition of Terms..............................................................................................................7
Organization of the Dissertation ..........................................................................................8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................10
History of Psychological Safety.........................................................................................10
The Role of Psychological Safety During Performance Failure........................................21
Conceptual Framework......................................................................................................40
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................43
Chapter Three: Methodology.........................................................................................................45
Research Questions............................................................................................................45
The Researcher...................................................................................................................47
Data Sources......................................................................................................................49
Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................50
Credibility and Trustworthiness.........................................................................................51
Ethics..................................................................................................................................51
viii
Chapter Four: Findings..................................................................................................................53
Participants.........................................................................................................................53
Findings for Research Question 1......................................................................................59
Summary of Research Question 1......................................................................................75
Findings for Research Question 2......................................................................................76
Summary of Research Question 2......................................................................................84
Findings for Research Question 3......................................................................................84
Summary Research Question 3..........................................................................................90
Emerging Theme: The Workplace as a Compartmentalized Safe Zone............................91
Summary of Findings.........................................................................................................92
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations..........................................................................95
Discussion of Findings.......................................................................................................95
Recommendations for Practice ........................................................................................101
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick New World Model..............................................................111
Limitations and Delimitations..........................................................................................119
Recommendations for Future Research...........................................................................120
Implications for Equity and Connection to the Rossier Mission .....................................121
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................123
References....................................................................................................................................127
Appendix A: Interview Questions With RQ Mapping ................................................................166
Appendix B: Communications Used for This Study ...................................................................169
ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Psychological Safety as a Mature Theory of Organizational Behavior 14
Table 2: Study Participation Criteria and Rationale 46
Table 3: Participant Background Data 54
Table 4: Psychologically Safe Characteristics, Leadership Behaviors, and Perception 64
Table 5: Recommendations for Practice 102
Table 6: DEPTH Program Kit 109
Table 7: DEPTH Program Key Performance Indicators 111
Appendix A: Interview Questions With RQ Mapping 166
x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework: Psychological Safety, Employee Empowerment, and
Disclosure Outcomes 40
Figure 2: Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick New World Model 110
Figure 3: Combined Change Model: McKinsey 7S, Kotter’s Eight Stages, and Human
Design 117
xi
List of Abbreviations
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
DEPTH Disclosure Enablement, Preparedness, Training, and Helping Program
FMLA Family Medical Leave Act
IPV Intimate partner violence
IPV-PA Intimate partner violence or psychological aggression
KPIs Key performance indicators
PA Psychological aggression
WHO World Health Organization
1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
More than 61 million women, approximately 48% of all women in the United States,
have “experienced psychological aggression from their intimate partner in their lifetime”
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2022, p. 1). Women who have experienced
psychological aggression (PA) from their intimate partners are 3.1 times more likely to exhibit
cognitive impairment (World Health Organization [WHO], 2021). Cognitive challenges
contribute to underperformance at work, resulting in negative outcomes, including job loss and
higher overall career instability (Deen et al., 2022; S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Thompson et al.,
2023). For women living in psychologically aggressive environments, experiences at home
might shape struggles experienced at work (S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Thompson et al., 2023).
Past experiences create a mental model that influences current behavioral choices (Senge, 2006),
particularly in the case of performance struggles (S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Thompson et al.,
2023). A psychologically safe leadership approach to these struggles may influence workplace
success for women experiencing PA at home.
The focus of this study was to understand the lived experience of women who disclosed
their psychologically aggressive home environments to their immediate supervisors. Disclosure
results in leaders’ and organizations’ ability to marshal resources, make workplace
accommodations, and take action to improve the performance and retention of employees
experiencing intimate partner violence or psychological aggression (IPV-PA; Adhia et al., 2019;
Thompson et al., 2023). This study sought to understand the experience of psychological safety
between an employee and their immediate supervisor in times of performance struggle. Leaders
who develop a psychologically safe workplace environment (Edmondson, 1999) may empower
underperformers to disclose their home situation, address problems with self-efficacy, and strive
2
for achievement in the face of failure. The study explored how psychological safety aids in
achieving performance success in the face of workplace struggles, as suggested by prior research
(Carmeli et al., 2009; Potter & Starke, 2022; J. Wang et al., 2014) through interviews of women
who had disclosed their home environment to their workplace supervisor.
Background of the Problem
Psychological aggression is a subset of IPV defined as “acting dangerous, name-calling,
insults and humiliation” as well as “behaviors that are intended to monitor and control an
intimate partner such as threats, interference with family and friends, and limiting access to
money” (CDC, 2022 p. 10). The systematic process of ridicule, threat, isolation, and control acts
as a regular attack on the victim’s self-worth, creating feelings of guilt and inadequacy, effects
that influence women’s self-efficacy and workplace performance (Deen et al., 2022; LeBlanc et
al., 2014).
Women experiencing PA at home exhibit behaviors such as withdrawal from co-workers,
decreased engagement, distraction, neglect of job duties, low performance, work absence, and
increased turnover intentions when they struggle at work (Brunstein & Gollwitzer, 1996;
Carmeli et al., 2009; LeBlanc et al., 2014). Additional research has suggested the impact PA has
on workplace performance (Alsaker et al., 2016; Deen et al., 2022; Dokkedahl et al., 2019;
Jones-Sewell, 2017; MacGregor et al., 2022; Swanberg et al., 2007; Thompson et al., 2023).
Reasons for finding solutions to handling performance struggles related to IPV-PA are
manifold, including the financial cost of low performance, decreased productivity for
organizations, and the psychological cost to workers. Gallup reported that employee
disengagement and low performance have a global cost of $7.8 trillion per year (Pendell, 2022).
A HubSpot report showed that employee distraction and health problems alone have a $1.8
3
trillion impact on the U.S. economy (Cox, 2021) and a $3.6 trillion lifetime global impact
(Peterson et al., 2018). Gallup further reports that poor employee performance results in a yearly
economic loss in the U.S. of $450 to $550 billion (Pendell, 2022).
Loss of mental health and productivity carries a cost as well. In the United States, each
woman experiencing IPV-PA carries a cost of over $100,000 due to loss of productivity as well
as medical, mental health, and legal expenses (Peterson et al., 2018). The poor mental health a
woman experiences by living with PA impairs her ability to perform on the job and communicate
with others (Deen et al., 2022; S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Nadinloyi et al., 2013; Thompson et al.,
2023).
Loss of work time is a key reason for productivity costs. According to an estimate by the
CDC (2003), workplaces in the United States lose eight million paid workdays every year due to
IPV, resulting in a cost nearing $730 million. The total breaks down to per-occurrence costs of
$2,400 for missed workdays, $4,000 for distraction, and $80 for being late to work (Reeves &
O’Leary-Kelly, 2009).
Research establishes that women who experience PA at home are more prone to struggle
with performance at work (Alsaker et al., 2016; S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; MacGregor et al.,
2022). Workplace effects of PA at home include being late for or missing work, increased
mistakes, issues with emotional regulation, and interpersonal problems with co-workers
(Thompson et al., 2023; Tolentino et al., 2017). Employees ' feelings of psychological safety
elicit initiative-taking behavior, including openness to learn from failure, positive attitude,
initiative, resilience, motivation, and persistence (Edmondson, 1999, 2019; Frazier & Tupper,
2018).
4
Leaders can utilize psychological safety as a tool for empowerment. However, few
studies have examined the link between various theoretical frameworks, including psychological
safety, on the success of women experiencing PA at home (Deen et al., 2022), particularly when
performance is failing. Psychological safety is frequently mentioned in relation to team dynamics
(Edmondson & Bransby, 2023), interpersonal applications (Edmondson & Lei, 2014; Ping et al.,
2017), and attitudes about failure (Ajjawi et al., 2022; Gosai et al., 2023). More research is
needed to understand this group of women, how leaders can empower them, and how the
workplace can influence employee success through psychological safety for those who are
marginalized.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to conduct a non-industry-specific discovery of the lived
experience of women who have experienced PA from their intimate partner. This study sought to
understand how leaders created environments of psychological safety to support these women
when they struggled with workplace performance. The following research questions guided the
study:
1. What perceptions do women who have experienced IPV-PA and disclosed this in
their workplaces have about the psychologically safe behavioral characteristics, if
any, of a leader who empowered them when they struggled to perform in the
workplace?
2. How, if at all, does psychological safety affect the performance self-efficacy of a
woman experiencing IPV-PA at home when she experiences performance difficulties
in the workplace?
5
3. How, if at all, does the treatment by a psychologically safe leader influence the way
women who have experienced IPV-PA lead today?
Significance of the Study
There is a lack of U.S.-centric research on how leaders can support women when their
psychologically aggressive home environment contributes to struggling with workplace
performance. International research provides some insight. Because the home environment
impacts work performance more so for women than men (Beppari & Chowdhury, 2021; Hosseini
et al., 2023), understanding women’s experiences is important. The study added to the body of
knowledge on helping leaders empower employees when they face performance failure by
focusing on a leader’s ability to communicate in ways that promote interpersonal psychological
safety and other behaviors that positively support performance. This study sought to add to the
body of knowledge on psychological safety in organizations, particularly the interpersonal
aspect, which needs additional research (Ajjawi et al., 2022; Gosai et al., 2023). Furthermore, the
study could be helpful to leaders in human resources (Tolentino et al., 2016) who want to build
supportive and understanding organizations rooted in psychological safety. The information it
provided can be used to create tools to help leaders support women when they struggle with
workplace performance due to experiencing IPV-PA.
The consequences of not examining the topic include leaders making misinformed
decisions or company policies concerning conflicts between employees and their leadership
(Argenti, 2017; Prewitt & Weil, 2014) that may unintentionally harm employees and impact
mental health (Henderson & Gronholm, 2018). Misinformed action could result in continued
struggles with individual performance (S. Kumar & Casey, 2017; Thompson et al., 2023),
increased risk of workplace bullying (Algner & Lorenz, 2022), and hostile work environments
6
resulting in increased legal risk to the organization and potential damage to the organization’s
employment brand (Brink, 2022; Y. Kim et al., 2023). The information may also be important in
the case of work-from-home or public health pandemic scenarios, such as COVID-19, where
female employees may struggle with performance while working from home and simultaneously
living in a psychologically aggressive home environment (Glowacz et al., 2022; Miall et al.,
2023).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
I utilized the theoretical framework of psychological safety as the lens for this study.
Psychological safety creates an environment where individuals feel they will not experience
punishment, humiliation, embarrassment, or rejection when they admit mistakes, voice concerns,
ask questions, or offer ideas (Edmondson, 1999). The framework was appropriate to examine the
problem because psychological safety has a validated instrument that measures behavioral
characteristics. The key concepts in the validated instrument are as follows: mistakes held
against individuals, safety in bringing up problems, rejection for difference, safety in taking
risks, asking for help, undermining of efforts, and value and utilization of skills and talent
(Edmondson, 2019). Women who live in psychologically aggressive home environments
experience lower self-efficacy and resilience during moments of struggle when psychological
safety is not present (S. Kumar & Casey, 2017; Thompson et al., 2023). Due to the benefits of
psychological safety on employee performance, it was appropriate to apply the framework to the
lived experience of leader behavior.
The study focused on a non-industry-specific discovery of the lived experience of women
who experienced a psychologically aggressive home environment while employed full-time. The
study helped to understand the interconnectedness of interpersonal psychological safety between
7
leaders and women who report to them when those women struggle with workplace
performance. The study data came from interviews. I ensured the participants’ confidentiality by
anonymizing all names and eliminating the names of workplaces (B. Johnson & Christensen,
2018). I disseminated the study’s results by sending the participants a copy of the published
dissertation. I also gave the participants a $20 gift card for their time.
Definition of Terms
● Performance struggle is a lack of success in desired performance goals “due to
complex situations and circumstances” (Vanderheiden & Mayer, 2020, p. 3)
● Performance self-efficacy is the belief and expectation one has in oneself to be able to
perform tasks, attain goals, and achieve outcomes to the standards of another
(Weinberg et al., 1979), which is applicable to and affects academic performance
(Lane & Lane, 2001), work performance (Johri & Misra, 2014), sports performance
(Schunk, 1995), or personal performance (Weinberg et al., 1979).
● Psychological aggression (PA) is a subset of IPV defined as “acting dangerous,
name-calling, insults and humiliation” as well as “behaviors that are intended to
monitor and control an intimate partner such as threats, interference with family and
friends, and limiting access to money” (CDC, 2022 p. 10) as well as “a
communication, either verbal or non-verbal., intended to cause psychological pain to
another person, or perceived as having that intent” (Straus & Sweet, 1992, p. 2).
● Emotional abuse “can include verbal assault, dominance, control, isolation, ridicule,
or the use of intimate knowledge for degradation” (Follingstad et al., 2005).
● Intimate partner violence (IPV) is “abuse or aggression that occurs in a romantic
relationship” (CDC, 2022, p. 2)
8
● Intimate partner is defined as anyone who lives in the same home as the participant,
married or not, irrespective of sex, gender identification, or sexual orientation, where
a close romantic relationship and daily contact with the participant exists, definition
supported as codified in United States Code (2009) 18 USC 921 § (a)(32).
● Psychological safety refers to the cultural elements present in an environment where
individuals feel they will not be punished, humiliated, embarrassed, or rejected when
they admit mistakes, voice concerns, ask questions, or offer ideas (Edmondson,
1999). It may also be referred to as a psychologically safe environment.
● Psychologically safe leadership is a subset of psychological health and safety. In the
United States, it is defined by the International Organization for Standardization
(ISO, 2021) and Occupational Health and Safety Administration guidelines for
psychological health and safety to mitigate psychosocial risks. It is a home and
workplace-oriented harm reduction leadership practice based on open
communication, team, and employee support.
● Interpersonal (dyadic) psychological safety is an interpersonal application of
psychological safety in the context of the study between an employee and their
supervisor. It has been used in recent studies (Ajjawi et al., 2022; Gosai et al., 2023;
Ping et al., 2017) to describe the one-to-one workplace relationship.
● Implicit voice theories are metacognitive processes that situationally protect
employees to mitigate the risk of speaking up (Milliken et al., 2003).
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter One outlines the problem of practice. It provides the purpose of the study,
research questions, study importance, and consequences for not performing the research. The
9
chapter provides a brief overview of the setting, conceptual, theoretical framework, and
definitions for terms. Chapter Two supports the study with a literature review on the topics of
intimate partner PA, psychological safety, leader behaviors that help employees learn from
struggle and failure, and voice behaviors, including disclosure of IPV-PA. Chapter Three delves
into the methodology and describes how I conducted the study. Chapter Four presents the study’s
results. Chapter Five reveals the results and offers recommendations for practice. It also includes
suggestions for future research on leaders’ application of dyadic psychological safety to support
disclosure and voice utilization for those who experience PA and struggle with workplace
performance.
10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This literature review supports the study through historical, human, leadership, and
organizational alignment with the problem of practice. The first section reviews the history of the
theory of psychological safety. It begins with the formation of the theory, following its
development from 19th and 20th-century influences. It then turns to how the theory reached
maturity with a growing body of cross-industry knowledge applied to individuals, dyads, teams,
and organizations. The history of the theory of psychological safety closes with a review of
dyadic, or interpersonal, psychological safety. It includes the role psychologically safe leadership
behaviors play in employee communication, confidence, knowledge sharing, and job
performance. The second section focuses on the role of psychological safety during performance
failure, with themes of employee behavior, leadership empowerment, and interpersonal risktaking. The third section covers literature discussing the workplace risks of PA in an employee’s
home environment. Chapter Two also discusses a review of workplace response, support, and
interventions, including the roles of supervisor support through methods supported by
psychological safety and empowerment. The chapter closes with an explanation of the
conceptual framework. It shows an employee’s perception of performance struggle,
empowerment to succeed, and psychologically safe leadership experience in connection to lived
experience as measured by the validated instrument to measure psychological safety.
History of Psychological Safety
Various psychologists and organizational leadership experts have touched on topics of
psychological safety since 1884. Two theorists inspired what Schein and Bennis (1965) would
later call psychological safety. Kierkegaard (1844) suggested the creative process must destroy
current structures and create new ones. The process of building and letting go produces anxiety,
11
which must be experienced for the creative process to occur. Maslow (1943) addressed the the
feeling of safety as a necessity for human development as a foundation of the hierarchy of needs
theory of motivation. Maslow’s framework asserted unmet physiological and safety needs would
block the necessary love and affection required to achieve belongingness. Lewin’s marrying of
the two concepts, safety and creativity, asserted that the unfreezing portion of his proposed
unfreeze, change, and refreeze process required creativity and was later shown to be a disrupter
of the status quo (Lewin, 1947; Schumpeter, 1994). Anxiety, creativity, and change management
were the beginning themes in what was later named psychological safety.
Psychological Safety Named and Defined
Two professors from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Edgar Shein and Warren
Bennis, suggested psychological safety was a key component to increasing learning receptivity
during the unfreezing stage of Lewin’s organizational change process. In Lewin’s unfreeze,
change, and refreeze definition, psychological safety helped individuals feel safe and capable of
changing without defensiveness or excessive personal protection during the process of
unfreezing (Lewin, 1947; Schein & Bennis, 1965). The work of Schein and Bennis gained
additional traction at the turn of the 20th century when Kahn (1990) conducted a qualitative
study of two diverse environments: a summer camp in the West Indies and an architectural firm
in the northwestern part of the United States. There were four key findings from the study. First,
psychological safety promotes personal security. Personal security helps people speak up and
begins the process of change by overcoming the anxiety that acts as a barrier to action. Second,
speaking up in times of discomfort positively increases a person’s ability to learn, achieve goals,
and solve problems. Third, when physical, cognitive, and emotional expression are enabled,
good intentions are assumed and given along with trust and respect. Fourth, when these attributes
12
were not present, people were more likely to disengage and tended to “withdraw and defend” to
protect themselves (Kahn, 1990, p. 694).
Psychological safety began to mature in the 1990s when Schein noted that psychological
safety helped reduce barriers to goal achievement and problem-solving by combatting the
tendency to withdraw and defend when experiencing learning anxiety (Schein, 1993). Other
researchers followed, creating a renaissance of psychological safety in the 1990s. The research
conducted in the 1990s revealed other attributes supported by psychological safety required to
achieve a fully functioning organization. Associations were first made between interpersonal
risk-taking, learning behavior, and team performance (Edmondson, 1999).
Psychological Safety in the 20th and 21st Centuries
Harvard University professor Amy Edmondson ushered psychological safety into the
20th century by equating it to other forms of interpersonal risk-taking. Edmondson (1999) built
on the ideas of Schein and Bennis as well as Kahn by asserting that psychological safety makes it
easier for individuals to speak up so they can overcome anxiety and combat the feeling that they
must protect themselves. Psychological safety helps people learn, achieve goals, and solve
problems by empowering voice behavior. Edmondson identified leadership behavior as an
influence on the development of psychological safety and created the first validated instrument
to measure the theory (Edmondson, 1999). The instrument measured seven thematic behavior
patterns (Edmondson, 1999) that aided in creating psychological safety. These are leadership
behaviors that enable employees to
13
• ask for help when needed
• make mistakes without fear
• bring problems to leaders’ attention
• know their differences will be accepted
• feel safe taking risks
• know their efforts will be supported
• understand they will be valued and utilized as a member of a team.
When leadership behaviors are rooted in psychological safety, they encourage learning
behaviors that help employees communicate more readily with their teams and supervisors.
Psychological safety helps understand how employees use their voices, behave in teams, and
learn within the organization’s culture (Edmondson & Lei, 2014). The creation of psychological
safety has been connected to how work is completed, knowledge and skills are obtained, the
experience of the working environment, and an employee’s experience with their leadership
(Edmondson & Bransby, 2023). A comprehensive literature review showed psychological safety
has “come of age” in the 21st century (Edmondson & Bransby, p. 56) as a mature theory utilized
internationally (Table 1).
14
Table 1
Psychological Safety as a Mature Theory of Organizational Behavior
Aspect Evidence Source
Alignment with
organizational behavior
topics
Aligns with 79.6% of the 49
topics of organizational
behavior.
Heath & Sitkin, 2001
Number of citations Topically cited in 185 peerreviewed and published
articles with qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed
methods methodologies
(2014–2023)
Edmondson & Brambsy,
2023
Breadth of industries studied Healthcare, manufacturing,
information technology,
elite sports, finance, and
service industries
Alami et al., 2023; Cai et al.,
2023; Edmondson &
Bransby, 2023; Jamal et al.,
2023; Purdy et al., 2023;
Walton et al., 2023
In a qualitative study of four primary care teams (Remtulla et al., 2021), 20 employees
produced themes providing barriers to psychological safety, such as hierarchy, lack of
knowledge, authoritarian leadership, and personality. Facilitators of psychological safety were
inclusiveness, open culture, support, vocality, bridging gaps, development of interpersonal
relationships, and the use of small teams. The study found that leaders could facilitate behaviors
to improve customer outcomes, employee engagement, and learning.
The existence of a psychologically safe environment also encourages employees to use
their voice (J. Lee et al., 2023), enables them to understand their roles (Klenke-Borgmann et al.,
2023), attend to physical safety (D. S. Kumar et al., 2023), seek developmental feedback (Cai et
al., 2023), and engage more actively in their work (Xu et al., 2023). Psychological safety has also
15
played a role in studying how leadership behavior can mitigate post-COVID-19 pandemic
workplace effects, including remote work, engagement, and burnout (Desai et al., 2023; Devaraj
et al., 2023; Khong et al., 2023; Plester & Lloyd, 2023). Psychological safety has been called
“vital to organizational effectiveness” and connects to the open sharing of ideas, opinions, and
other forms of interpersonal risk-taking (Plouffe et al., 2023, p. 443). Considering the importance
of psychological safety, it may be important to understand its application in a dyadic sense.
History of Dyadic Psychological Safety
McCroskey and McCain (1974) stated that interpersonal, or dyadic, interactions were
essential to meet social and physical needs and accomplish tasks. Further research explored the
verbal and non-verbal process of initiating interpersonal communication. The research
demonstrated how psychologically safe approaches helped develop relationships through the
achievement of intimacy, information exchange, reciprocity, liking, and similarity (Andersen &
Guerrero, 1996; Berger & Calabrese, 1975; Burgoon et al., 2002; Burgoon & Le Poire, 1999;
Fichten et al., 1992).
Tynan (2005) discovered that self-preservation was perceived as an imminent threat,
which functioned as a barrier to the admission of error and requests for help. Self-preservation
demonstrated a two-way problem and affected both supervisors and employees. The study found
that interpersonal psychological safety between supervisors and employees helped supervisors
readily communicate with their employees. Supervisors could do that without feeling threatened
by disagreements, candid feedback, or observation of mistakes. When the supervisors regularly
modeled open communication one-on-one, psychological safety increased (Siemsen et al., 2009).
When leaders acknowledge limitations, mistakes, strengths, and contributions, employees
16
embrace the concept of teachability. Tynan’s study found that when employees are teachable,
they will more likely fully engage in their work without needing to engage in self-preservation.
A quantitative study conducted with 140 Amazon employees in the United States
working on the MTurk human intelligence project (Walters & Diab, 2016) showed a significant
positive relationship between a leader’s humility and their employees’ engagement. An attitude
of humility enabled leaders to model teachability by recognizing their own errors and limitations.
By acknowledging the strengths and contributions of their employees, the leaders could create a
psychologically safe environment where fully engaged employees could act without the fear of
punishment for failure.
In the 2020s, psychological safety has shown significant correlations with authentic
leadership, inclusive leadership, transformational leadership, and servant leadership, including
possessing the desire and confidence to help others (Ahmed, 2023; Christopher, 2023; Gosai et
al., 2023; Siyal, 2023). There is both an interpersonal and intrapersonal element to psychological
safety. Individuals must have the confidence and comfort to seek help. Productive feedback
requires two-person, trusting relationships (Ajjawi et al., 2022). The realm of sports exemplifies
the building of trusting relationships in that psychologically safe coaching relationships affect
how athletes view their ability to grow, succeed, and thrive. A qualitative study of athletes in the
United Kingdom found that psychological safety and the quality of the coach-athlete relationship
were the predecessors to the athlete’s performance improvement (Gosai et al., 2023). Literature
moving into the 2020s demonstrates leader behavior can affect an organization’s development of
psychological safety and mitigate interpersonal risk so employees can speak up.
17
Association With Leadership Behavior
Leader behavior can either add to or detract from psychological safety, causing
employees to speak up or remain silent. A quantitative study of chief executive officers and
board members in the United States (Coutifaris & Grant, 2021) revealed leader behaviors that
detract from the development of psychological safety. These behaviors included hierarchical
attitudes, perceived incompetence, defensiveness, and inaction. The effects of behaviors that
impede psychological safety can be mitigated by both leaders and team members through
relationship building, giving and providing support, and sharing power responsibilities (Remtulla
et al., 2021). Leader transparency positively influences creativity by focusing on the creative
process rather than worrying about information gaps (Yi et al., 2017).
Studies in healthcare have found that leaders who demonstrated integrity built trust with
their employees. Leadership transparency engendered psychological safety, decreased employee
silence in times of failure, and enhanced reporting relationships (Erkutlu & Chafra, 2019; Yi et
al., 2017). Inclusivity, openness, vocality, support, shared leadership, and relationship building
all supported the development of a psychologically safe environment (Remtulla et al., 2021),
built leadership trust, and improved job performance (Chughtai, 2022). These behaviors aligned
with core behaviors measured in the validated instrument for measuring psychological safety.
Open and Respectful Communication
Open and respectful communication of expectations creates psychological safety. Leaders
who demonstrate “mature and open communication” engage in active listening behavior (True et
al., 2014, p. 637). Attentiveness supports the ability to verbalize attention and comprehension,
listen to understand, and assume good intentions from others (Castro et al., 2018). De Stobbeleir
et al. (2020) conducted two qualitative studies of interpersonal relationships, one between
18
employees and supervisors and one between dyads present in self-managed student teams. Both
studies found employees were more engaged, contributed more, and sought more two-way
feedback when they felt psychologically safe.
A leader’s vulnerability supports their ability to give and receive feedback with humility
to support employee teachability (Walters & Diab, 2016). Therefore, psychological safety in
dyads may also impact performance reviews as supervisors view employees who seek and are
open to feedback as more engaged in their jobs (De Stobbeleir et al., 2020). Coutifaris and
Grant’s (2021) study of chief executive officers and board members found two-way feedback
sharing and disclosure of failure built trust by enabling employees to use their voices to openly
discuss performance concerns and suggestions. Their study found that two-way feedback that
occurs naturally enables psychological safety and normalizes vulnerability and reciprocity.
Normalization of these behaviors leads to more actionable feedback, increased accountability,
and enduring psychological safety. Because authentic communication is important to
demonstrating openness and respect, it connects to transparency as a key component of building
trust.
Transparency
Leadership transparency builds trust and aids in the creation of psychological safety. An
employee’s trust in their supervisor can predict their individual job performance. Job
performance also depends on a leader’s ability to develop trust, make themselves available,
provide meaning, and promote psychological safety for their employees (A. N. Li & Tan, 2013).
Lack of transparency reduces trust in an organization, decreases psychological safety, and creates
fear and anxiety (Haesevoets et al., 2021). Transparency includes a leader quickly sharing
knowledge over time (Zhou et al., 2023). Transparent leaders reveal the motives and reasoning
19
behind their decisions, disclose relationships that may be a conflict of interest, share relevant
information with employees, demonstrate openness to feedback, communicate about
performance standards, and vulnerably reveal their own humanity (Montgomery et al., 2020; Yi
et al., 2017).
When leaders communicate transparently, employees feel safe expressing themselves in
kind. It also creates increased employee loyalty and reciprocity in transparency and drives
greater job engagement (Basit, 2017). A qualitative study asked team members to describe their
educational leaders in a European business school (Rego et al., 2022). The study found loyalty
and reciprocity affected a leader’s openness when a subordinate was transparent and vulnerable
with them. Openness enabled an environment that encouraged the practice of shared
transparency and reduced health and safety risks in an organization (Geller, 2022; Lindhout &
Reniers, 2022; Rego et al., 2022). Overall, when leaders demonstrated transparency, employees
trusted them more to be able to help.
Willingness and Capability to Help
Demonstrated willingness to help and the capability to do so creates psychological safety.
When leaders are perceived to be competent, willing to help, and offer help in a non-self-serving
way, both psychological safety and team performance improve (Mao et al., 2019). Helpful
collaboration supports an employee’s productivity and creates feelings of psychological safety
(Zimmerman et al., 2020). A study of 417 supervisor-employee dyads in China (Liu et al., 2023)
showed that non-benevolent, self-serving leadership perceived for personal gain at the expense
of others negatively affected innovation and increased employee anxiety.
When employees feel a leader is not willing or capable to help them, they feel less
psychologically safe. Lack of support causes employees to engage in self-protective behavior,
20
avoiding the risk of punitive action from being incorrect due to non-support, lack of knowledge,
or resources (Bai et al., 2023). Leaders collaborating with their employees, endeavoring to help
them, and exhibiting servant leadership traits without self-serving motives promote
psychological safety (Ahmed, 2023; Liu et al., 2023). Organizations committed to an
environment of helping have transactional systems in place to understand who knows and does
what, which drives overall effectiveness. These systems create psychologically safe
socioemotional and informational environments and motivate employees to seek help (Wilhelm
et al., 2019). Literature shows the effects of a leader helping in a positive and supportive way.
Positive, Supportive, Leadership
Leaders trained in how to create psychologically safe environments are more likely to be
supportive of their employees (Shea et al., 2018). Positive motivating relationships decrease
employee anxiety by helping them believe in their ability to achieve and thrive in the workplace
(Frazier & Tupper, 2018; M. Kim & Beehr, 2023). A qualitative study of workers in western
Nebraska (Stratman & Youssef-Morgan, 2019) found that positivity helps employees feel safe
speaking up. It also found that cynicism promotes unsafe behavior through self-censorship and
hiding mistakes, whether witnessed or self-perpetrated, increasing workplace accidents. A survey
of students in Poland, Serbia, and Italy (Litwic-Kaminska et al., 2023) found consistent positive
support to be a creator of individual and organizational resilience, which reduced stress in
learning environments. Resilience allows organizations and the individuals within them to
embrace differences and further drives a culture of psychological safety.
Acceptance of Differences
Organizational climates supportive of diversity minimize the perception of age, gender,
and race gaps and enhance learning outcomes. A positive environment where diversity and
21
individual differences are respected drives employee performance and creates psychological
safety, particularly in the case of non-White individuals, where greater inclusion has been shown
to drive performance (Singh & Ramdeo, 2023). Lack of support for diversity can negatively
impact learning outcomes by reinforcing stereotype threats (Casad & Bryant, 2016).
Communication and education can improve receptivity to the perception of gaps created by
diversity (Singh & Ramdeo, 2023). A qualitative study of automotive workers in Germany
(Gerpott et al., 2019) found the perception and reception of communication and education are
directly affected by the psychological safety of the environment.
The risk-taking necessary to create innovation is more likely in psychologically safe
environments when the workplace is diverse. Diversity demonstrates to employees that age, race,
gender, and other differences are respected and are not a factor in listening or attention to ideas
(Gerpott et al., 2019; Moake et al., 2019; Singh & Ramdeo, 2023). Psychological safety restores
parity in the self-efficacy differences between men and women. Improved self-efficacy is
connected to increased creative ability and improved performance (Hora et al., 2021).
Psychological safety enables individuals to utilize risk and failure as tools for learning.
The Role of Psychological Safety During Performance Failure
Psychological safety is an effective leadership intervention when employees exhibit
performance failure. A collectivist versus an individualist attitude empowers intervention by
considering responsibility for failure, sharing knowledge, seeking feedback, and sharing
mistakes (Deng et al., 2019; Mura et al., 2016). Discussing failure and seeking feedback
generates the ability for an employee to talk about their ideas and take action to implement them
(Mura et al., 2016). Psychological safety improves an employee’s ability to learn from failure
22
and encourages them to use their voice more when failing by decreasing fear and increasing
confidence in creative flexibility and originality (Deng et al., 2019).
A qualitative study of 238 manager-worker dyads in the service industry from 33 hotel
properties in the United States (X. Wang et al., 2020) showed tolerance for error has a positive
relationship with an employee’s feeling of psychological safety and self-efficacy. Tolerance for
error promotes learning behavior and the willingness to report errors. Learning behavior drives
resilience and recovery when mistakes occur. Learning from failure is facilitated by a leader’s
ability to be accessible and involved, provide timely and elaborate feedback, guide the employee,
and assess progress toward success (Smeets et al., 2021).
Because psychological safety improves the utilization of risk and failure for learning, it is
important to understand the causes of performance failure and how psychological safety,
learning, and behavior can curtail an employee’s natural impulse to stay silent versus speak up.
Psychological safety can create a workplace where it is safe to fail (Nicolaides et al., 2020) by
enabling interpersonal communication. In a psychologically safe environment, both students and
employees can feel safe using their voice to point out problems, admit mistakes, or ask for help
when they fail without fear of consequences such as criticism, embarrassment, or being targeted
for punishment (Brykman & Maerz, 2023; Detert & Edmondson, 2011).
In a study of Canadian undergraduate students, leaders who positively encouraged the use
of voice created more voice behavior from students than those leaders who discouraged speaking
up or criticized ideas (Brykman & Maerz, 2023). Detert and Edmondson (2011) conducted a
similar mixed methods study in the United States with four participant groups:
• employees of a large corporation
• executive education students
23
• full-time employees.
• Master of Business Administration students who felt dismissed or unappreciated
when they spoke up.
They discovered four thought patterns that discouraged employees from speaking up:
• being targeted or punished for speaking or for what is said
• needing to know everything before speaking or have it be perfectly polished
• speaking out of turn in the presence of others
• potentially embarrassing their boss by speaking
A psychologically safe environment is necessary to create a space where failure can be
productive and creative solutions can be created to solve problems. Problem-solving requires
responsive, bold, courageous, and strategic thinking on the part of leaders (Mills & Watson,
2021; Nicolaides et al., 2020). Leader behavior that is empowering and solutions-focused
enhances employees’ ability to learn and think creatively (Yang et al., 2021). Therefore,
psychological safety may be useful to empower employees to report errors when they occur,
share knowledge, and trust their leaders enough to take interpersonal risks when they fail.
Psychological Safety, Employee Behavior, and Learning
When leaders empower employees to speak up, companies are better able to overcome
challenges by understanding the root cause of problems and obtaining innovative solutions
(S. Y. Lee & Kim, 2021). Past acceptance versus rejection of voice behavior and encouragement
rather than discouragement of opinion and sharing ideas helps create a psychologically safe
culture that enables learning (Brykman & Maerz, 2023; S. Y. Lee & Kim, 2021). Inclusion is a
leadership behavior that increases the likelihood of error reporting by affirming an employee’s
value, creating trust, and supporting psychological safety (Brimhall et al., 2023). Active
24
management of leadership behaviors that would exclude employees and negatively affect their
comfort in speaking up encourages employees to use their voices to create positive outcomes for
the organization (Brimhall et al., 2023; S. Y. Lee & Kim, 2021). This may help leaders mitigate
the psychological impact of failure on employees.
Psychological Impact of Performance Failure
Individual positionality, epistemology, and mental mastery of life events affect an
employee’s ability to learn. Lived experience also affects the psychological handling and impact
of failure (Vanderheiden & Mayer, 2023). In learning environments, course failure creates
emotions such as anger, shame, guilt, embarrassment, anxiety, and boredom can mimic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, resulting in absenteeism, diminished ability to learn,
and inability to prepare for and meet challenges such as exams (Erhun et al., 2022). In a
workplace context, unsupportive handling of employee failure can result in job insecurity and
increased intentions to leave a company due to increased psychological stress and exhaustion
(AlHashmi et al., 2019; Probst et al., 2020). Rumination worsens stress and exhaustion, which
decreases job performance and satisfaction (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Schaubroeck et al., 2021).
A quantitative laboratory study with accounting students from a university in the
southeast United States and a field study conducted with trainees in the U.S. Army (Schaubroeck
et al., 2021) found that lack of a growth mindset and inability to learn from failure increases
frustration and goal digression. The participants in both environments underwent tests known to
create stress and carry consequences for failure: the CPA exam for accounting students and a
basic combat training final physical fitness examination. Ruminative thinking about failure did
not create failure. Rather, it distracted from the ability to succeed in other endeavors unrelated to
the exam. Although fear of failure can be a motivating factor in learning and achievement
25
(Solansky et al., 2023), leaders who help with constructive feedback and encouragement of
creative solutions, rather than control through prescriptive micro-management, can improve
employees’ ability to recover from failure when it happens to improve performance (Hu et al.,
2023; Schaubroeck et al., 2021; Sidana & Mishra, 2022). The emotional intelligence required to
help in a non-controlling way mitigates the negative responses to receiving feedback and reduces
conflict when failure occurs (J. Johnson et al., 2020).
The multi-disciplinary study of the psychological impact of failure spans the field of
marketing as well. Developing failure-tolerant cultures encourages admitting, accepting,
managing, and addressing failure to improve performance. Acceptance does not increase the
number or severity of failures. Rather, failure tolerance improves employees’ long-term ability to
learn from failure (Vomberg et al., 2020). Addressing failure by providing coaching and
developmental feedback supports employees to discover and address the root cause of failure to
take innovative action and improve performance. Leaders can support employees by encouraging
risk-taking, recognizing effort, and rewarding creative solutions (Cai et al., 2023). This mitigates
the negative psychological risks of failure and helps employees capitalize on the inherent
learning opportunities failure provides (Wilhelm et al., 2019).
When employees feel psychologically safe, they feel more comfortable innovating and
admitting errors when they occur (Elsayed et al., 2023). A quantitative study conducted with
members of the radiation oncology staff of a hospital in the United States showed that educating
them to develop psychological safety in their units supported reporting near-miss situations and
improved patient safety by providing innovative ideas for care (Jung et al., 2021). Another
quantitative study of service industry employees in China (He et al., 2022) linked psychological
safety to a full mediation of the tendency for employees to hide knowledge from their leaders in
26
favor of self-preservation. Various causes of cognitive and performance failure, from workload
to job insecurity and creative performance, carry a psychological risk for employees that
leadership behavior can help mitigate the effects of failure (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Probst et al.,
2020; H.-F. Wang et al., 2021). Creating a psychologically safe environment where learning
from failure is encouraged may decrease employee silence and be an effective intervention in
times of performance failure. Therefore, it is important to understand the literature about the
differences between men and women in handling failure.
The Metacognitive Effect of Failure on Women
Gender differences in how men and women handle failure are linked to self-efficacy. A
longitudinal quantitative study of physics students examined the motivational beliefs and selfefficacy of female students in connection to grades and test scores. The study found that when
women felt like they were failing or not meeting a real or imagined standard, their self-efficacy
decreased as they regulated emotion (Kalender et al., 2020). Self-efficacy decreases as a woman
becomes more attached to her beliefs, using them as data to help process information (Kashif &
Malik, 2020). As a result, women feel lower self-confidence, a lack of belonging, and experience
self-doubt regardless of past successes, knowledge, or skills (Kalender et al., 2020; Vaughn et
al., 2020). Low self-efficacy decreases overall self-confidence and increases perception of threat
and lack of safety (Popovych et al., 2020). Lower self-confidence decreases a woman’s ability to
self-motivate, connect with others, and seek resources. Rumination creates a cycle of cognitive
disturbances, reducing memory and attention. These cognitive disturbances perpetuate behaviors
leading to additional failure (Popovych et al., 2020; Vaughn et al., 2020).
Metacognition is important because self-efficacy influences achievement (Sheffler et al.,
2022). The belief that she is powerless and the cause of her own failure demotivates a woman’s
27
attempts at change (Necula, 2023). Impulsivity may occur while attempting to regain power, stop
rumination, and regain emotional regulation. (Kashif & Malik, 2020) Metacognitive control and
self-protection mitigate feelings of stress and anxiety but potentially create additional issues due
to reactive action-taking (Clauss et al., 2019). Whereas men will become more task-focused
during times of stress, women are more likely to become distracted, unwell, or tired until
emotional release is possible (Carver & Scheier, 2014; Giesbrecht, 2022).
Three factors influence a woman’s motivation to mitigate interpersonal risk associated
with failure (Abdelrahman, 2020)
• fear of failure
• acceptance of the consequences of failure
• power dynamics at stake
A field study of turn-by-turn wayfinding conducted with 30 men and 29 women (Lemieux et al.,
2019) found that men are more likely to metacognitively process failure in the moment and act
on knowledge to correct future mistakes. Women, however, were less likely to proactively assess
failure and act upon the learning. When women feel safe to speak about their emotions, it can
improve intrinsic and extrinsic motivations by mitigating the risks of forming additional negative
beliefs and improving attitudes (Abdelrahman, 2020; Kashif & Malik, 2020).
Leaders can support metacognitive awareness and increase willingness to learn from
failure by providing positive feedback and motivational incentives (Brycz et al., 2021).
Competitive or isolative environments with limited mentorship opportunities can further lower
women’s self-efficacy and limit their capacity to engage in conceptual learning, hindering their
ability to learn from failure (Kalender et al., 2020; Vaughn et al., 2020). Women who lack selfefficacy may be more likely to silence themselves or withhold shared knowledge. The silence
28
decreases the ability to prevent or exacerbate failure (Nguyen et al., 2019). Metacognition also
explains what causes employees to remain silent or omit information when they fail.
Employee Voice and the Choice to Stay Silent
Implicit voice theories are metacognitive processes that situationally protect employees to
mitigate the risk of speaking up (Milliken et al., 2003). The inner dialogue drives decisionmaking about voice behavior and can either increase or decrease the likelihood of someone
feeling safe enough to communicate openly (Detert & Edmondson, 2011; Milliken et al., 2003).
These theories result in silence, hesitation, resistance, or delay in speaking up to avoid the real or
imagined repercussions of using their voice. The more of these theories an employee has, the
more likely it is that their internal dialogues support pain avoidance, as they fear appearing
incompetent, lacking information, unable to create solutions, or as an embarrassing problem
employee (Detert & Edmondson, 2011; Yalçın et al., 2022).
Yalçın et al. (2022) conducted an exploratory qualitative study of female hospital nurses
in Istanbul, Turkey. They discovered silence behavior encouraged by an organization’s
behavioral norms, such as fear, disengagement, or encouraged silence. Cultural support of the
metacognition that encourages silence occurs when other employees are afraid, disengaged, or
silent. Employees feel supported and psychologically safe communicating ameliorates these
environments (Yalçın et al., 2022). The dyadic relationship between an employee and a leader
can determine whether an employee feels comfortable speaking up. Trustworthy and ethical
leadership behavior encourages the use of employee voice (Zeng & Xu, 2020). When employees
feel their leaders are transparent with knowledge, rather than hiding it, employees develop
positive job attitudes and feel more empowered (Offergelt et al., 2019).
29
Conversely, behaviors perceived as suspicious, unethical, competitive, or otherwise anticollaborative foster distrust and disempower employees. Distrust increases motivation to remain
silent (Hildreth & Anderson, 2016; Offergelt et al., 2019; Zeng & Xu, 2020). When an employee
experiences distrust and protective silence behavior at home perpetuated by IPV or PA, it has
significant implications for victims and their behavior in the workplace, including their
willingness to speak up (Arriaga & Schkeryantz, 2015). The effects of IPV-PA are welldocumented with significant impact on the economy in the United States.
Effects of Intimate Partner Violence and Psychological Aggression
The perpetration of IPV by a current or former partner can entail physical harm, control,
and sexual or psychological abuse resulting in “physical., sexual., or psychological trauma”
(World Health Organization [WHO], 2021, p. 1). Psychological aggression, a subset of IPV, is
the most common expression of domestic violence (Carney & Barner, 2012; Dokkedahl et al.,
2019; Frye & Karney, 2006). Psychological aggression is “a communication, either verbal or
non-verbal, intended to cause psychological pain to another person, or perceived as having that
intent” (Straus & Sweet, 1992, p. 2). Perpetrators of PA intend to damage the victim’s selfesteem or view of self through various forms of abuse, including degradation, withholding
affection or nurturing, threatening, and restricting their partner’s actions (Jordan et al., 2010).
The abuse causes psychological distress, leading to depression, anxiety, passivity,
helplessness, compliance, and withdrawal from others (Follingstad, 2009; Jordan et al., 2010).
Individuals who experience PA from their intimate partners are more likely to experience PTSD
than those who experience physical aggression alone (Dutton et al., 2006). The severity of
perpetration a victim experiences is measured by the Follingstad Psychological Aggression Scale
(Follingstad, 2009). More commonly known as emotional abuse, it “can include verbal assault,
30
dominance, control, isolation, ridicule, or the use of intimate knowledge for degradation”
(Follingstad et al., 2005, p. 25) and has significant implications for victims and the United States
economy.
The most recently available statistics show PA is a global problem that affects 114
million adults in the United States, approximately 61 million of whom are women (CDC, 2022;
Smith et al., 2017). Lost productivity from PA results in a $1.3 trillion economic impact
(Peterson et al., 2018). Perpetration of physical, mental, financial, and social harm occurs with
PA. However, the observable bodily evidence left by physical abuse may not be present (Lantrip
et al., 2015). As such, the observable impact may be behavioral alone and not understood by the
victim during the situation (Arriaga & Schkeryantz, 2015). The severity of PA, including health
and performance consequences, is often underestimated, downplayed, or ignored due to the
absence of physical evidence (Capezza & Arriaga, 2008; Dokkedahl et al., 2019; Thompson et
al., 2023).
Research on how PA impacts experiences in the workplace has become more prevalent,
with more than 50% of literature published post-2010 (LeBlanc et al., 2014; MacGregor et al.,
2021). 70% of research on the topic has been conducted in the United States (MacGregor et al.,
2021). Change is occurring on a global scale, with PA legislation passed in France in 2010, the
United Kingdom in 2015, and Ireland in 2018 (Fox, 2019). In the United States, Futures Without
Violence (2023) helps workplaces with the impacts of IPV to increase safety and economic
security through education, training development, referrals, and auditing workplace practices and
policies. Peer-reviewed studies have called for federal, state, local, and workplace policies and
tactical interventions to support those affected by IPV-PA in the United States (Giesbrecht,
2022). In 2022, the organization worked with the City of New York to write and enact a policy to
31
address domestic and gender-based violence in the workplace through resources and nonmandatory training (City of New York, 2022), which addresses employees of all gender
identities. Understanding gender differences will help leaders deal more effectively when
employees experience failure in the workplace.
Work Performance Impact on Women
The key differentiator between male and female victims of PA is the emotional handling
of the home environment at work and work-related behavior change resulting in job instability
resulting in severe physical and mental health consequences (Showalter & McCloskey, 2021;
WHO, 2021). Female victims of PA may exhibit behaviors in the workplace supported by a
negative worldview based on feelings of fear or unworthiness (Follingstad et al., 1990; LeBlanc
et al., 2014; Samios et al., 2020). Mindsets of fear or unworthiness can affect their performance,
goal attainment, ability to engage in meaningful work, sense of purpose, and career development
(Arriaga & Schkeryantz, 2015; Park & Ai, 2006; Samios et al., 2020).
Although absenteeism may be among the first indicators a leader might notice, emotional
withdrawal is also common. Withdrawal behavior includes distraction, difficulty concentrating,
co-worker avoidance, missed days of work, and quiet quitting that results in performance failure
(LeBlanc et al., 2014; Showalter & McCloskey, 2021; Wathen et al., 2018). Visible signs of
emotional distress may present in the workplace as work efficiency and quality decline (Arriaga
& Schkeryantz, 2015; Showalter & McCloskey, 2021). Women experiencing PA at home may be
unaware that it is abuse because it lacks a physical component. As such, women may question
their reality, preventing them from confiding in others when experiencing failure at work
(Thompson et al., 2023).
32
Despite the impact on performance, women experiencing PA may receive a lack of
guidance depending on the culture of their employer, resulting in erratic job histories (JonesSewell, 2017; Showalter & McCloskey, 2021; Showalter, 2016). They can gain employment, but
maintaining it can be difficult due to their intimate partner’s weaponization of the workplace
(Borchers et al., 2016; Lantrip et al., 2015). Direct and indirect disruption of work negatively
affects career trajectory through interference with work performance (Showalter & McCloskey,
2021). Career trajectory slows down or misdirects by missing opportunities to plan and advance,
develop identity and reputation, or build supportive workplace relationships.
Perpetrators of IPV-PA might also interfere by limiting the employees’ working hours
and attendance at workplace events, threatening co-worker relationships, and refusing to provide
domestic help (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Lantrip et al., 2015; Showalter, 2016). The stress at
home causes employees to be emotionally exhausted and impairs their job performance. Lack of
career progression reduces job satisfaction overall (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; H.-F. Wang et al.,
2021; Wathen et al., 2018). When an employee’s performance falls, their lived experience with
PA reduces their ability to silence negative self-talk and be kind to themselves. Negative self-talk
hinders the ability to positively reframe failure to learn from it (Samios et al., 2020). Selfperpetuating PA affects mental models and creates a dangerous reflexive loop of thought.
Meanings formed in the home environment are attached to beliefs about work situations (Samios
et al., 2020; Senge, 2006).
The issues caused by IPV-PA do not stop when the employee goes to work. Due to
various employment consequences, recognition of IPV-PA as a workplace issue by employers,
researchers, and policymakers is common (Giesbrecht, 2022; MacGregor et al., 2022). Intimate
partner violence affects employees’ ability to get to work. More than half of the participants
33
reported they continue to experience PA while at work in the form of constant phone calls or
other work disruptions (Wathen et al., 2018). The use of technology through text messaging,
email, and other methods has added complexity to the problem (Showalter & McCloskey, 2021).
Among women, the inability to control interference creates feelings of fear, shame, and guilt and
reinforces beliefs of low self-esteem and self-worth, further impacting self-efficacy and
employment stability (Alsaker et al., 2016; Jordan et al., 2010; Showalter & McCloskey, 2021).
As negative consequences and performance failures occur more frequently, there is a
growing need to understand the cost of the IPV-PA problem to the workplace and interventions
that could help (Blodgett & Lanigan, 2018). During the COVID-19 pandemic, IPV-PA at home
increased due to uncertainty. The uncertain environment of the pandemic multiplied the
workplace effects (Glowacz et al., 2022; Miall et al., 2023). The direct impact on employee
performance created a resurgence of interest in the workplace effects of IPV-PA, resulting in
more studies, both global and domestic, in the 2020s (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Gracia et al.,
2020; Maticka-Tyndale et al., 2020; Showalter & McCloskey, 2021). However, the topic carries
stigma in general (Murvartian et al., 2023; Sánchez-Prada et al., 2022). Workplace programs that
teach employers how to recognize signs of IPV-PA and offer accommodation and resources to
help improve employee outcomes during times of uncertainty and failure may aid leaders in
responding to the workplace impacts of PA specifically (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Lantrip et al.,
2015). When leaders lack training to respond to IPV-PA, they lack skills to connect vulnerable
employees to resources.
Twenty-First-Century Workplace Response and Support
The workplace impact of IPV-PA threatens employees’ well-being, their productivity,
and the profits they help create. Unaddressed as a workplace condition, IPV-PA is harmful to the
34
employee experience, affects women disproportionately, and impacts stakeholders in human
resources, legal, risk management, operations, and finance. Yet, the responsibility of businesses
to conduct interventions for social impact and employee health and safety is under-discussed in
organizations (Karam et al., 2023). The risk and need for corporate response became more
evident in response to increased IPV reports during the #MeToo movement and the COVID-19
pandemic, which produced additional awareness of the ethical risk present when organizational
leaders do not work to address the problem (Branicki et al., 2023; Karam et al., 2023).
When an employee is experiencing IPV-PA at home, the workplace can either be
protective or triggering (MacGregor et al., 2022). Not all women who experience IPV-PA fail. A
segment views the workplace as a refuge and takes the opportunity to excel, take on more work,
and dissociate from the experience at home (Thompson et al., 2023). Others experience negative
effects and require supportive workplaces that decrease the mental, behavioral, social, and
economic harms (Showalter & McCloskey, 2021; Staggs et al., 2007).
The workplace should not endeavor to be the sole provider of resources, advice, or
counseling for employees experiencing IPV-PA. However, workplace support offers allyship to
those in need and supports the ability of employees to perform and maintain consistent
employment as well as exit abusive relationships (Swanberg et al., 2007; Widiss, 2018).
Employee assistance programs offer the opportunity to be heard about home and work–life
challenges or to work with supervisors to alter work schedules, which can help empower and
validate women (Showalter & McCloskey, 2021; Widiss, 2018). When an employee perceives an
organization is apathetic about them or their situation at home, they conserve resources at work,
saving energy to deal with what is happening at home versus channeling energy into workplace
productivity (H.-F. Wang et al., 2021). Additionally, workplace interference, such as on-the-job
35
harassment by the perpetrator, may increase due to a lack of policies that enable companies to
intervene. Increased distraction and decreased motivation to work results in loss of paid work
time, a decline in performance and productivity, and employment instability (Pachner et al.,
2022; Showalter, 2016; H.-F. Wang et al., 2021).
Despite the significant impact on the workplace, due to stigmatization and other factors,
organizations struggle to find a solution to the effects of employees who are affected by IPV-PA
(Adhia et al., 2019). Some organizations are taking action to help. Futures Without Violence
(2023) maintains a website that provides material, including fact sheets, education, and IPV
tools, to survivors, employers, co-workers, and advocates. Interventions such as these may not be
peer-reviewed. Since every IPV-PA situation is different, there is limited literature about the
effectiveness of standardized solutions.
However, during a study of women receiving services from two different domestic
violence support agencies in Orange County, California (Garcia et al., 2021), participants were
enrolled in personal empowerment courses containing a regimen of mediation and exercise. The
study found that the courses in personal empowerment helped the participants. Workplace
supports such as these have varied according to women’s race and sexual orientation, including
the transgender population (MacGregor et al., 2021; Pachner et al., 2022). Support for all
women, including those with same-sex partners, would be helpful, considering 43% of lesbians
have experienced PA in their lifetime (Badenes-Ribera et al., 2015).
An organization’s culture, policies, and training contribute to a leader’s willingness or
fitness to aid employees experiencing IPV-PA (Jones-Sewell, 2017; Niolon & CDC, 2017).
Organizations that lack these elements alongside evidence-based, peer-reviewed training may
inadvertently ignore the workplace effect of IPV-PA in the home environment. Leaders may
36
additionally believe that understanding the problem would require more time to consider and
implement than it is worth due to the staff time required to create, test, and implement (Adhia et
al., 2019). Organizational resistance and the stigma connected to IPV-PA produce leaders who
are uneducated in what approaches to take to assist these employees. This avoidance leaves
affected employees alone to resolve homelife interferences with the workplace and performance
gaps (Jones-Sewell, 2017). When leaders empower employees to speak up, employees
experiencing IPV-PA may be more likely to disclose barriers to acceptable job performance to
receive accommodations and resources.
IPV-PA Disclosure, Empowerment, and Support
When an employee feels psychologically safe enough to disclose their experience with
IPV-PA, a supervisor can provide resources or tools to remove or diminish learning anxiety and
other barriers to performance (Edmondson, 1999, 2019; Schein, 1993; Thompson et al., 2023).
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88-352; Title VII) does not protect victims of
any form of domestic violence from employment discrimination, including dismissal for
disclosure to someone who would use the information to discriminate against them (U.S. Equal
Opportunity Employment Commission, n.d.). There are protective laws in place in 25 states in
the United States. However, most laws supply provisions for flex time and leave and do not
protect against termination. Some laws require police interventions or court proceedings to be
underway (Paycor, 2022). The lack of employment protection creates an interpersonal risk in a
woman’s choice to disclose IPV-PA at home to a supervisor, co-worker, or human resource
department in the workplace (Ajjawi et al., 2022; Giesbrecht, 2022). Supervisors and co-workers
have a significant impact on the choice to disclose.
37
Women who disclose are more likely to achieve employment stability than women who
are silent about the abuse at home (Borchers et al., 2016). In a qualitative study of employees
experiencing IPV (Swanberg & Logan, 2005), employees who disclosed their home environment
to their supervisor had safety concerns based on fear of workplace retaliation or limited longterm support. The retaliation the employees experienced resulted in a termination rate of 41%
within 2 years. Reasons for termination included missed work, performance failure, and on-thejob harassment by their abuser on the phone and in person. Risks to co-workers, leaders, and the
affected employee, as well as a lack of education on IPV bias, may have contributed to the
outcome (Reeves & O’Leary-Kelly, 2009). Supportive workplace structures for all employees
can support disclosure safety through methods supported by psychological safety and
empowerment (S. Kumar, 2015; S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Ogbe et al., 2020; Pachner et al.,
2022; Samios et al., 2020).
Studies of work and IPV-PA show the potential for leaders to empower survivors. A
survey conducted with service recipients in an IPV advocacy and service agency in the Midwest
(Borchers et al., 2016) found women are more likely to accept help from leaders they trust.
Several women in the study received help from trusted supervisors. Performance improvement
contracts, training, and positive communications helped to support women and aided in abuse
recognition, emotional support, and resource attainment. One survivor described her boss as
“trying to build me up, make me stronger” (p. 475).
A qualitative study of 10 middle-class women experiencing IPV (S. Kumar, 2015)
showed that empowerment and support through work enabled them to feel a semblance of
control. Self-determination allowed them to experience healthy power dynamics and
interpersonal communication when offered choice, space for reflection, and the opportunity to
38
question others and themselves. Recognition of their personal sovereignty helped them
recognize, honor, and use their strengths in the workplace to meet performance goals and feel
accomplished. Their feelings of accomplishment created motivation to seek further support and
resources and help with their home environment. Supervisors can help women cope with the
effects of IPV-PA by empowering them to recover the internal resources they need to perform in
the workplace (Garcia et al., 2021; S. Kumar, 2015). This work can empower women by
positively influencing self-efficacy and other areas of metacognition, resulting in significant
social impact (S. Kumar & Casey, 2020). Understanding the factors that drive disclosure can
help employees speak up.
Inspiring Employee Voice Behavior to Disclose IPV-PA to the Workplace
Five factors influence whether IPV is disclosed or not (Conroy et al., 2023; Swanberg et
al., 2006, 2007):
• organizational culture
• leader behavior
• employee attitudes and biases
• magnitude of the employee’s performance struggle
• communicated availability of resources
Disclosure of IPV-PA at work is important to reduce safety risks, minimize disruptions, and
promote ethical treatment of the workforce (Conroy et al., 2023; Karam et al., 2023). Yet, as of
2021, only 6% of peer-reviewed studies addressed the topic of workplace disclosure of IPV or
PA experienced at home. Fewer academic studies took place in the 2020s, adding to the short
supply of literature to review (MacGregor et al., 2021).
39
Five factors influence workplace non-disclosure and four factors influence disclosure
when an employee is experiencing IPV-PA. The factors that influence non-disclosure (Adhia et
al., 2019; MacGregor et al., 2016) include a lack of personal awareness they are experiencing
IPV-PA, a lack of interpersonal safety in the workplace to disclose, a company culture that does
not encourage employees to speak up, a lack of perceived emotional support in the workplace
after disclosure, including IPV-PA stigma, and a lack of perceived or actual resources available
to them after disclosure. The factors that influence workplace disclosure (Glass et al., 2016;
Swanberg et al., 2007) include the existence and communication of supportive policies, the
availability of increased resources such as flexible work time, privacy, and resources, education
about the resources available for employees experiencing IPV-PA, an communication training
for co-workers to identify signs of IPV-PA, support active listening, and connection to companysupplied resources.
When training is available, knowledge and recognition of IPV-PA signs are more
common (Kulkarni & Ross, 2016; MacGregor et al., 2016). Employee education empowers
connection to resources and ethically managed communication interventions, including active
listening and interpersonal support (Conroy et al., 2023). Developing strong trusting dyadic
relationships with leaders, direct supervisors, or colleagues drives disclosure behavior and
enables an employee to receive ongoing support. Feeling safe empowers employees to share
personal information proactively and allows leaders to take positive action (Thompson et al.,
2023). Information sharing drives voice behavior to disclose IPV-PA and improves employee
mental, physical, and behavioral health outcomes, job performance, and employment longevity
(Ogbe et al., 2020). This leads to the development of the conceptual framework.
40
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework (Figure 1) supports the study. The framework shows how
psychologically safe leadership supports employee empowerment during performance struggles.
It depicts the connection between an employee’s positive experience with a psychologically safe
leader and their performance self-efficacy and positive future career outcomes. This is all related
to a positive experience with IPV-PA disclosure.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework: Psychological Safety, Employee Empowerment, and Disclosure
Outcomes
Note. From Edmondson, A. C., & Bransby, D. P. (2023). Psychological safety comes of age:
Observed themes in an established literature. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 55–78. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-
055217 and “Partner Psychological Abuse: Can You Leave Home at Work?” by M. J.
Thompson, K. Hackney, W. Crawford, J. M. Bonner, J. M., & D. S. Carlson, 2023, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 96(2), 457–472.
(https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12427). Copyright 2023 by John Wiley & Sons
41
Psychological safety creates an environment where individuals feel they will not
experience punishment, humiliation, embarrassment, or rejection when they admit mistakes,
voice concerns, ask questions, or offer ideas (Edmondson, 1999; Edmondson & Bransby, 2023).
Additionally, due to the positive impact of psychological safety on employee performance, the
framework was applied to the leadership of women who live in psychologically aggressive home
environments where psychological safety is not often present (S. Kumar & Casey, 2017;
Thompson et al., 2023). The study sought to discover key leadership behaviors connected to
psychological safety that change the women’s experience of self-efficacy and performance
failure from the perspective of women who have disclosed IPV-PA in the workplace.
Seven aspects of psychologically safe leadership behavior were measured in alignment
with the validated instrument: positive support, acceptance of differences, learning from failure,
open communication, transparency, willingness to help, and valued contribution. Open and
respectful communication of expectations creates psychological safety. Leaders who demonstrate
“mature and open communication” engage in active listening behavior (True et al., 2014, p. 637).
Leadership transparency builds trust and aids in the creation of psychological safety. Leadership
behaviors can either add to or detract from psychological safety, causing employees to speak up
or remain silent, affecting the decision to disclose IPV-PA occurring at home (Coutifaris &
Grant, 2021).
Job performance depends on a leader’s ability to develop trust, make themselves
available, provide meaning, and promote psychological safety for their employees (A. N. Li &
Tan, 2013). When leaders perceived to be competent are willing to help and offer it in a non-selfserving way, they enhance psychological safety and team performance (Mao et al., 2019). These
42
positive motivating relationships decrease employee anxiety by helping believe in their ability to
achieve and thrive in the workplace (Frazier & Tupper, 2018).
Organizational climates supportive of diversity and acceptance of differences minimize
the perception of age, gender, and race gaps and enhance learning outcomes. (Singh & Ramdeo,
2023). When an organization is psychologically safe, failure can be discussed, and feedback can
be sought and shared. Non-punitive communication generates the ability for an employee to talk
about their ideas as well as discuss and take action to implement them, giving them the
experience of self-efficacy (Mura et al., 2016). Psychological safety improves an employee’s
ability to learn from struggle and failure. It encourages employees to use their voice more when
they struggle by decreasing fear and increasing confidence in creative flexibility and originality
(Deng et al., 2019). Companies can overcome challenges when leaders empower employees to
speak up, understand the root cause of problems, and obtain innovative solutions (S. Y. Lee &
Kim, 2021). How a leader has reacted to an employee using their voice in the past can predict
whether employees feel free to speak up in the workplace (Brykman & Maerz, 2023). Voice
behavior empowers performance self-efficacy and productive struggle, particularly for women.
Gender differences between the way men and women manage struggle are linked to
performance self-efficacy. When women feel they are not meeting a real or imagined standard,
more so than men, performance self-efficacy decreases as women regulate emotion through the
attachment of beliefs to the metacognitive processing of information (Kalender et al., 2020;
Kashif & Malik, 2020). Since metacognition drives self-efficacy and achievement, psychological
safety restores parity between men and women in self-efficacy connected to creative ability,
resulting in improved performance (Hora et al., 2021; Sheffler et al., 2022). Tolerance for error
has a positive relationship with an employee’s feeling of psychological safety and performance
43
self-efficacy (X. Wang et al., 2020). Learning from failure is facilitated by a leader’s
accessibility, involvement, feedback, guidance, and assessment of progress toward success
(Smeets et al., 2021). The conceptual framework depicts the journey of psychological safety that
drives IPV-PA disclosure and its influence on the lived experience of performance self-efficacy
and struggle.
Conclusion
Employees’ lived experience with dyadic psychological safety may influence voice
behavior as well as their experiences with disclosure of IPV-PA, performance self-efficacy, and
struggle in the workplace (Conroy et al., 2023; Offergelt et al., 2019; Sheffler et al., 2022; Zeng
& Xu, 2020). Disclosure improves employment longevity and work performance outcomes for
women experiencing IPV-PA at home (Hora et al., 2021; Ogbe et al., 2020). However, due to
embarrassment or feeling unsafe, many do not disclose their home situation or speak up about
the resulting struggles with performance (Adhia et al., 2019; Erhun et al., 2022; MacGregor et
al., 2016). Silence behavior leads to poor behavioral responses to failure and a decline in selfefficacy (Nguyen et al., 2019). Psychological safety promotes failure and struggles as a learning
opportunity (Edmondson, 1999; Smeets et al., 2021). Employees may perceive workplace
struggles and their own self-efficacy differently when their leaders provide positive support,
accept their differences, communicate openly, act transparently, and demonstrate a willingness to
help (Brykman & Maerz, 2023; Detert & Edmondson, 2011).
Achievement can depend on an employee’s self-efficacy and metacognition (Sheffler et
al., 2022). Gender differences in how men and women handle failure are linked to self-efficacy.
When women feel they are not meeting a real or imagined standard, self-efficacy decreases as
they regulate emotion through the attachment of beliefs to the metacognitive processing of
44
information (Kalender et al., 2020; Kashif & Malik, 2020). Psychological safety restores parity
between men and women in self-efficacy connected to creative ability, resulting in improved
performance (Hora et al., 2021). Tolerance for error increases with feelings of psychological
safety and self-efficacy (X. Wang et al., 2020). The conceptual framework depicts the journey of
psychological safety that drives IPV-PA disclosure and its influence on the lived experience of
self-efficacy and performance failure. Understanding women’s lived experiences may help
leaders understand the metacognitive process in disclosing IPV-PA in a dyadic workplace
relationship in times of struggle.
45
Chapter Three: Methodology
Psychological safety creates an environment where individuals feel they will not
experience punishment, humiliation, embarrassment, or rejection when they admit mistakes,
voice concerns, ask questions, or offer ideas (Edmondson, 1999). This qualitative study explored
the dimensions of psychological safety in relation to the lived experience of leadership behavior.
It examined the effect of psychological safety on the disclosure of IPV-PA, the experience of
self-efficacy, and metacognition when struggling with performance. This included leadership
behaviors that increase feelings of psychological safety for women who have lived in
psychologically aggressive home environments (S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Thompson et al.,
2023). It explored the lived experience of women who have experienced IPV-PA at home and
how psychologically safe leader behavior changes the experience of how they lead today
(Edmondson, 2019; Edmondson & Bransby, 2023).
Research Questions
Three research questions guided this study:
1. What perceptions do women who have experienced IPV-PA and disclosed this in
their workplaces have about the psychologically safe behavioral characteristics, if
any, of a leader who empowered them when they struggled to perform in the
workplace?
2. How, if at all, does psychological safety affect the performance self-efficacy of a
woman experiencing IPV-PA at home when she experiences performance difficulties
in the workplace?
3. How, if at all, does the treatment by a psychologically safe leader influence the way
women who have experienced IPV-PA lead today?
46
Overview of Methodology
The research design began with a qualification survey that collected a snowball sample
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018) of 11 women who met the five criteria in Table 2.
Table 2
Study Participation Criteria and Rationale
Participation criteria Rationale Source
Located in the United
States
More than 61 million women
(48.4%) in the United States have
“experienced [PA] from their
intimate partner in their lifetime”
(CDC, 2022, p. 1).
CDC, 2022, p. 1
Identify as female Women who have experienced PA
at home are 3.1 times more likely
to exhibit cognitive impairment.
WHO [World Health
Organization], 2021
While employed between
the years 2010 and 2019,
experienced IPV-PA at
home
Allows at least 4 years between the
occurrence of PA at home and the
time of the study to ethically
protect participants, yet not so far
in the past the participants cannot
recall lived experience
Glesne, 2011; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016
Disclosed IPV-PA
occurring at home within
a dyadic workplace
relationship
Disclosure of IPV-PA at work is
important to reduce safety risks,
minimize disruptions, and ethical
treatment of the workforce.
Conroy et al., 2023; Karam
et al., 2023
Had a positive experience
with a leader when
experiencing
performance struggles
Psychological safety promotes
failure as a learning opportunity.
It may help employees perceive
struggle and their own
performance self-efficacy
differently.
Brykman & Maerz, 2023;
Edmondson, 1999;
Smeets et al., 2021
47
Psychological safety was an appropriate theoretical framework for this study because the
theory is measurable with a validated instrument (C. Grant & Osanloo, 2014). The key concepts
in the validated instrument are as follows: holding individuals’ mistakes against them, safety in
bringing up problems, rejection for difference, safety in taking risks, asking for help,
undermining of efforts, and value and utilization of skills and talent (Edmondson, 2019).
Additionally, due to the positive impact of psychological safety on employee performance, it
seemed appropriate to apply the framework to the leadership of women who live in
psychologically aggressive home environments (S. Kumar & Casey, 2020; Thompson et al.,
2023).
During the study, details about the specific characteristics of PA were not discussed to
safeguard against re-traumatization due to research participation (Legerski & Bunnell, 2010).
The elements of inequity researched include gender and power dynamics. I did not collect
information on education, the age difference between the employee and leader, or disability
status to maintain the focus of the study (Rosenberg, 2017).
The Researcher
My positionality as a woman who has lived in a psychologically aggressive home
environment and struggled with performance at work is an important consideration for this study.
It has been more than 10 years since I had this experience in the workplace. However, my history
and interest in empowering the use of voice in the workplace prompted the focus of this study.
To protect myself as a researcher, the dissertation process included reflexive journaling. This
helped me process feelings that materialized through the research and proactively mitigate the
risk of biases from my positionality and epistemology (Crawford & Knight Lynn, 2020). I
connected with and maintained contact with researcher Dr. Smita Kumar, who found healing in
48
her dissertation as a member of her participant class through heuristic inquiry (S. Kumar, 2017).
During my lived experience of failing at work with IPV-PA at home, I worked with many
leaders who did not act in a psychologically safe way. For that reason, I was mindful of biases
related to disclosure and women having psychologically safe leaders (Lindeman, 1997). To
mitigate this risk, I conducted a pre-qualification survey that did not assume or measure
psychological safety. Instead, it asked about a positive experience with a leader. Additionally,
the study focused on women who have disclosed IPV-PA occurring at home, which differs from
my experience of non-disclosure. Declining to study non-disclosure was a conscious choice to
mitigate the risk of bias. The qualifying survey also did not ask for details about performance
self-efficacy or the degree of struggle the participant was experiencing at the time (C. Grant &
Osanloo, 2014).
Although I did not foresee power issues, it was important to determine whether power
influences could affect the study. Examples included a participant currently reporting to the
leader about whom they spoke, a participant with concerns that their leader or company would
see the study, and a participant mitigating interpersonal risk with me as a researcher by engaging
in self-censorship. I mitigated these risks by asking the participant how long it had been since the
situation and the employee and employer relationship with the leader. The participants were also
assured of their anonymity and safety when participating in the study (Creswell & Creswell,
2018).
Finally, I am a cis-gender female. Economically, I am middle-class. Because I am
privileged, I was mindful of how my personal privilege impacted equity choices, particularly
when I selected study participants. Likewise, I was mindful of utilizing research as a primary
method of healing from trauma created by both my own experience of IPV-PA and being
49
marginalized for unrecognized female neurodivergence (Matias, 2016; Stibbe et al., 2020) in past
employment environments.
Data Sources
I invited candidates to participate in this study after they responded to the qualification
survey (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I obtained voluntary participation and informed consent
through disclaimers on the survey and verbal disclaimers and consent during the interviews. I
ensured confidentiality by anonymizing all names and workplaces (B. Johnson & Christensen,
2008). For this study, education, the age difference between the employee and leader, or any
disability status will not be collected to maintain the focus of the study (Rosenberg, 2017).
Participants
I used convenience sampling to recruit the participants. I located them online through the
social media sites Facebook and LinkedIn. Additionally, I used subgroups on these platforms
that attract professional women. Additionally, USC networking groups and other business
networks such as The Upside, Growth Day, and Polka Dot Powerhouse helped with word-ofmouth recruitment. I selected 12 individuals for interviews. All but one qualified to complete the
interview, resulting in 11 participants.
Data Collection Procedures
Selected candidates participated in one-on-one interviews. I based the interpretation of
the findings on themes discovered in the qualitative analysis (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
(Weiss, 1994). I recorded and transcribed interviews for data analysis and deleted them
afterward.
50
Qualitative Interviews
I held the semi-structured interviews on Zoom in an environment convenient and
comfortable for the participant (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Weiss, 1994). These lasted between
30 and 40 minutes, depending on the participants’ pacing in answering interview questions. The
interview questions are in Appendix A. Emails, social media postings, and other communications
are in Appendix B. The interview questions addressed the research questions by capturing lived
experiences related to leaders who empower those who struggle in the workplace and the
behaviors that fall inside and outside of a psychologically safe theoretical framework. Second,
the questions addressed the key concepts by specifically inquiring about the elements of
psychological safety as measured by the validated instrument. Third, the questions aligned with
the conceptual framework for the study and provided a method of inquiry to understand the
psychologically safe experiences of women who have disclosed IPV-PA, experiences of
performance self-efficacy, and their experience of struggle in the workplace. The questions also
explore the women’s career outcomes.
Data Analysis
I conducted a qualitative data analysis to make meaning from the data (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016) and recorded the interviews on Zoom. I transcribed the audio recordings utilizing
the transcription functionality of Fireflies.ai and reviewed the transcription to ensure the
completion and accuracy of the content. I discovered themes related to the conceptual framework
by conducting a manual qualitative analysis with open and a priori coding (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). I used this data to create a codebook to codify qualitative data and align data to answer
the research questions. I also undertook a manual process of theming with color-coded Post-it
notes. I captured verbatim quotes in a codebook appendix to provide a narrative to support the
51
themes discovered. I deleted all recordings after data collection and analysis to protect the
participants’ identities.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Because I am a woman who has experienced IPV-PA and workplace struggle, the fact
that I was the primary data collection instrument in this study provided a greater risk of bias that
I actively mitigated (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As mentioned in the data analysis section, to
ensure valid data collection, member checking was conducted by asking participants questions in
the pre-qualifying survey to ensure truthful qualifying responses (C. Grant & Osanloo, 2014;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Member checking also ensured that researcher bias did not lead to
misinterpreting the participants’ answers or leading them in any way (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
During the semi-structured interview, I asked 21 open-ended questions, with additional probing
questions asked when appropriate (Crawford & Knight Lynn, 2020; Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The
interview questions checked the triangulation of data by checking patterns in data through the
responses of multiple participants (Patton, 1987). A pilot of these questions fulfilled the
requirements for the four-phase process of interview protocol refinement. Research questions
aligned with this refinement, constructed through an inquiry-based conversation, and I received
feedback on the protocols (Castillo-Montoya, 2016). The questions were written and delivered in
a way that was mindful of double-barreled, leading, and loaded questions (Robinson & Firth
Leonard, 2019).
Ethics
This study was open to women who qualified and voluntarily participated. I did not
collect data in the qualification survey other than obtaining consent to provide information. Upon
52
pre-qualification, I sent the participants an information sheet and an informed consent form.
Permission was requested permission to record, which the participants granted.
At any time, the participant had the right to withdraw consent, end study participation, or
decline to answer any question. I anonymized all audio or video recordings, transcripts, and
notes, with participants’ names adjusted to preserve identity. I kept digital artifacts on a private
password-protected computer. Handwritten notes were immediately transcribed to a digital file
and shredded. Participants participated in member checking by granting them access to the
interview transcript, offering them the opportunity to clarify or expand upon any topics
discussed.
Due to the sensitivity of the material discussed, I put additional ethical measures in place
to help with the challenges, potential discomfort, and nuances of responsibility when researching
women who have lived with IPV-PA (Dempsey et al., 2016; Karam et al., 2023). I chose the date
range of 2010 to 2019 as a window for participants to allow at least 4 years between the
occurrence of IPV-PA and the time of the study to protect the participants. However, it is not so
far in the past that the participants could not recall their lived experiences (Glesne, 2011;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In addition, the interview questions did not ask about the specific PA
characteristics to safeguard against re-traumatization (Legerski & Bunnell, 2010).
53
Chapter Four: Findings
This study collected qualitative data through virtual interviews conducted on Zoom. The
purpose was to understand the lived experience of women who have lived with IPV-PA and, as a
result, struggled in the workplace. Research questions were related to their experience with their
supervisors, who empowered them to succeed when the women disclosed their home situation. I
utilized psychological safety as a framework to understand how the aspects of psychological
safety aided in the participants’ empowerment and long-term growth as leaders.
Prior to collecting interview data, I gave the participants a qualifying survey to confirm
they met the study criteria. A total of 106 women participated in the qualifying survey. I
identified 12 women to interview. I disqualified one woman from the study due to her experience
being primarily with a co-worker and not with her direct supervisor. Eleven women completed
interviews that were, on average, 30 to 40 minutes long. I identified themes based on two types
of coding. First, a priori coding was completed based on themes found in literature about
psychological safety. Second, open coding was used based on the frequency of topical mentions
during the interviews (Gibbs, 2018). When a minimum of seven women mentioned a topic, I
listed it as a theme.
Participants
Study participants (Table 3) were living in the United States and identified as female.
While employed between the years 2010 and 2019, they experienced IPV-PA at home. At some
point, the participant experienced struggles with workplace performance and disclosed IPV-PA
to their supervisor. The disclosure resulted in a positive experience with the leader. Table 3
provides context for the participants’ lived experience and summarizes pseudonyms, race,
54
location in the United States, professional role while experiencing IPV-PA, their industry, and
the gender of the leader or leaders who empowered them to succeed in the workplace.
Table 3
Participant Background Data
Participant
pseudonym
Race Location Role Industry Leader gender
Isabell Hispanic/
Native
American
Nevada Administrative
assistant
Electrical
contracting
Male and female
Dionne African
American
South Carolina Administration Military Male
Claudette Filipino
American
California Analyst Technology Female
Tiffany White California Publicist Professional
services
Female
Holly White Florida Administration Homeowner
association
Female
Sandy White California Legal K–12
education
Female
Sean White Nevada Administration Non-profit Male and female
Connie White Michigan Business office
manager
Healthcare Female
Barbara White Texas Nurse Healthcare Female
Cathy White Oregon Property
manager
Housing Male
Carrie White Oklahoma Counselor K–12
education
Female
55
Isabell
Isabell had two supervisors, one male and one female. Isabell found solace in her
supervisors’ supportive and constructive feedback when she struggled at work, which enabled
her to disclose the IPV-PA she experienced. Her leaders provided tangible assistance that helped
her perform well at her job and connected her with resources for domestic violence survivors.
Today, Isabell is an administrative assistant and spends her free time volunteering for domestic
violence charities. Isabell reported that her self-confidence and communication skills have
significantly improved because of her experience with her leaders.
Dionne
Dionne worked as a civilian for the military. She had one African American male
supervisor with whom she felt safe and comfortable disclosing IPV-PA. Her supervisor earned
her trust through open communication and practical support. Dionne believes her supervisor
fostered “psychological safety” and “professional growth.” Today, Dionne works in a different
area of the military. Dionne stated that her experience has “positively affected [her] belief in her
ability to perform well” in her role today.
Claudette
Claudette disclosed IPV-PA to a female supervisor during one of their daily coffee
meetings. Through one-on-one interactions, the supervisor nurtured Claudette’s talent and helped
her excel professionally. Today, Claudette is self-employed as a consultant. The support she
received in the past has helped her transform into a transformative leader, as evidenced by her
advocacy for women’s support networks and helping others who have encountered challenges
like her own.
56
Tiffany
Tiffany had one female supervisor to whom she disclosed IPV-PA despite being a new
employee, which gave her hesitation initially. Tiffany shared her struggles with this leader, who
responded empathetically by offering time off work and adjusting tasks. Tiffany reported that she
felt empowered and thought her supervisor’s treatment of her aligned with the organization’s
focus on workplace happiness, personal well-being, trust-building, clear expectations, and open
communication. Today, Tiffany is a publicist with the same firm. She is also a cheerleading
coach. She said she now uses her experience to “lead from a place of empathy.”
Holly
Holly worked for a homeowner association where she had a female supervisor. Holly
disclosed IPV-PA occurring at home to her leader when her husband’s controlling behavior
interfered with workplace performance, a situation requiring a creative solution. Holly
progressed professionally, as evidenced by her promotion to regional director. She works in this
role today. Holly reported that she credits her past leader for her leadership style, which was
focused on inclusivity and the recognition of individual contributions.
Sandy
Sandy had one female supervisor and disclosed IPV-PA during her divorce. Sandy said
her supervisor, whom she described as “supportive, empathetic, and non-judgmental,” provided
“crucial support” for her. Her supervisor’s consistent treatment and understanding helped her
maintain self-efficacy to “perform well despite difficulties.” Today, Sandy is a general manager
for a risk financing group. The positive experiences she experienced in the workplace shaped
Sandy’s leadership style positively, as evidenced by traits she discussed such as transparency,
trust-building, and appreciation for employee contributions.
57
Sean
Sean had one male and one female supervisor. Sean disclosed IPV-PA when she began to
visibly struggle with workplace performance. Sean reported that her leaders provided open
communication, encouragement, resources like counseling services, and legal assistance. Sean
recalled being treated with “compassion.” She recalled that the support her leaders provided
helped her regain confidence at work. Sean stated the two leaders created “a safe space for
communication.” She mentioned them offering flexibility in scheduling and work adjustments to
accommodate her needs. Today, Sean works in the state government. Sean reported the
supportive leadership she experienced had a significant impact on her self-perception and longterm belief in her abilities.
Connie
Connie worked as a business office manager for a healthcare organization in Michigan.
Connie had one female supervisor. Connie reported she disclosed IPV-PA when anxiety and
depression began to impair her focus. She recalled her supervisor demonstrated “empathy” and
“built trust” by developing “friendship” and “emphasizing self-care.” Today, Connie is in
medical billing with a large health insurance provider. As a leader today, Connie said she values
empathy, understanding, and communicating expectations when managing others.
Barbara
Barbara worked for a hospital and had one female supervisor. Barbara disclosed IPV-PA
when she was late to work, had increased conflict with co-workers, and had emotional outbursts
at work. Barbara reported she felt her supervisor’s compassionate guidance helped her “navigate
workplace conflicts” and maintain “focus.” Barbara said this “understanding” and “guidance”
helped her address performance issues. Today, Barbara is a nurse working at the same hospital.
58
She stated she values listening to others’ needs and fostering a positive work culture based on
mutual respect. Barbara credits her past experiences for shaping her empathetic approach toward
colleagues’ well-being.
Cathy
Cathy worked in the housing industry and had one male supervisor. She disclosed IPVPA to her supervisor, initially hesitating to share personal details. She slowly disclosed the
reasons behind the emotional instability she showed at work. As she did, she reported receiving
support from her supervisor that boosted her self-confidence and work performance. Cathy stated
her supervisor’s “support” allowed her to “separate personal issues from professional duties.”
Although the experience overall was positive, Cathy reported her relationship with her
supervisor became distanced 3-months post-disclosure. Today, Cathy is a regional manager in a
large property management organization. Cathy shared she was “appreciative of the empowering
effect [her] story has on others.”
Carrie
Carrie worked as a counselor in K–12 education in Oklahoma. Carrie had one male
supervisor. She partially disclosed IPV-PA to her leader to obtain work accommodations that
would allow her to support her children. She reported that her supervisor “valued open
communication and collaboration,” which contrasted with the “lack of respect and empathy” she
reported feeling from the male-dominant leadership in her organization. Carrie found
empowerment and accommodation through her supervisor’s leadership. Today, Carrie is an
associate dean at a university. She shared has learned from her past experiences to “prioritize
individual needs and open dialogue.” Carrie stated she now values “inclusivity, transparent
communication, and valuing unique contributions.”
59
Findings for Research Question 1
The first research question sought to understand the perceptions of participants who had
experienced IPV-PA and disclosed it at the workplace. The question focused on the participants'
perceptions of their leaders’ psychologically safe characteristics. The interviews discovered
several themes. These included depth and detail when communicating about struggle and six
aspects of psychologically safe behavior exhibited by the leaders.
Theme One: The Role of Trust in IPV-PA Disclosure and Communication About Struggle
Ten participants disclosed details of the IPV-PA occurring at home with their
supervisors. The same 10 participants felt psychologically safe with their leader and the
organization. According to the participants, disclosure of the IPV-PA situation created dyadic
relationships where the employees stated they could confide in and cultivate trust in their
supervisors. Carrie was the one participant who did not go into as much detail, as she felt less
safe in the organization overall. Carrie described her organization as “very male-dominant, pretty
male toxic.” Therefore, although she did disclose IPV-PA to their supervisor and trusted him, she
wanted to limit the details she provided to protect him:
The culture of the larger organization did not make it feel safe because I didn’t ever want
to put my supervisor in a position where he had to lie. And so, I just was like, if he
doesn’t know, then he doesn’t have to lie.
However, the lack of trust in the organization did not diminish her trust in her supervisor.
All 11 participants voiced that they developed confidence in their supervisor when the supervisor
was willing to offer positive, supportive leadership and transparency. For example, Isabell
referred to the reciprocity of listening to build trust, “She was always there with an ear and vice
60
versa. We would have many conversations that we could really confide in each other.” Tiffany
spoke about the balance between supervisory and peer conversations to create safety:
I think that’s actually made it the perfect mix of her being someone to confide in because
she was directly in charge of reviewing my work, and so her knowing what was going on
was helpful. But at the same time, someone who felt like a peer in terms of just, like, our
more conversational interactions made her feel like an easy, safe person.
Mutual transparency was shared, as evidenced by Tiffany’s supervisor revealing stories about
her own struggles with a personal crisis. Cathy detailed how her preconception about
“oversharing” and the potential for her to “look weak” shifted when her supervisor listened to
her disclosure and related with her by sharing a situation he had experienced:
So, I called him, and I explained to him what was going on, that there was mental, verbal,
emotional, just abuse going on, just really being transparent. And I thought I was going to
get in trouble. It was really weird because I felt like, oh, I’m oversharing, and it’s going
to make me look weak. And it was really nice because he was open, first of all, listening
to me and relating to me. Which I was really surprised about because usually people just
listen. They don’t explain to you their situation. But he had not just sympathy but
empathy for it because he really understood.
Showing empathy through mutually transparent communication helped Isabell know she was not
“the only one” who struggled in the workplace due to home situations. Isabell shared learning
about her supervisor’s experience helped her feel more human and showed Isabell that her story
could be useful to others one day:
In her experience with her abuse, she taught me that it’s okay to talk about it. I talk about
it freely for the fact that it might help somebody in the future, just like it helped me with
61
her experiences. But, yeah, she was always ready to just put it out there and say, you
know what? We’re all just human.
Like Isabell, Tiffany’s supervisor also did more than listen. By transparently sharing about
“different struggles and experiences,” Tiffany shared that the experience helped her feel “not so
alone:”
I feel like she was just transparent about different struggles and experiences she went
through. I think probably to help, like, connect with me and make me feel like not so
alone. Granted, it wasn’t at the same level of what I was going through, but she wasn’t
just a good listener. But she engaged in conversation and didn’t make me feel like I was
just word-vomiting on her. And she would share experiences in her own life, probably to
make me feel one, more comfortable to share with her and two, less alone.
Conversations such as these, between 10 participants and their supervisors, were described as
“deep,” both personally and professionally. With this depth, the participants trusted their
supervisors. The trust helped them be transparent with performance concerns about their
employees and ask questions. Asking open and probing questions helped the supervisors provide
accommodations to the participants, including time off, reassignment of job duties, specific
performance-related help, and connections to resources like counseling. The participants felt they
were listened to without judgment and received understanding and fair treatment from their
supervisors. Claudette stated the experience felt like sharing “openly with an equal:”
She would share what I would share. Like, it would be a, I treat you the same way I treat
myself. I felt like she wasn’t above me. Obviously, she was my boss. But she didn’t feel
like my boss. She felt like an equal.
62
Like Claudette, Holly referred to consistently witnessing her supervisor treat everyone equally.
“I never saw her not treat everyone equally. Everybody got the same respect and
acknowledgment.” These psychologically safe leadership traits, specifically around the
experience of disclosure, led to an additional theme around the leadership traits, which helped
the participants bring problems to their leaders’ attention.
Bringing Problems to the Leader’s Attention Post-Disclosure
Post-disclosure, every participant reported practices and policies that enabled them to
bring their struggles to their supervisor’s attention. These methods included face-to-face
conversations, going for walks, having coffee, instant messaging, and open-door communication
policies. Barbara mentioned that the open door made communication easier for her. “I’d go to
her office because she was really easy to talk to. I guess it’s that she was just open. Her door was
open. You could go in there anytime and talk to her with anything.” Similar to Barbara, Sandy
would utilize her supervisor’s open-door policy. She used the open door to communicate when
time off work was needed due to her situation at home, “I’d just walk next door and knock on her
door and say, hey, I got this going on. I need to take time off of work.” Dionne shared that the
open door also meant anything said behind it was confidential. This trust in confidentiality,
combined with her supervisor’s character, inspired her to disclose her home environment to him:
Basically, his door is always open. And whatever I said to him was always confidential. I
think because so many years of being with him and him as a person, his characteristics,
just personal conversations in the workplace, just talking to him, just working with him,
kind of motivated me to say, maybe I need to tell him.
63
Openness, trust, transparency, and willingness supported the theme advanced by the study’s
theoretical framework. The participants’ perceptions of their leaders’ behavior showed alignment
with psychologically safe behavioral characteristics.
Theme Two: Alignment With Psychologically Safe Behavioral Characteristics
The interviews found all 11 participants aligning aspects of their supervisors’ behavior
with these psychologically safe behavioral characteristics:
• open and respectful communication
• positive and supportive leadership
• demonstrated willingness and capability to help
• helping employees learn from failure or struggle
• acceptance of differences among employees
• valuing employee contributions
The participants stated these behaviors helped them feel safe to communicate and take steps to
improve performance. The leadership themes of psychological safety are combined through the
following headings (Table 4):
• open, respectful, positive, and supportive communication
• helping to learn from struggle to accept accommodation
• acknowledgment of differences and valued contribution
64
Table 4
Psychologically Safe Characteristics, Leadership Behaviors, and Perception
Psychologically safe
characteristics
Leadership behaviors Perception of leadership
Open, respectful, positive,
and supportive
communication
Frequent conversation,
encouragement, open
communication, verbal
affirmations, reminders,
coffee breaks, pointers for
improvement, reassurance,
connection to resources
Kind, non-judgmental,
concerned, gentle, willing to
provide grace, solutionsfocused, encouraging,
communicative
Helping to learn from
struggle to accept
accommodation
Listening, prioritizing for
employees, asking
questions, proactive
noticing of struggle, being
open to conversation,
coaching, verbal
affirmations
Safe, willing, capable, helpful,
caring
Acknowledgment of
differences and valued
contribution
Accepting differences in
needs, acknowledging,
providing flexibility or
time off, verbal
affirmations, frequent
praise, recognition,
gratitude, speaking up
Supportive, patient, flexible,
values and appreciates
others, empowers people,
respects others
Open, Respectful, Positive, and Supportive Communication
Every participant mentioned supervisors’ behavioral characteristics that made
communicating and bringing problems to their attention easier. These characteristics inspired the
participants to engage in open and respectful communication with their supervisors. Sean
mentioned the frequency of conversation helped her feel safe at work. “It was the support:
65
professional support and personal support. A lot of encouragement. Specifically, it was the
encouragement in making me feel safe at work. A lot of talking. It was open communication.”
Every interviewee talked about the role of communication in their ability to obtain
emotional support and resolve performance problems. Claudette spoke about receiving emotional
support through “affirmations or reminders.” Sandy recalled her supervisor provided similar
emotional support when she “came over and patted my back and brought me some tissues,” as
well as affirmed her verbally with a “you’ve got this” and “you’ll get through this.” Frequent
conversations and affirmations such as these helped the participants develop focus and
motivation to increase their confidence in their work. Daily coffee breaks with her supervisor
would help Claudette refocus when she was struggling. She characterized her workplace as a
“high-stress environment.” The conversations held during the coffee breaks with her supervisor
helped her “refocus.”
Dionne’s experience and perception of her leader summarizes the empathetic and
compassionate encouragement, reassurance, and engagement present in all 11 participants’
interviews:
He’s probably one of the few African American leaders, man or woman, who has been
empathetic and compassionate and wanted you to be successful. He’s encouraging you to
be successful. He’s giving you resources to be successful. If you need something, he’s
going to find a person to connect you with, and he wants you to propel in your career.
I’ve never experienced that.
Like Dionne, Isabell communicated how receiving reassurance, “pointers that could have made it
better,” and encouragement from her leader “was empowering” when she struggled. Similarly,
the reassurance and encouragement Barbara received from her supervisor “made her want to” get
66
to work on time. Connie connected in a similar way with her supervisor, who encouraged her and
engaged in a way that helped her access resources:
She encouraged me to seek out therapy. And I was able to see a therapist and a
psychiatrist. And she also encouraged me to take intermittent days. Like, I was having
anxiety attacks. Horrible. So, I did end up taking the intermittent FMLA.
All participants described open and respectful communication as a leadership behavior
that helped validate them, their experience with IPV-PA, and their struggle with workplace
performance. Tiffany recalled how the “constant reassuring” let her know her experience was
acceptable. Her supervisor provided tools to improve performance by sharing, “It’s okay to have
a hard time,” and encouraging her to deal with “whatever was overwhelming” by “focusing on
one thing at a time” and “getting to the other things later.”
Much like Tiffany, other participants referred to the acceptance of felt and expressed
emotion when communicating with their supervisor. Dionne recalled crying:
I would just go in his office and say, “Hey, can I talk?” And a lot of times, I would
probably break down crying. And I would be expressing to him some of the things that I
would be dealing with at home that made life a lot stressful. And I felt terrible as a person
because I always pride myself into having a quality of work completed and being a
perfectionist and just being able to perform efficiently. And just being vulnerable with
him being Black and White, saying, “Hey, I have a lot of drama going on at my house.”
Rather than focusing on the drama of the problem, conversations between the employees and
their supervisors were solution-result-based. Carrie recalled the questions asked by her “solutionfocused” supervisor:
67
We didn’t spend a lot of time perseverating on, you did this thing or you didn’t do this
thing, right. It was, “Here’s what we need to address” and what he would always ask for,
like, “How do you think you could address it?” Sometimes what I would recommend
isn’t what we could move forward with. But we could start there and continue to tweak it
until we found something that we both felt comfortable with.
Focusing on the solution helped the participants ask their supervisors questions when they
struggled in the workplace and know they were in a supportive and non-judgmental environment.
Connie recalled her supervisors’ treatment of her made her want to do a better job:
I feel like I did want to. I wanted to do well for her, and it was very difficult for me, but I
wanted to please her. She was a great boss, and she was a good friend. And, of course, I
wanted to do everything I could to make our business unit look good. But, like I said, I
was slacking.
I asked the participants to provide adjectives that reflected their leader’s behavior toward
them when they were experiencing IPV-PA. Seven women mentioned the word “supportive.”
The women saw their supervisors as a source of encouragement who would provide emotional
support, understanding, compassion, and patience. Claudette relayed a memory of providing
reciprocal encouragement to her supervisor and the encouragement the leader gave her that
reminded her she was brilliant and worthy:
It’s a wonderful thing to know that women supporting women and having that time
where, you know, you understand each other’s challenges during the workplace, that you
can give each other resources or just emotional support or affirmations, reminders,
because she would often, you know, remind me. I’m just wanting to remind you. You’re
a brilliant person. You’re. You’re worthy.
68
All 11 participants positively characterized their supervisors as non-judgmental, kind, concerned,
gentle, and willing to provide grace for the mistakes they had made. Sandy, Carrie, Sean, and
Tiffany all felt their supervisors were “genuine.” Sandy spoke about the authenticity of her
leader, describing her as “non-judgmental” and “empathetic.” She recalled, “It all came across as
very powerful. It was very genuine and very real. It wasn’t fake or phony in any stretch of the
imagination.” Consistent genuine support helped the participants accept help learning from their
struggles. This consistency helped Claudette trust her supervisor and be open to ideas from her:
That consistency was huge for me. The consistent actions with a language allowed me to
trust her, to invite more ideas to her and from her. When we would be at high risk in the
performance, I would be very candid with her and give my honest opinion, because I
knew I count on that this leader will not use that blame tone or anything which was
unproductive whatsoever.
Consistently knowing what to expect from their supervisors helped the participants trust them.
The trust they developed in their supervisors helped the participants learn from their struggles
and accept accommodation when offered.
Helping to Learn From Struggle to Accept Accommodation
Because the workplace had become a safe place to empathetically communicate without
judgment, every interviewee was open to ideas, tools, and other forms of input from their
supervisors. Having a safe place to communicate also helped them feel comfortable asking for or
accepting offers for workplace accommodations that addressed the effect IPV-PA had on their
performance. Once disclosure took place, the leaders took immediate action to help the
employees perform despite the difficult circumstances at home. Every interviewee supported a
willingness and capability to help on the part of their supervisors. The most common struggle all
69
participants reported was focus. The lack of focus was caused by lack of sleep and stress at
home. A diminished ability to concentrate and focus transferred into the work environment.
Cathy described herself as “not functional” and “immobilized.” She shared her experience
reaching out to her supervisor for help:
I actually am to the point where I am not functional. I cannot go to work tomorrow. I was
physically sick. It was a physical manifestation of emotional draining. And I was like,
okay, I got to be honest. I’ve got to call him. And then that’s when I went, and I locked
myself in the bathroom and I called him. I was at my bottom. I had hit bottom at that
point. I had hit a real low, and I hadn’t really needed to miss work prior to that because
it’s just that whole Gen X suck it up, Buttercup. You still got to go. But, no, I was going
to lose my job. I felt like I was going to lose my job if I wasn’t transparent with him. I
think that just relating to me and saying that he understood made me feel safe to talk to
him about it. And then when I was just crying uncontrollably, he just sat there and he just
listened.
Work performance was affected when the participant’s internalized emotional states evidenced
in the workplace as visible overwhelm, difficulty prioritizing, emotional reactions, poor time
management, inattention to detail, and increased mistakes. Holly shared her experience asking
her supervisor to prioritize her to-do list and the anxiety she felt about her performance:
I would sometimes just get really overwhelmed by my to-do list. And so, I would go to
her and just say, “Can you prioritize this for me?” Because I always had the sense of, if I
don’t get everything done, something bad is going to happen. And I would start to have
panic attacks at work. And she asked me what she could do to help, and I said, “I need it
prioritized.” So, she would say, “These things have to be done today. But look, you can
70
do these,” and helped prioritize and helped me see that everything is not this impending
doom that it felt at the time.
Supervisors asked many questions to determine how they could help their employees.
Tiffany spoke about tending to “move too quick” and “trying to attend to a million different
things” because she just wanted to “get through them all quickly.” She did this particularly when
things were stressful in her life, as they were at the time. Tiffany recalls her supervisor’s advice
to “slow down and to take my time, because whatever the deadline isn’t going to, like, make or
break my life. If it’s 30 minutes late and it’s done the right way, that’s better.” Like Tiffany, the
women uniformly reported struggling to complete tasks, taking longer to do their work, and
having difficulty staying present. Uniformly, the supervisors encouraged employees in various
ways to “be easy on themselves.” Sean spoke about her struggle:
I couldn’t focus. I was struggling on completing tasks, knowing what those tasks were,
and to even get through them, something that would normally take me an hour to do
probably would have taken all day. You know what? They were both different. I think it
really started because I was so emotional during that time. I wasn’t able to even think
clearly because of lack of sleep, the stress, and the emotions that came out during that
period of time. I knew also, because of that, I went to both of them and talked to them
about what was going on.
Sean shared how her supervisor had resources that she did not have. Those resources helped her
“feel okay and to start regaining that focus back a little bit.” Before engaging her supervisor and
seeking help with the problem with focus, Sean said she could not keep her “mind in one place
and focus on doing one thing.” Participants received resources such as coaching, mentoring,
access to counseling, connection to domestic violence advocacy programs, legal assistance, and
71
access to program assistance such as employee assistance programs and intermittent FMLA, a
temporary leave supplied by the federal Family Medical Leave Act. Time off and flexibility were
a common resource that was offered. Dionne recalled how her supervisor noticed she was
coming in late:
My supervisor began to notice, of course. I was coming in to work late. And to be quite
frank, because I felt that I was in a safe environment with him, I actually came out and
told him that I was experiencing some abuse at home, and that was the reason why I was
late to work or sometimes I wouldn’t even be able to perform correctly. He would notice.
He would notice that I have too many errors in my work, or I would be antisocial or just
being exhausted, feeling depleted. So, he kind of picked up on those things, and we had
an open-door policy where I communicate to him my home life.
Participants learned from their struggles and accepted accommodation from their supervisors.
However, each participant was approached in ways that acknowledged differences in their
situations and valued them as employees and individuals.
Acknowledgment of Differences and Valued Contribution
The participants’ circumstances meant their needs differed from those of their coworkers. The supervisors accepted and acknowledged the differences in the participants’ needs
to help them succeed in the workplace. All participants mentioned a need for flexibility or time
off as a necessary accommodation. Sandy felt this flexibility and time off added to the loyalty
and dedication she had toward her supervisor:
She’s just incredibly supportive of it, of what I was going through, allowing me the
flexibility at work. And it’s funny because I do believe that when leaders do that, you
72
know, when they give you a little flexibility, you get that loyalty and dedication back
tenfold from the employees. And that definitely was the case with me.
Sean also reflected that her supervisors showed “a lot of patience, a lot of flexibility” in
scheduling. When Barbara similarly experienced problems trying to focus on the natal intensive
care unit (NICU), “losing focus” on her “infant patients, their parents, or charting,” she
approached her supervisor and was granted time off.
In addition to providing a flexible working environment, the supervisors verbally
affirmed employees by telling them their contribution to the organization was valued. 10 out 11
women reported being told, outside of a performance review setting, that their work was valued
and appreciated. Value and appreciation were evidenced by the supervisors frequently praising
their employees. Claudette spoke about group recognition that took place through email and
other acknowledgment and gratitude:
Her consistent acknowledgment, celebrations of others on an email, on a, like, meeting.
“Oh, Claudette figured out that we can save $10,000, you know, this quarter.” And then,
you know, acknowledging a lot of people during the meetings is the second one. Oh, we
would leave each other dessert.
Similarly, Sandy mentioned “frequent confirmation” of the work she was doing stating her
supervisor was “very good at showing appreciation.” Carrie echoed the benefit of
acknowledgment. She mentioned that the one-on-one praise and acknowledgment she received
from her supervisor helped her despite the culture present in the rest of her school:
He would tell me all the time. Like, nobody above him would acknowledge the work that
I had done. But he would often say thank you. Or he’d send me a quick email saying,
“Hey, I just saw this thing that looks awesome. Thanks for finishing that up.”
73
When possible, as in Carrie’s case, supervisors communicated how much they valued the
participants’ contributions one-on-one. Recognition was also socialized into the supervisors’
departmental culture through group emails, meetings, and participation in games:
As the participants’ performance began to improve, recognition looked more public.
Tiffany shared that her supervisor was a “good cheerleader overall” who would “hype her up”
and share positive details with the owner about “how successful” she was with projects. “I feel
like she was always on Slack, like, cheering me on.” The supervisors’ adaptability to address the
participants’ needs evidenced itself as performance struggles were overcome. Some participants
were being given more responsibility or opportunities to receive further education. Holly’s
supervisor was supportive of her career development. She helped Holly position continuing
education as a requirement of her job. Communicating in this way made the time away to pursue
a property management license more palatable to Holly’s husband:
She handed off textbooks and other things and kept pushing for me to go get my own
license to manage in the state of Florida, which in Florida you have to be licensed and go
through a whole process. And so, she just really kept pushing that. And then that would
be something outside of the realm again of being able to do in my job duties. It’s
something you typically do on your own. So, she worded it in such a way so that my
husband at the time saw it as a job requirement. I had to go do these classes because
otherwise, it would have been extracurricular activity and been harder to do.
Holly and Sandy were “very impressed” by their supervisors’ support. Isabell said this
helped her use her voice and “stand up to authority” when needed. Leaders taught the utilization
of voice by demonstrating it. Connie recalled a time when a regional director she did not report
to was yelling at her in all caps in an email. She mentioned she was “afraid to say anything,” but
74
her supervisor would speak up. Dionne referred to her supervisor as someone who “takes care of
his people, and in return, his people always take care of him.” She mentioned her supervisor
“always defended us. He always made sure that were receiving awards and incentives, pay
incentives, PTO incentives. We always got our recognition.”
Support and recognition were individualized in the way it was delivered. Nine
participants stated that their leader respected differences between people. Isabell described her
supervisor as “a very respectable person” who “could see the goodness in sometimes very
difficult people.” Carrie explained that her supervisor, when facing difficult people, would often
“agree to disagree” and find mutually beneficial workarounds to solve problems. Tiffany said her
leader was the type that “adapts to whatever the style is of who she’s managing,” and it was not a
“one-way approach.” Connie shared how her supervisor “knew her audience and how to act
accordingly:”
Some people need a little bit more of a lighter touch. Some people need more of an
authoritarian. Some people need, based on their personality. She was able to see that and
know how to treat each person individually.
Similarly, Kat’s two supervisors paid attention to differences and used them to assign different
work to the interns according to “their abilities, their skill set, their abilities as a human.”
Respecting differences between people also included discussion about inclusivity and
equal treatment. Claudette called her leader “very inclusive.” Dionne said her supervisor
respected her “opinion and thought process and who they are.” Barbara said her supervisor “tried
to treat everybody the same” and “accommodate people.” Holly shared how her supervisor
treated everyone equally, with everybody getting “the same respect and acknowledgment.”
Leaders demonstrating psychologically safe behaviors created a dyadic relationship with the
75
participants that helped them disclose their experiences and home and receive the help they
needed to succeed in the workplace.
Summary of Research Question 1
The first research question focused on the participants’ perceptions of their leaders’
psychologically safe behavioral characteristics. The participants felt they could confide in and
cultivate trust in their supervisors to disclose IPV-PA at home. Open, respectful, and frequent
communication with mutual transparency created a supportive dyadic relationship where the
participants could bring problems to their leaders’ attention. Trust further developed and helped
the supervisors provide the participants with the resources and accommodations to succeed in the
workplace.
Because the participants saw their supervisors as non-judgmental and accepting of their
different needs, they felt more able to ask for help. The supervisors provided coaching,
mentorship, and help with prioritizing tasks, and alleviating the workload when necessary.
Consistent communication with their supervisors helped the participants learn from their
struggles with workplace performance. This allowed them to effectively address emotions and
situations connected with their home environment while meeting job requirements. Supervisors
were liberal with praise and recognition and provided opportunities for employees to continue
their education or take on new challenges as they were able. They also demonstrated inclusivity
and respect for differences in the workplace. Cultivating psychological safety within the dyadic
relationship to develop trust was a consistent theme connected to how the participants
experienced the positivity of their work environment while experiencing IPV-PA at home.
76
Findings for Research Question 2
The second research question sought to understand the perceptions of participants about
their performance self-efficacy. The question focused on how their experience with leader
behavior affected the way they perceived their ability to perform in the workplace. The
interviews discovered several themes. The participants universally experienced low performance
self-efficacy while experiencing IPV-PA. The common experience positively impacted their
workplace performance. The self-talk they learned at home transferred to the way they spoke to
themselves at work. However, proactive communication and support provided by their leaders
helped improve the participants’ performance self-efficacy.
Theme One: Low Performance Self-Efficacy While Experiencing IPV-PA
The cognitive effects of experiencing IPV-PA at home resulted in the participants
questioning their ability to perform in the workplace. All 11 participants agreed that their belief
that their ability to perform well diminished. Participants questioned their intelligence and
abilities and whether they deserved their roles. They had trouble concentrating and struggled to
get through the day. Isabell, Sandy, Sean, and Carrie questioned their intelligence and
specifically said they didn’t think they were “good enough.” Sandy remembered questioning
how “smart” she was. Isabell said she didn’t feel like she “deserved to have the role.” Sean said,
“I questioned myself and my own abilities.” Cathy said she “couldn’t concentrate” and she “felt
stupid.” Barbara and Dionne both said believing in themselves was “tough.” Dionne said despite
the affirmation her leader gave her, she didn’t think she was going to “get through it.” Holly said,
“I didn’t have a confidence in what I could do.” Connie said, “It was a lot harder to believe in
myself because I let [my husband] break me. I thought I was worthless.”
77
The sentiments the participants had about themselves mirrored the PA they were
experiencing at home. These feelings of low self-worth and self-value decreased their overall
confidence in their ability to perform. The participants reported difficulty believing in
themselves and their capabilities. Claudette reported imposter syndrome or a feeling she “didn’t
deserve to have the role” she had.
The participants experienced common workplace struggles and impacts on their
performance self-efficacy. Their belief in themselves was negatively impacted by their
experiences at home. These messages impacted the way they spoke to themselves about their
ability to perform in the workplace. Proactive leadership communication and support, such as
personal assistance, job flexibility, performance tools, asking questions, and verbal affirmations,
helped the participants’ performance improve.
Common Workplace Struggles and Self-Efficacy Experiences
All 11 women mentioned lack of focus, problems concentrating, and distraction as
workplace struggles. Cognitive interference affected the participants’ ability to perform
consistently. Cathy recalled feeling “immobilized:”
I was immobilized, and I couldn’t concentrate. I was late on my reports. I would sit there,
and I would look at my reports, and I’d be like, I have done this so many times. Why can
I not do this? I felt stupid. I was like, you lose your mojo?
Home life distractions and scheduling problems caused by experiencing IPV-PA include being
late to work, missing work days, or being unable to keep to standard hours. Sandy was distracted
by her home situation:
78
I would sit there, and I would just be staring at my computer screen or whatever because
my mind was going, you know, really a hundred different directions. Like, what am I
going to do? Where am I going to live? How am I going to take care of my son?
Seven participants reported being late to meetings, work, or turning in work. Claudette reported
how her supervisor would respond when she would occasionally show up to meetings late after
experiencing an instance of IPV-PA at home:
“You’re usually punctual. You were late, you know, 5 minutes, but I got you.” That’s
what she would say, “I got you. I just was wondering if you’re okay.” And the reason
why I would be late was I would be driving. This was before remote work, so I would be
driving, crying to work, and I had to take a minute to go to the bathroom.
Lack of sleep and mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and acute stress
further interfered with the participants’ ability to cognitively process and fulfill the requirements
of their jobs. Connie recalled depression, anxiety, and walking on eggshells due to her partner
texting her at work. “Eventually, it got to the point where I became so depressed and so anxious.
I was walking on eggshells all the time, and I started having anxiety attacks. I’m trying to work,
and he’s texting me.” Increased mistakes, struggling to or taking longer to complete tasks,
missing deadlines, or other issues increased the participants’ concern they were not performing
well. Sean mentioned that her “lack of sleep, the stress, and the emotions” interfered with her
ability to “think clearly because of lack of sleep, the stress, and the emotions that came out
during that period of time.” Sean “went to both of them and talked to them about what was going
on” and asked for “grace from both of them.”
Struggles with performance resulted in mounting frustration in the participants.
Experiencing this increased the overwhelm they felt. Barbara voiced that it was difficult to
79
“manage personal life and work life.” Some performance difficulties resulted in emotional
instability. She recalled being “so touchy with, you know, feelings, and every little thing that
would bother me” that she began to argue with or “blow up at” other employees. Like Barbara,
Cathy also began to have problems with her co-workers when she began to disengage from the
team she managed. She withdrew and became “less available to them.” Isabell and Dionne both
mentioned being in a “dark place.” There was a sense of hopelessness. Dionne was not sure she
would make it through her ordeal:
It was very challenging. Very challenging. I mean, it got to the point where I didn’t think
I was going to get through it. It’s one of those situations where you can’t see the light at
the end of the tunnel.
All 11 participants experienced distress caused by a combination of their experiences at home
and their fear of underperforming in their jobs. The anxiety caused by this fear and distress
affected their self-talk at work.
Self-Talk Affected by Experience With IPV-PA at Home
The participants’ self-talk at work began to mirror the messages they received at home.
They began to believe they could not do anything right when they made mistakes. Isabell did not
feel she was good enough for anything:
Oh, it was super challenging for hearing all the horrible things that were said to me by
that person, as a person, that I am trying to tear you down, and just hearing all the
nastiness, it brings you down to a level where you’re like, well, I’m not good enough for
anything.
Learning better self-talk was described as difficult. Like Isabell, Connie mentioned that it was “a
lot harder” to believe in herself. The abuse she was experiencing impacted all aspects of her life:
80
It definitely was a lot harder to believe in myself because I let him break me. I thought I
was worthless. And then, of course, I started slacking at work, and then that made me feel
worthless. So, then, he was right. And just the whole change that I went through as being
a victim of him changed everything in my whole life. I mean, from my family to my
friends to my job, my home, my whole life changed.
Consistent communication within the framework of psychologically safe leadership behavior
helped them change the way they spoke to themselves.
Theme Two: Proactive Communication and Support Builds Performance Self-Efficacy
All 11 participants felt supported by their leaders through proactive communication and
ongoing support. The support provided included job flexibility, education about tools to improve
performance, and other forms of personal assistance. All participants mentioned their leaders
asked questions and provided consistent mindset reinforcement through verbal affirmation.
Cathy felt that just talking to her supervisor helped her “breathe” and give herself “grace” when
she was “hard on” herself and had “lost confidence.” Talking to her supervisor helped her
“regain confidence.” Her supervisor’s approach to her struggle helped her reframe her view of
“rough days”:
When I would have rough days, I knew that, okay, this is not just the end. This is just a
crap day, and tomorrow will [be] better. Not every day looks the same. Our best is
different every day.
To improve detail orientation and decrease the overwhelm caused by not knowing how to
approach their workloads, the supervisors encouraged the participants to take their time, slow
down, and review their work. Some supervisors would remind them to remember what they
81
could control. This strategy, used by her supervisor, removed the urgency-based time pressure
Holly felt when customers were “lined up” waiting for service:
She came to me, and she said, “This is like a baseball game.” She said, “I don’t care if
they’re all lined out the door. Nobody’s going to do anything to you. Nothing’s going to
happen, and you are the pitcher, and until you pitch the ball, they’re just going to be
standing there.” Because I would see three or four people lined up and think they’re all
about to just jump me because I’m not immediately fixing their needs because I was so
used to doing it immediately, you know? And so, she was constantly telling me that.
The interviews reflected that the supervisors engaged in servant leadership, putting themselves in
a position to support the participants to help improve their performance. This included creating
plans to achieve greater comfort at work. Carrie recalled her supervisor supported her in
separating herself from the main office to gain focus. She would “go down there to focus on
what needed to be done immediately.” Other forms of separation include supervisors telling
employees to take breaks, take a walk, or take time off. Isabell’s supervisor provided a variety of
strategies and tools to help her focus:
She always told me to kind of take my time, sit back, review everything, kind of take it
in. Pros and Cons was a big thing for her, just to kind of list them out. But she just kind of
said, you know what? Stop. Take a deep breath. If you need to take a walk around the
building, do that. But don’t just dive in with your eyes closed. You have to focus. If you
need to come in my office and scream at the top of your lungs for a quick second, you
can do that, too.
Eight participants mentioned their supervisors would see struggles or emotional reactions and
take steps to provide immediate support. Supervisors noticed inconsistent performance, less
82
engagement, and physical signs of emotional distress. Isabell recalled her supervisor would give
her “unending tools of support” just to help her “get through the day sometimes.” Holly recalled
the intuitive support she received when her supervisor saw her “struggling to focus or be there”:
She would say, hey, are you okay? And I’d say, I’m fine. And she’s like, are you sure?
And like I said, later on, I found she had some own experiences herself that made her
more in tune. And so, she would say, “Hey, did you get sleep? Hey, what have you gotten
to eat? You know what? I think let’s go grab some lunch together.” And, so, really, she
was just very intuitive.
Holly is one of 11 participants who mentioned their supervisors asked them questions, which
enabled them to accept support or ask for feedback from the supervisors. Some of these
questions were proactive based on employee behavior the supervisors observed. Supervisors set
aside one-on-one time with the participants. They presented different approaches to solving
problems and focused on finding creative solutions. When possible, the supervisors provided
specific advice or provided options.
Candid conversations about performance were had in a tone of non-judgment. This tone
allowed for reciprocal idea sharing that allowed the supervisors to help. Connie shared how her
supervisor set up a non-judgmental conversational environment:
I had made the comment once, like, okay, look, don’t judge me. But she’s like, Connie, I
would never judge you. I’ve had situations in my own life that weren’t the most pleasant
things. I’m not here to judge you. I’m here to listen to you, and I’ll do whatever I can to
help you, but you have to help yourself too.
Although supervisors asked questions and offered non-judgmental support, the participants took
the lead on disclosure of situations at home that interfered with performance. The resulting
83
conversations allowed supervisors to share their experiences and provide a support system for
the participants. Tiffany referred to her supervisor as a “cheerleader” who provided “tough
feedback.” She recalled the feedback was not on “who you are as a person,” and I wasn’t a
“direct reflection” of who she was. “It was just obviously whatever work needed to be corrected
or done better or done differently, whatever it was, and it was more about the work than me.”
The support the participants received alleviated workplace pressure, which improved their
performance. Sean mentioned, “It was like being dug out of a hole. … They helped dig me out
and pull me out. The support, the words that they said.”
When leading, the supervisors were perceived as mentors, cheerleaders, and teachers of
perseverance. In addition to communicating in a supportive way, the participants talked about
barriers the leaders removed to make workloads more feasible. The supervisors removed time
pressure from tasks. Supervisors protected the participants and the quality of the work by
reassigning or choosing to occasionally complete portions of assignments themselves. Holly
remembered a time when her leader acted as her safety net when giving her more responsibility:
She told me one time, she said, “It’s like a baby bird kicking out of the nest.” She said,
“I’m going to start giving you more responsibility and do it.” And she said, “I’m not
going to micromanage. I’m just going to let you do it.” And I was like, “No, tell me what
to do” because I couldn’t make any choices at that time without someone telling me
exactly what to do because that’s what I had been used to. And she said, “I’m going to let
you start making some choices, but just know I’m a safety net.” So she said, “You might
feel like you’re falling, but I promise I won’t let you hit the ground and crash and burn. I
want to see you succeed in this career.”
84
The support the leaders provided to help increase the participants’ performance self-efficacy was
individualized. Connie mentioned her supervisor “knew her audience” and “how to act
accordingly.” She said, “Some people need different things, based on their personality. She saw
that and knows how to treat each person individually.” Individualized support provided through
consistent, proactive communication helped improve the participants’ self-talk and enhanced
their ability to believe in themselves and their ability to perform well in the workplace.
Summary of Research Question 2
Research Question 2 explored women’s experience with the belief they had in their
ability to perform well when they were experiencing IPV-PA at home. It also explored what
impact, if any, the leader had on their belief. Each participant described the need to perform in
their jobs while they were in variations of a mental “dark place.” Believing in themselves and
their ability to perform was difficult. Their home environments reinforced negative beliefs about
their performance and self-worth. Cognitive interference affected the participants’ ability to
perform consistently. The interviews reflected that the supervisors engaged in servant leadership,
putting themselves in a position to support the participants to help improve their performance
self-efficacy. Supervisors asked questions and offered non-judgmental support to open the door
to transparent conversations. These conversations would allow supervisors to encourage the
participants, offer solutions, and help them remove performance barriers.
Findings for Research Question 3
The third research question sought to understand the long-term experience of the
participants. The question focused on understanding how their leader’s psychologically safe
behavior impacted the participants’ ability to perform long-term. The question also sought to
understand the participants’ leadership experience today, considering their positive experience
85
with their leader. The interviews discovered several themes. Their experience was a catalyst for
empowerment, performance self-efficacy, and future demonstration of empathetic leadership.
Ten participants had a positive view looking back at their experience. They reported the
experience empowered their growth as leaders today.
Theme 1: Experience Was a Catalyst for Empowerment, Performance Self-Efficacy, and
Future Demonstration of Empathetic Leadership
The support the participants received helped them achieve more confidence in themselves
and their work today. Empowerment and improved performance self-efficacy have helped the
participants succeed long-term in their careers. Every interviewee was employed.
All 11 participants grew to have a positive workplace attitude, both during their experience with
IPV-PA and long-term. The shifts the participants experienced included a feeling of
empowerment and a greater belief in their ability to perform in the workplace. Increased
confidence, improved communication skills, and empathy created a foundation for career
stability. Cathy now has five direct reports and is a regional manager. She still uses skills learned
from her former supervisor to “communicate more” and not to “hold things inside.” She recalled
her experience sharing her workplace struggles. “It helped me to not feel so immobilized, like
trying to stuff everything down, so just more transparent.” Isabell credits her experience being
transparent in the workplace for helping her not take things personally at work:
It kind of, like, opened my eyes a little bit. You don’t know what someone’s going
through, so kind of take it with a grain of salt. It took me to a place that if I was ever in a
supervisorial position, that I could pay it forward.
86
Nine participants experienced little to no job instability. Barbara is still a staff nurse at the same
hospital. Where she once had conflict with fellow nurses, Barbara is now more empathetic when
considering what others experience in the workplace:
I’m still a staff nurse. In the same place. Like I said, you just never know what kind of
day people are having and just being nice. And if they are going through something, just
listen and maybe try to give your professional advice.
Seven participants spoke specifically about being a “mentor” to others today. The
participants spoke about being non-judgmental, understanding, helping, and caring about others.
Sandy said her leader “mentored as a leader without realizing that she was doing that.” Sandy
reports she has “definitely mimicked” traits that mirror her psychologically safe leader, including
“her sense of appreciation for the employees, her sense of support and mentoring.”
Sandy and Dionne both mentioned how their experience with their leader has caused them to
“mimic” their behavior. Dionne adopted the characteristics of her leader and “how he takes care
of people,” building her into an “empathetic and compassionate” leader:
I would say he motivated me to and encouraged me to work and be confident in my work.
And in terms of leadership, I’ve somewhat mimicked how he takes care of people, as in
putting the employee first before work, which may sound a little crazy, but it’s too much
research out here that shows that if you provide certain amenities or incentives to
employees or you just compassionate, and you just see employees for who they are as a
person, that actually productivity increases. So, that’s the approach that I’ve taken in my
life, in my workplace, in my career, is being empathetic and compassionate.
Although their experience with IPV-PA at home created struggle in their lives and ability to
perform in the workplace, the participants largely viewed the experience as positive. The
87
experience they had with their leader turned a difficult situation into one for learning,
development, and growth.
Looking back at their experience, 10 participants saw it as positive. The positive outlook
related to the leaders’ consistency in the participants’ belief in their ability to perform well. Over
time, with the guidance of their supervisors, the participants grew more empowered, used more
positive self-talk, and began to “laugh again.” Sean spoke about the impact this had on her ability
to believe in herself:
When somebody in the background is saying things over and over, you believe them.
And the same goes for everything positive. You believe that. And I think that
empowerment really kind of stuck with me. It really helped. At first, I didn’t think I was
good enough to get the job done. Once they took a bigger role in my professional work,
in my career, I knew I could do it.
The participants received credit for the work they did by their supervisors, which taught them to
give credit to themselves and others. And they learned “it’s all right to make mistakes.” Whereas
mistakes at home would equal consequences, mistakes at work became opportunities for grace
and learning. Through this experience, they learned they could give themselves grace as well.
Isabell described “a warm and welcoming feeling,” knowing her supervisor “makes mistakes,
too.” She shared about an “open-door policy” where “anytime you have questions, anytime you
have difficulties, just let’s talk about it” as “refreshing.” The participants learned how to openly
ask questions and talk about their difficulties. Consistent leadership behavior helped them learn
to trust their supervisors. Carrie mentioned it helped her be more transparent as a leader:
I think, as a leader, I’m pretty transparent. So, I think it’s a risk to share parts of yourself
with others. But I’m totally willing to do that because I think, you know, if others can
88
learn from things that I’ve experienced and not have to fully experience it themselves.
Right? But I also learn from others. I felt heard, and I think that’s powerful, you know,
feeling heard, feeling seen. And so I appreciate that and try to replicate that.
The participants began to feel they were good at their jobs rather than lacking intelligence or
ability, as they previously believed. This resulted in the participants questioning their ability less,
developing more self-confidence, and valuing themselves, their own dignity, and worth. The
leaders had a significant impact on the participants, helping them “in every aspect,” pulling them
out of the dark place they were in. The participants’ experience with their leader helped give
them confidence that they can succeed and do well. The treatment they received from their
supervisors provided an example of psychologically safe leadership to carry on.
Theme 2: Experience Empowered Growth as a Leader Today
Nine out of the 11 participants advanced to a leadership role. The participants use the
same words and act similarly to their past supervisors when they can empower other employees
or those who report to them. Participants spoke about having an opportunity to “pay it forward,”
and, as some of their supervisors shared their stories, the participants now can share their own.
They are open to talking about their experience to others if they feel it will help. The participants
spoke about having “a voice.” They began to “stick up” for themselves and reported feeling
“heard and seen.” Standing up for herself had been a new experience for Carrie and is now
common practice for her today:
She started letting me learn to have a voice and tell somebody no in things. And then that
translated to realize the world doesn’t come crashing down just because I didn’t do
something someone wanted, which was my belief at that time. If I didn’t make everyone
89
happy and do whatever anyone told me to do, my world kind of did come crashing down.
So, she kind of helped me see that wasn’t always the case.
The participants now ask questions and advise others when needed. They provide regular
appreciation and support for their employees. Holly shared about the programs she has
implemented “to help the first line people be seen.” She’s also “brought some companywide
changes” to make disclosure safe:
It’s an offline type of program for all of my managers who work for me now so that if
they need to communicate something, it’s not going through their company phone or our
email. I’m using separate third-party apps so they feel like they can share things with me
in confidence that won’t go into their files.
Claudette describes herself now as a “transformational leader.” She has turned her experience
into a passion for supporting women and credits her leader for it:
She’s a constant reminder for me that leadership doesn’t have to be transactional. It can
be more than that. Because of her, I’m gonna give her all the credit that I became an
advocate for women in leadership, especially in executive leadership.
The women appreciate the power of vulnerability, compassion, and supportive leadership in the
workplace. Sean uses this in her work as a leader in youth and juvenile services. She claims the
“communication” and understanding “everybody’s different” she learned from her supervisors
“provided a huge baseline” for her to use. “Everybody goes through their own struggles, and you
have to show compassion to that but also give them the tools that a leader should give to their
staff.” The participants claimed to be approachable mentors who provide feedback in an
empathetic way. Those who are managers say they engage in “open communication.” Tiffany
said her employees today can be transparent with her and “talk about anything”:
90
I try to be approachable in a way that the people that I manage feel like they can talk to
me about anything. If they’re having a hard time getting their work done because of
XYZ. Like, I want them to be able to tell me versus feel like they just have to get things
done and essentially please me as manager.
They take a compassionate, non-judgmental, and patient approach to leadership. Connie took the
way she was treated by her supervisor and uses it to inform how she treats others today:
It’s made me a lot like her, being so open to me and not being judgmental and giving me
advice and letting me vent to her. I think that’s helped me to be that way with other
people, not necessarily in the same situation, but in other trying situations as well.
The participants spoke about the techniques they use in the workplace today. The participants
transformed into open-minded leaders who listen, recognize others, provide praise, and
communicate authentically. They seek to remove barriers and reach solutions like their leaders
did with them while they were experiencing IPV-PA.
Summary Research Question 3
Research Question 3 explored how their leaders’ treatment influences how the
participants lead today. The support the participants received helped them achieve more
confidence in themselves and their work. The shifts the participants experienced included a
feeling of empowerment and a greater belief in their ability to perform in the workplace. The
participants ultimately felt they were good at their jobs. Empowerment and improved
performance self-efficacy have helped them succeed long-term in their careers. Increased
confidence, improved communication skills, and empathy created a foundation for career
stability. The participants grew to have a positive workplace attitude, both on the job during the
difficult experience and long term. The leaders had a significant impact on the participants,
91
pulling them out of the dark place they were in. The participants continued in their careers to
model the psychologically safe leadership behavior they received when they were experiencing
IPV-PA. The participants considered leaders to be “mentors” and “friends” who created a “safe
zone” that helped shape them to become the empathetic leaders they are today.
Emerging Theme: The Workplace as a Compartmentalized Safe Zone
The interviews with the participants discovered one emerging theme. Eight participants
expressed gratitude for their “safe” workplace. After the participants disclosed their home
environment to their supervisors, the workplace became a place of “separation of home life from
work life.” Claudette mentioned she felt “safe,” and the environment felt “constructive” and
“caring.” Sandy referred to the workplace as her “safe zone:”
I was able to really use work as a safe environment and kind of a silo where I could
concentrate and be away from all of that, you know, kind of all of that drama. It was my
safe zone. So, after those first few days became a place that I did not have to think about
what was going on in the outside world, that I could really silo myself, kind of
compartmentalize myself and concentrate on work and not worry about that. But I don’t
know that I would have been able to do that if I had not been given the support in that
safe space from my boss.
It became a “home away from a chaotic home” where the participants could receive
“professional support, personal support, and encouragement.” It became a place where they
knew they would be praised, lifted up, and empowered, unlike the environments they faced at
home. Like Claudette, Dionne felt the workplace was “a home away from a chaotic home. Truly
a safe space to be” when the “door is always open.” Supervisors became someone the
participants could “confide in” and then “leave it behind” for a moment so they could perform in
92
the workplace. Cathy spoke about the separation between home and work she felt after she told
her supervisor about the IPV-PA she was experiencing at home:
After I talked to him, I really felt this separation of home life from work life because
when I was going through this, and I had nobody understanding what was going on, it
was like it transferred. Usually, you walk through the door, and it’s gone. And that was
there. I was bringing home with me all the time, and I felt after the conversation that I
was able to separate that, I guess.
Like Cathy, Tiffany spoke about separating from what was happening at home, stating the office
made it “a lot easier to separate whatever was happening at home because I wouldn’t have to be
directly dealing with it.” Sandy also mentioned trying to separate work and home, “I tried to
separate the two so that I had something that I was good at and that was mine and that wasn’t
being, like, pulled down and taken down by that other person.” Disclosure, resources, and
accommodations allowed the participants to separate home from work. This separation improved
their belief in and ability to perform.
Summary of Findings
Open, respectful, and frequent communication with mutual transparency created a
supportive dyadic relationship where the participants could bring problems to their leaders’
attention. The trust that was developed helped the supervisors provide the participants with the
resources and accommodation they needed to succeed in the workplace. Because the participants
saw their supervisors as non-judgmental and accepting of their different needs, they felt more
comfortable asking for help. The supervisors provided coaching, mentorship, and help with
prioritizing tasks, and alleviating the workload when necessary. Consistent communication with
their supervisors helped the participants learn from their struggles with workplace performance.
93
This allowed them to effectively address emotions and situations connected with their home lives
while meeting job requirements. Supervisors were liberal with praise and recognition and
provided opportunities for participants to continue their education or take on new challenges as
they were able. Cultivating psychological safety within the dyadic relationship was a consistent
theme connected to how the participants experienced the positivity of their workplaces.
Secondly, all participants described the need to perform in their jobs while they were in
variations of a mental “dark place.” Believing in themselves and their ability to perform was
difficult. Their home environments reinforced their negative beliefs about their performance and
self-worth. Lack of focus, problems concentrating, and distraction were workplace struggles.
Cognitive interference affected the participants’ ability to perform consistently. The interviews
reflected that the supervisors engaged in servant leadership, putting themselves in a position to
support the participants to help improve their performance self-efficacy. Supervisors asked
questions and offered non-judgmental support to open the door to transparent conversations,
encouraging the participants, offering solutions, and helping to remove performance barriers.
Lastly, the support the participants received helped them gain confidence in themselves
and their work. The shifts included empowerment and a greater belief in their workplace
performance. The participants began to feel they were good at their jobs. Empowerment and
improved performance self-efficacy enabled their career success due to their increased
confidence, improved communication skills, and empathy. They developed a long-term positive
workplace attitude. The leaders had a significant impact on the participants, pulling them out of
the dark place they were in. The participants continued in their careers to model the
psychologically safe leadership behavior they received when they were experiencing IPV-PA.
94
The participants considered leaders to be “mentors” and “friends” who created a “safe zone” and
helped shape them to become empathetic leaders.
95
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
Chapter Five discusses the study’s findings, how they connect to the literature, and how
they align and misalign with the findings of similar studies. The chapter presents three
recommendations for practice, supported by the evidence collected in the study conducted and
through the literature review. It also provides evidence-based suggestions aligned with this
study’s findings. The recommendations are integrated into a comprehensive program with a
suggested sequence of activities and methods to use for implementation. Limitations and
delimitations of the study are discussed, along with recommendations for future research that
will help address the problem of practice. I offer a programmatic approach to apply the
recommendations when encountering instances of IPV-PA occurring at home and in other
employee disclosure scenarios, which may necessitate the need for accommodation. This chapter
concludes with implications for equity and connection to the mission of the Rossier School of
Education and a conclusion to the study.
Discussion of Findings
This study resulted in four findings that explore the connection between psychological
safety, trust, disclosure, performance self-efficacy, and the workplace environment.
• Psychologically safe leadership behavior, when practiced transparently and
consistently, helps build the trust necessary for women experiencing IPV-PA to
disclose their experience and receive accommodation, which, in turn, helps improve
performance.
• Proactive and positive leadership communication supports performance self-efficacy
in women who experience IPV-PA.
96
• Positive leadership experiences empower future career success for women who
experience IPV-PA.
• The workplace can act as a compartmentalized safe zone for women who experience
IPV-PA to improve their performance outcomes.
Consistent Psychologically Safe Leadership Behavior, Trust-Building, and Disclosure
The first finding of this study is that psychologically safe leadership behavior, when
practiced transparently and consistently, helped participants build the trust necessary for them to
disclose their experience with IPV-PA and receive accommodation. The support the participants
received helped them improve their performance. This study found psychologically safe behavior
on the part of a leader, practiced one-on-one, empowered the participants, and inspired safety in
IPV-PA disclosure. Participants shared that their supervisors demonstrated psychologically safe
leadership behavior through open, respectful, positive, and supportive communication. The
empowering communication received from their leader helped the participants learn from their
struggles. Consistent communication further built trust, resulting in the participants embracing
their need for accommodation and understanding the value of their contribution to the
organization.
This finding aligns with literature that explores aspects of the topic, including Conchie
(2013), who discussed how employees feel safer utilizing their voice when they have a
transformational leader. Battaglia et al. (2003) asserted that communicating openly, providing
accessible resources, and demonstrating respect are tools healthcare providers can use to build
trust with IPV survivors. Other recent studies explore inclusive leadership, motivating language,
positive relationships, and psychological safety as facilitators of domestic violence disclosure
97
(Heron & Eisma, 2021), reporting errors in healthcare (S. E. Lee & Dahinten, 2021), and the
development of self-leadership traits (Mayfield & Mayfield, 2021).
This can be applied to the problem of disclosure of IPV-PA to improve the short and
long-term performance outcomes of women in the workplace. Leaders can support employees by
engaging in open communication with motivational language, positive relationship-building
skills, and supportive policies, structures, and training to help cultivate and maintain a
psychologically safe working environment. Policies and procedures can be created to help
leaders address sensitive situations with empathy and respect and readily provide resources when
needed. These measures, which facilitate leadership communication, can help improve
performance self-efficacy and improve performance outcomes for those experiencing IPV-PA at
home when they struggle in the workplace.
Leadership Communication and Performance Self-Efficacy
The second finding of this study is that proactive and positive leadership communication
supported performance self-efficacy in the participants. This study found consistent
communication within the framework of psychologically safe leadership behavior helped the
participants change the way they spoke to themselves. The participants reported that negative
beliefs about their ability to perform and self-worth were reinforced by experiencing IPV-PA.
The study found the lack of focus, problems concentrating, and distraction they experienced
produced cognitive interference that affected their ability to perform consistently. Servant
leadership, constructive feedback, recognizing effort, encouragement of risk-taking, and creative
solutions helped participants see their leaders as supportive of them. Supportive behavior helped
improve the participants’ performance self-efficacy. The study also found asking questions and
offering non-judgmental support opens the door to transparent conversations. Transparent
98
conversations allowed supervisors to offer encouragement and solutions, which helped remove
barriers to performance for participants.
This finding aligns with literature that explores aspects of the topic, including work by
Ottu and Inwang (2017), who explored the development of high self-efficacy among those
experiencing IPV-PA to assist in overcoming challenges and succeed in the workplace. Wu and
Parker (2017) examined leadership support in predicting workplace success for vulnerable
populations. Additional literature supports this finding with studies that show setting and
monitoring goals influences employee behavior and job performance (A.-C. Wang et al., 2022),
the positive impact of mentoring, support, and networking on self-efficacy (Sarkar, 2022), and
improved employee outcomes created by transformational leaders (Bush et al., 2020).
This can be applied to transform the approach to performance struggle. Leaders can
support employees by viewing employee struggle as an opportunity to ask questions, engage in
servant leadership, and remove barriers to performance success. Policies and procedures can be
created to help leaders empathetically question performance difficulties and provide nonjudgmental, constructive feedback. The concept can be applied as an enhancement to or
replacement of performance review structures, offering a coached, solution-oriented, mastery
approach to addressing performance difficulties. When these supports are provided, they
contribute to a positive leadership experience as well as future career success for those who have
experienced IPV-PA at home and struggled with workplace performance.
Positive Leadership Experiences and Future Career Success
The third finding of this study is that positive leadership experiences empowered future
career success. This study found empowerment and improved performance self-efficacy helped
the participants avoid erratic job histories and succeed long-term in their careers. Erratic job
99
histories are common to this demographic (Jones-Sewell, 2017; Showalter & McCloskey, 2021;
Showalter, 2016). The participants revealed that their experiences with their leader provided
them confidence they could succeed and do well. The study shows that increased confidence,
improved communication skills, and empathy created a foundation for career stability. The
participants continued in their careers to model the psychologically safe leadership behavior
from which they benefited.
This finding aligns with the literature on women who have experienced IPV-PA,
including the workplace’s role in providing resource accessibility, self-discovery, experiences of
success (S. Kumar & Casey, 2020), and supplying financial and personal empowerment
(MacGregor et al., 2021). Studies have found that leaders can nurture potential (Sharififard et al.,
2020). Multiple studies have found that leaders can create hope and agency to help ethnic
minority women achieve their career and educational goals (D’Amico Guthrie & Fruiht, 2020;
Mousa et al., 2021; Otaye-Ebede & Shaffakat, 2022).
This can be applied to how organizations make resources available for those who
experience IPV-PA. Leaders can support employees by receiving training and practicing skills
that empower employees, nurture potential, and create hope and agency to help develop
employees’ performance self-efficacy. Policies and procedures can reward leaders for their
achievements in employee empowerment and nurturing employee potential. Making resources
accessible is the first step in intentionally designing organizations that supply empowerment,
nurture potential, and create agency and hope. This helps position the workplace as a safe zone
that helps improve performance outcomes for women experiencing IPV-PA at home.
100
The Workplace as a Safe Zone to Improve Performance Outcomes
The fourth finding was that the workplace acted as a compartmentalized safe zone for
participants who experienced IPV-PA. A workplace they felt was safe improved their
performance outcomes. This study found separating the experience of IPV-PA at home from the
working environment was possible through disclosure and receiving resources and
accommodation. Their leaders’ psychologically safe behavior and the resources they provided
made the separation possible. Separating work from home enabled the participants to improve
their belief in and ability to perform and remain present at work.
This finding aligns with the literature on aspects of this topic. Studies conducted in the
United States (Giesbrecht, 2022) and Europe (Lelebina & Lemière, 2024) outlined the role
workplaces can play in responding to and supporting those experiencing IPV-PA. Pio and Moore
(2022) explored workplace disclosure of IPV-PA in South Asia, considering culture and the
acceptance of voice utilization. Supportive policies and training for those experiencing IPV-PA.
A longitudinal study addressed organizations’ fostering employee well-being and improving
overall workplace performance (Weziak-Bialowolska et al., 2020).
This can be applied to how organizations educate leaders about how to create healthy
compartmentalization between work and home. Disclosure can be achieved by inspiring the
healthy and safe use of voice through both psychologically safe leadership behavior and
organizational preparedness to handle disclosure of IPV-PA and other needs for resources and
accommodation. Policies and procedures can be created to research and keep the resources
available to employees current. The availability and accessibility of employee accommodation
should be reviewed to supply employees experiencing IPV-PA with the time off, flexibility, and
resource accessibility they need to succeed in the workplace. The workplace can play a role in
101
responding to and supporting those experiencing IPV-PA to help improve well-being,
performance self-efficacy, and career outcomes for women experiencing IPV-PA at home.
Recommendations for Practice
Considering the four findings of this study and the supporting literature, I present three
recommendations:
• Develop policies to support the intentional design of a psychologically safe,
empowering workplace that is a safe space for those experiencing IPV-PA at home.
• Design processes, training, and systems to support leadership’s ability to act in a
psychologically safe, empowering, and supportive manner.
• Create accountability by investing in internal stakeholders and building compliance
responsibility into job roles and company culture.
The following sections discuss support for recommendations through policy change. I will also
suggest organizational design and systems to support implementation. Next, to ensure
communication and understanding of how to support and develop dyadic psychological safety, I
will recommend training solutions and employee empowerment strategies. The last is a strategy
for developing the workplace as a safe zone. These recommendations support the intentional
design of a psychologically safe and empowering safe zone for employees to disclose IPV-PA
(Table 5). While these recommendations are aligned, there is no implication that these activities
must occur at the same time.
102
Table 5
Recommendations for Practice
Recommendation Activity 1 Activity 2 Activity 3
Develop policies to
support the
intentional design
of a
psychologically
safe, empowering
workplace that is a
safe space for those
experiencing IPVPA at home
(Giesbrecht, 2022;
Kulkarni & Ross,
2016; Showalter et
al., 2024).
Additions to physical
safety policies to
include
psychological safety
Policy to enforce
problems with
workplace bullying
and other
disempowering
behaviors
Creation of IPV-PA
safe space policy and
revised open-door
policies
Design processes,
training, and
systems to support
leadership’s ability
to act in a
psychologically
safe, empowering,
and supportive
manner
(Aranzamendez et
al., 2015).
Processes to support
execution of a
psychologically safe
working environment
Training on
psychological safety,
empowering
communication,
resources for IPV-PA
Systems selected to
support training and
processes, including
additions to
knowledge base or
interactive process
roadmaps
Create individual
accountability by
investing in internal
stakeholders and
building
compliance
responsibility into
job roles and
company culture
(Connell, 2017).
HR policy compliance
and addition of
psychological safety
responsibilities into
roles supporting
physical safety for
risk management
Establishment of
workplace safety
liaison, learning and
development team to
support training
execution, pre-and
post-learning metrics
Leadership KPIs
created to hold
leaders accountable
through surveys and
360 reviews
103
Recommendation 1: Develop Policies to Support the Intentional Design of a Psychologically
Safe, Empowering Workplace as a Safe Space for Those Experiencing IPV-PA at Home
This study found that psychologically safe leadership behavior, when practiced
transparently and consistently, helps build the trust necessary for participants to disclose their
experience and receive accommodations to help them improve their performance. Additionally,
the National Safety Council’s SAFER survey reported a connection between physical and
psychological safety (National Safety Council, 2023). The survey showed that employees who
speak up to report hazards and issues without fear of judgment, reprisal, or other personal
consequences contribute to developing safe workplaces (National Safety Council, 2023). Finally,
open-door policies as a stand-alone may not empower employees and develop meaningful
leader-employee connections, as employees may not utilize an open door if leaders are not
proactive in initiating communication (Badjie et al., 2020; Bani-Melhem et al., 2021; Hassan et
al., 2019).
Therefore, I recommend four policy changes or developments take place.
• If not present already, add psychological safety mandates and guidelines to safety
policies to empower employee voices.
• Mitigate the risk of employee silence by adding or enhancing policies to enforce
employee behavioral issues, including workplace bullying and other disempowering
behaviors.
• Create a safe space policy for employees experiencing IPV-PA at home. Assure
policies are inclusive, time off, flex time, supportive resources, and protective
measures for the workplace (Giesbrecht, 2022; Kulkarni & Ross, 2016).
104
• Revise or create proactive open-door policies that empower leaders to creatively
connect with employees who report to them. Include provisions for the development,
maintenance, and accountability of processes, training, and systems to support these
enhanced or new policies.
Recommendation 2: Design Processes, Training, and Systems to Support Leadership’s
Ability to Act in a Psychologically Safe, Empowering, and Supportive Manner
This study found that proactive and positive leadership communication, along with
psychologically safe leadership behavior, supported performance self-efficacy. Participants
reported that their positive leadership experience with their psychologically safe leader
empowered their future career success. The literature shows that empowerment, which is
essential for improving motivation, productivity, performance, and satisfaction, begins with
understanding how individual employees are motivated and empowered (Price et al., 2004;
Sahoo et al., 2010; Vu, 2020). This evidence provided both through this study and the literature
supports the need for processes, training, and systems to support the implementation of programs
to support leadership’s ability to act in a psychologically safe, empowering, and supportive
manner.
Process
Processes can be created to support the execution of a psychologically safe working
environment on a cross-functional basis. This study and others agree that processes should be
reviewed to enable the organization to be receptive to and prepared for disclosure of IPV-PA and
performance struggles requiring accommodation (Giesbrecht, 2022; Kulkarni & Ross, 2016).
Organizational leaders should develop process roadmaps for risk management and human
105
resources, specifically to co-create processes that aid in developing the workplace as a safe space
for IPV-PA disclosure (Showalter et al., 2024).
Training
This study’s findings align with other studies which state there is a need for training in
the workplace on how to recognize, respond to, and provide accommodation and resources for
those experiencing IPV-PA at home (Giesbrecht, 2022; MacGregor et al., 2021). The program to
develop structures to develop the workplace as a safe zone would include training for l managers
and non-managers to create a respectful environment that supports disclosure and transparency
by preparedness to offer resources and accommodation, including employee assistance programs
(Pollack et al., 2010). Training to support proactive open-door policies can teach leaders to leave
their workspace and develop one-on-one connections with employees. Proactive dyadic
connection strategies will provide them with the framework and strategies to observe employee
behavior, exercise compassionate inquiry skills, and use empowering and affirming language to
enhance the quality of one-on-one communication (Aranzamendez et al., 2015). The curriculum
would also include training on how to compassionately inquire and actively close gaps in
resource and accommodation needs, including education on resources to address adverse mental
and physical health effects (Bacchus et al., 2018).
Systems
Systems can be selected to support processes and training. This study found participants
were receptive to utilizing text messaging or systems such as Slack for communication. This can
be expanded to include training and delivery of systems for leaders to learn how to create dyadic
psychological safety. “Online advisory systems” can also be used to deliver on-demand
information to support employee empowerment or safe workplace strategies for those
106
experiencing IPV-PA (M. Li et al., 2012, p. 35). Training accessibility can be improved by
offering training modules and micro-learning through learning management systems.
Knowledge-intensive experiential learning support groups could be offered both online and
offline to teach psychologically safe approaches to sensitive situations (Cauwelier, 2019; Gimby,
2024; Sanner & Bunderson, 2015). Additions to the knowledge base or interactive process
roadmaps could also help with training accessibility. Artificial intelligence and machine learning
could be used to provide internal resource searches for leaders and employees, supporting the
study’s findings about the need for accommodation and immediate resource availability tailored
to specific employee needs (Rathore & Singh Rathore, 2024). Systems rollout would be
supported by training to maximize user adoption.
Recommendation 3: Create Accountability by Investing in Internal Stakeholders and
Building Compliance Responsibility Into Job Roles and Culture
This study found that a leader’s ability to behave in an empowering way and their
preparedness to provide resources can make a difference in a participant’s experience during
disclosure. The literature shows that disclosing IPV-PA can be empowering or negative and
fearful (Heron & Eisma, 2021). An organization’s preparedness and ability to provide resources
and accommodation enable employees to compartmentalize the home and working environments
(Blodgett & Lanigan, 2018; Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Lantrip et al., 2015). A climate of support
and safety can be achieved when roles and accountability are clear.
Organizational structures should include a workplace safety liaison (Giesbrecht, 2022)
with specific training to help leaders communicate, act, and appropriately respond to IPV-PA
disclosure. These responsibilities can be integrated into those of the employee responsible for
occupational health and safety compliance, a risk manager, or the human resources department.
107
Leaders who have direct reports can also build key performance indicators (KPIs) into their
review structures to allow for accountability for psychologically safe leadership behavior (Miao
et al., 2019).
Programmatic development can be a time-consuming and costly process for
organizations, resulting in loss of momentum due to complexity in decision-making and
difficulty in creating processes, which can result in longer times between development and
execution as well as struggles with program quality (Filiak & Zavadovska, 2022). Additionally,
smaller organizations may lack the resources to develop a comprehensive integrated program
that meets their needs. Therefore, considering these four recommendations, I offered an
integrated program to guide these organizations.
Integrated Recommendation: The Disclosure Enablement, Preparedness, Training, and
Helping Program
The recommendations have been integrated into a comprehensive disclosure enablement,
preparedness, training, and helping (DEPTH) program. The program aligns with this study’s
findings by helping enable disclosure-friendly environments and aiding organizations in
preparing for disclosure when it occurs. The DEPTH program content aligns with this study’s
findings by providing safe space policies, dyadic psychological safety training, and assessments.
Although the initial versions of the DEPTH program will be created with IPV-PA in mind, the
program framework could be used for various types of employee needs disclosure.
The DEPTH program will consist of a policy and operations kit supported by a training
kit (Table 6). The domestic violence disclosure preparedness kit will include
• IPV-PA safe space policy
• Change management framework
108
• HR and risk management guidelines
• IPV-PA safe workplace assessment
• IPV-PA safe leader assessment
• Course 1: Recognition, response, and accommodation for employees experiencing
domestic abuse
• Course 2: How to connect with employees struggling with job performance
• Course 3: Developing a workplace safe for domestic violence victims for both
management and non-management
109
Table 6
DEPTH Program Kit
Kits Contents Elements
Policy kit Model policies to adjust to
organizational needs.
Policies:
Psychological safety policy
Disempowering behavior
policy
IPV-PA safe space policy
Proactive open-door policy
Operations kit Processes to support execution
of a psychologically safe
working environment
Tools:
Change management
framework
Job description enhancements
HR and risk management
guidelines
Sample KPIs
Model processes
System recommendations
Training kit Training on psychological
safety, empowering
communication, resources for
IPV-PA, creating an IPV-PA
safe workplace
Courses:
Recognition, response, and
accommodation for employees
experiencing domestic abuse
How to connect with
employees struggling with job
performance
Developing a workplace safe
for domestic violence victims
(management and nonmanagement)
Strategies to have a proactive
open door
Compassionate communication
Assessment kit Pre- and post-assessment to
monitor topical mastery in
practice
Assessments:
IPV-PA safe workplace
assessment
IPV-PA safe leader assessment
DEPTH leader knowledge
assessment
110
The DEPTH program was created within the four levels of the Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) new world model (Figure 2) to ensure effective training, which is a
significant portion of the integrated recommendation.
Figure 2
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick New World Model
Note. From Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation, by J. D. Kirkpatrick & W. K.
Kirkpatrick, 2016. Association for Talent Development. Copyright 2106 by Association for
Talent Development.
111
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick New World Model
The Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) new world model supports the effectiveness of
training by working backward through four levels: results, monitoring and adjusting to achieve
desired behavior, anticipated learning, and audience reaction (Figure 2). Leading indicators of
success and desired outcomes measure the results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). On-the-job
learning, reinforcement, reward, encouragement, monitoring, and adjustment reinforce
behaviors. Learning supports the growth of knowledge, skills, attitudes, learner confidence, and
commitment. Reactions are measured through engagement, relevance, and customer or employee
satisfaction. Key performance indicators for the DEPTH program (Table 7) allow learning and
development leaders to track the program’s efficacy.
Table 7
DEPTH Program Key Performance Indicators
Level Description Key performance indicators
Results Results are an organization’s
ability to realize certain
outcomes, a result of a
training program and the
support provided around the
program.
Employees trust their
supervisor enough to disclose
IPV-PA occurring at home.
Employees feel a supportive
1:1 connection with and feel
empowered and helped by
supervisor.
Employees view the workplace
as a safe space.
Behavior Behavior is a program
participant’s application of
their learnings in
practice
Leader demonstrates
Open, respectful, positive, and
supportive communication
Helps others to learn from
struggle
Encourages employees to
accept accommodation when
needed
112
Level Description Key performance indicators
Acknowledges the differences
between others and their
performance needs
Shows employees they are
valuable to the organization
Lives policy changes through
example
Connects with direct reports
one-on-one outside of review
periods or corrective actions
Compassionately addresses the
workplace needs of
employees experiencing IPVPA at home.
Learning Learning is a program
participant’s acquisition and
adoption of attitudes, skills,
and knowledge, with the
ability, confidence, and
commitment to demonstrate
the knowledge they have
Leaders have comfort and
confidence executing the
DEPTH program skills on the
job and feel skills are
valuable and worthwhile in
their work.
Leaders ask for coaching or
feedback on DEPTH program
execution when needed.
Leaders feel the master trainers
have helped boost their
confidence to execute skills
on the job.
Leaders identify one-on-one
relationships where processes
and skills can be applied.
Reaction Reaction is a program
participant’s perception of
the training as relevant,
engaging, and favorable to
them as employees.
Employees believe the program
improves their well-being
Employees believe it builds a
supportive community inside
the workplace.
Leaders believe the knowledge
gained through the program
is favorable and relevant to
their work.
Leaders believe they can
empower, communicate with,
113
Level Description Key performance indicators
and assist employees with
sensitive needs.
Leaders are engaged and
satisfied with the DEPTH
training.
Leaders execute what they have
learned through their work
with employees.
Level 4: Results
Results are an organization’s ability to realize certain outcomes as a result of a training
program and the support provided around the program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The
questions to be asked after program implementation in an employee engagement survey were
created from the findings in Chapter Four of this study and aligned with the literature review
conducted in Chapter Two. The engagement survey should reflect the following results:
• Employees would trust their supervisor enough to reveal a need for workplace
accommodation to them if necessary.
• Employees feel they have a supportive 1:1 connection with their immediate
supervisor.
• Employees feel their immediate supervisor empowers them to do their best work.
• Employees consider the workplace to be a place that is safe for them to be.
• If employees have disclosed a need for support due to a sensitive situation, they feel
their supervisor has been helpful to them.
The leading indicators for program success include observable employee involvement and
engagement, employee work quality, and, in the case of service industries, customer satisfaction.
114
Level 3: Behavior
Behavior is a program participant’s application of their learnings in practice (Kirkpatrick
& Kirkpatrick, 2016). The critical behaviors created by the DEPTH program include the
following leadership actions, which are psychologically safe behavioral characteristics and
behaviors discovered because of this study’s findings and literature review:
• Leaders engage in open, respectful, positive, and supportive communication.
• Leaders help others to learn from struggle.
• Leaders encourage the acceptance of accommodation when needed.
• Leaders acknowledge the differences between others and their needs.
• Leaders recognize and demonstrate they value others’ contributions.
• Leaders understand and live policy changes through example.
• Leaders take time to connect with direct reports one-on-one outside of review periods
or corrective actions.
• Leaders compassionately address the needs of employees experiencing IPV-PA at
home by observing employee behavior, inquiring and actively closing gaps in
resource and accommodation needs using empowering and affirming language,
including providing education to the employee on available resources.
The drivers of these behaviors include on-the-job learning, job aids, coaching, and recognition
(Carter & Youssef-Morgan, 2022) as a DEPTH leader who has completed the training program.
Additional driver feedback loops during coaching will train the leader on modeling empowering
behaviors while minimizing the potential for adverse emotional effects (López-Cabarcos et al.,
2021). Feedback loops support learning behaviors and help leaders serve as transformational
coaches who are culturally supported by the organization (Lyons & Bandura, 2020). Executing
115
DEPTH principles can help leaders empower employees experiencing IPV-PA and improve
performance.
Level 2: Learning
Learning is a program participant’s acquisition and adoption of attitudes, skills, and
knowledge, with the ability, confidence, and commitment to demonstrate the knowledge they
have (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The following learning KPIs were created through
reflection on a literature review demonstrating how leaders can increase confidence in their
ability to execute what they have learned (Edwards & Kloos, 2022; Poitras et al., 2021).
1. Leaders know and feel comfortable and confident as servant leaders executing the
DEPTH program skills on the job.
2. Leaders carry an attitude that skills learned through the DEPTH program are valuable
and worthwhile in their work.
3. Leaders are encouraged to ask for coaching and feedback from their DEPTH program
master trainer on how to address employees or fulfill the policy requirements.
4. Master trainers, created through a train-the-trainer element of the DEPTH program,
can help boost leaders’ confidence.
5. Leaders can identify one-on-one relationships where processes and skills can be
applied to help master trainers prepare them for on-the-job scenarios.
Level 1: Reaction
Reaction is a program participant’s perception of the training as relevant, engaging, and
favorable to them as employees (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). A literature review supplied a
list of ideal reactions to the DEPTH program, which can be measured during a post-training
assessment.
116
• Leaders feel their engagement in the learning process of the DEPTH program has led
to increased employee well-being by training servant leadership skills (Meuser &
Smallfield, 2023).
• Leaders feel the DEPTH program has helped build a supportive community inside the
workplace (Meuser & Smallfield, 2023).
• Leaders feel knowing how to create one-on-one psychological safety is favorable and
relevant to their work because it helps those who report to them be more creative,
innovative, and resilient (Vito et al., 2023).
• Leaders see the benefit of having psychologically safe relationships in the workplace,
tools to empower and communicate with employees, and the ability to assist them
with sensitive needs (Edmondson & Bransby, 2023).
• Leaders are satisfied with their training.
• Leaders felt engaged with the training.
• Leaders execute what they have learned through their work with employees.
DEPTH Program: Change Management and Implementation Timeline
Change management for the DEPTH program is supported through a combination of
Kotter’s eight stages of change, which helps develop organizational buy-in through strategy,
guiding coalitions, shared vision, and reinforcement (Kotter, 2012) and the McKinsey 7S model
to analyze organizational structures present for change (Waterman et al., 1980). A combined
change model integrates these two change models with concepts from human design (Figure 3).
This design seeks human-centered ways to improve engineering and has been applied in
innovation management (Auernhammer & Roth, 2021). Integrating human design into these
steps will help organizations create change in a way that is personalized, effective, and
117
sustainable long-term, leading to greater engagement and well-engineered, equitably developed
programs (IDEO, 2011).
Figure 3
Combined Change Model: McKinsey 7S, Kotter’s Eight Stages, and Human Design
Note. Adapted from Human centered design toolkit (2nd ed.) by IDEO, 2011. Copyright 2011 by
IDEO. Adapted from The 8-Step Process for Leading Change, by J. Kotter, 2012. Kotter
International. (https://www.kotterinc.com/8-step-process-for-leading-change/) Copyright 2012
by Kotter International. Adapted from “Structure Is Not Organization,” by R. H. Waterman, Jr.,
T. J. Peters, & J. R. Phillips, 1980, Business Horizons, 23(3), 14–26.
(https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(80)90027-0). Copyright 2024 by Elsevier B.V.
118
The eight stages utilizing this combined model are as follows, noting change is rarely
linear in nature. This model guides organizations to drive urgency by developing and reinforcing
shared values by aligning with an implementation strategy (Kotter, 2012).
The first stage is to develop strategy as an executive team, gaining input from employee
data and a guiding coalition. The second stage is to utilize the coalition to adjust policies to suit
the organization’s needs, develop processes and systems, and define project timelines (IDEO,
2011). The third stage is to create a vision for successful implementation and adjust the project
timelines as needed. The fourth is to communicate about the project and its vision to the
workforce (Kotter, 2012). The fifth is to empower management and non-management employees
through training, reinforced into the leadership style, practices, and culture of the organization,
keeping the needs of the workforce in mind (IDEO, 2011; Kotter, 2012; Waterman et al., 1980).
The sixth is to identify and celebrate the quick wins achieved, reinforce the wins, and learn from
any gaps discovered in the leadership style, practices, and culture of the organization. The
seventh is to consolidate by reinforcing the changes, building on the momentum from the quick
wins, removing obstacles, adjusting as needed, and maintaining urgency around the program
(Kotter, 2012). Last, the change will need to anchor into the culture to stick (IDEO, 2011). This
can be accomplished through human resources, learning, development, and operational
processes. Human resources could adjust hiring and job descriptions, utilizing the newly aligned
roles to identify, empower, promote, and recognize leaders who champion DEPTH principles.
The learning and development function can provide ongoing training, measuring skill mastery
through communicated and measured KPIs. Operations can integrate processes and systems into
the organization, including implementing knowledgebase systems and activating cross-functional
119
teams to close feedback loops and improve internal communication (IDEO, 2011; Kotter, 2012;
Waterman et al., 1980).
Change needs and implementation timelines will vary among organizations and require
careful planning and consideration of sponsors, stakeholders, and communication strategy
(Packard, 2021). Leaders must allow time to proceed mindfully through the change process as it
matches the organizational style and plan to reinforce training and coaching as applicable
scenarios occur (A. M. Grant, 2010). If new systems are adopted, add time to the operations
alignment to align systems and processes and assure system and process adoption through
extended training time. These timelines may adjust depending on the resources available in the
organization.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study focused on understanding the lived experience of women who experienced
and have disclosed to their supervisors IPV-PA occurring in their home environment. It sought to
understand how psychologically safe leadership behavior helps women succeed when they
struggle in the workplace. It further sought to understand the long-term effects of
psychologically safe leadership on women.
There were four known limitations outside of my control. The first pertains to the
limitations of the participants’ memories or how they recalled their lived experiences. Secondly,
the time since or the participants’ connection to trauma could have hindered their recollections of
their experiences. Third, the participants’ truthfulness and good intent in their responses posed
limitations. Lastly, an assumption in this study was that participants identified what performance
struggle meant to them.
120
I made six decisions, or delimitations, that bounded the study. First, I collected data
collection only from women who have experienced IPV-PA in the home. This study did not
consider women who grew up with IPV-PA during their formative years or experienced PA in
the workplace. Second, I collected data through the lived experience of those who identify as
women. I did not ask questions about sex at birth or trans-identification. Although men are
affected by IPV-PA at home, I did not collect data about their lived experiences. Third, I did not
collect data on those who did not disclose the IPV-PA in the home. This study included only
women who disclosed their situation in the workplace. Data did not consider COVID-19 effects.
As the dates of IPV-PA and the work experience were between 2010 and 2019, the effects of
COVID-19 on IPV-PA or the work experience were not explored. Fourth, I collected data only
for women who held a full-time position at the time they experienced IPV-PA and struggled with
workplace performance. This aligned with the third research question, which asked about current
leadership and career effects. Full-time work as an employee allowed sufficient time and
opportunity for career development to answer the research question. Lastly, this study was not
evaluative. It sought to capture lived experiences and not to evaluate existing programs for
women living with IPV-PA who struggle with workplace performance.
Recommendations for Future Research
Based on the limitations and delimitations of this study, the following recommendations
for future research are provided. This study focused on women who disclosed IPV-PA occurring
at home. Limited literature was found on women who do not disclose IPV-PA, their reasons for
non-disclosure, and their experience with workplace performance. While seeking participants for
this study, some participants who did not qualify stated they did not have a positive workplace
experience with disclosure. Therefore, additional research should be conducted on the lived
121
experience of women who disclosed IPV-PA and did not have positive workplace experiences,
performance, or career experiences. This study measured the experiences of women who
experienced IPV-PA between 2010 and 2019. This decision did not consider post-pandemic
workplace experiences, including the effects of remote work and other post-pandemic
environments. The study did not evaluate the DEPTH program or any existing workplace
accommodation program for women living with IPV-PA. Evaluative studies are needed to
provide further evidence of program efficacy. Finally, silence culture and non-disclosure impacts
several diverse marginalized groups where the utilization of voice is important. Studies about
how the topic affects diverse marginalized groups where disclosure would assist with
performance improvement would be beneficial. This would include studies about the disclosure
of elements of identity, disability, or specific invisible disabilities affecting learning, such as
neuro-divergence and autism. These additional studies will further academic work studying
disclosure to improve workplace equity.
Implications for Equity and Connection to the Rossier Mission
This dissertation was written in alignment with the mission of the Rossier School of
Education, as it sought educational equity in the workplace to prepare leaders to address
inequities related to employees who experience abuse at home. The psychologically safe,
empathy-driven approach offered here translates research to practice and inspires thought for
future policy to protect employees and organizations from risks to safety and performance.
Disclosing IPV-PA at the workplace is not a cultural norm, as only 40% of workplaces in the
United States have formalized programs or policies to address the effects of domestic violence
on the workplace. This work elevated the voices of marginalized and silenced groups will be
through, allowing women to speak up to receive accommodation when they struggle with
122
workplace performance. The implications for empathy training can improve the lives of
historically marginalized groups with 75.54 million working women (Statista, 2024),
approximately 1.4 million LGTBQ+ owned businesses in the United States (National Gay and
Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, 2016), and 12.3 million Black and minority-owned businesses
(U.S. Department of Commerce, 2023) improving the opportunity to learn psychologically safe
leadership skills and improving employee outcomes in diverse and urban settings.
The methodology utilized in this dissertation sought to capture the voices of African
American, Native American, Hispanic, and Filipino voices to consider, value, and respect the
context of the experience through the cultural lenses of these nationalities. This work calls for
additional research on these and other ethnic groups who have been impacted in various ways by
silence culture. Additionally, although the difference did not visibly affect the data, two women
identified as bisexual. I respected the micro-cultures present throughout the United States in
participant selection. I collected data from participants in eight states who held a variety of
managerial and non-managerial roles. Their educational backgrounds varied, ranging from a high
school diploma to a doctorate.
This dissertation sought to inform those in leadership positions and interrogate the
systems of power to leverage creativity to marshal support for employees who struggle in the
workplace (Anderson et al., 2014). It interrogated how reporting structures can empower and
elevate women in IPV-PA situations who may be more vulnerable to revictimization in the
workplace (Bellot et al., 2024). This work encourages leaders to utilize their positions to
reinforce a company’s duty to protect workers via policies and practices that support and prepare
them for disclosure of incidents, ideas, identities, or instructional needs. I hope that the thinking
and research provided in this work demonstrate how to empower employees to succeed in the
123
workplace through psychologically safe and empathetic communication. Empathy-driven
educational programs such as these may help resolve organizational problems related to human
risk, employee performance, turnover, lost quality, and revenue.
Conclusion
Psychologically safe leadership behavior, when practiced transparently and consistently
(Shea et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2023), helps build the trust necessary for women experiencing
IPV-PA at home to disclose their experience and receive accommodation, which will help them
improve their performance at work (Frazier & Tupper, 2018; M. Kim & Beehr, 2023).
Developing strong trusting dyadic relationships with leaders, direct supervisors, or colleagues
drives disclosure behavior and the ability for an employee experiencing IPA-PA to receive
ongoing support. Proactive and positive leadership communication supports performance selfefficacy in women who experience IPV-PA. Positive leadership experiences empower future
career success for these women.
The workplace can act as a compartmentalized safe zone for women who experience
IPV-PA to improve their performance outcomes. Separating the experience of IPV-PA at home
from the working environment to improve safety, functionality, and productivity in the
workplace (Giesbrecht, 2022) is made possible through the enablement of disclosure.
Organizations’ preparedness, resources, and accommodation enable employees to
compartmentalize home and work environments (Chowhan & Pike, 2023; Foucreault et al.,
2018; Lantrip et al., 2015). A climate of support and safety can be achieved when managers and
non-managers learn how to recognize and respond to IPV-PA to develop a safe workplace
(Giesbrecht, 2022; Glass et al., 2016).
124
Based on these findings, three recommendations have been made to assist organizations
with this problem. First, leaders can receive training on understanding, developing, and
maintaining psychological safety on a one-on-one basis to improve employee outcomes in an
equitable and employee-centric way. Leadership training can be provided to support the concept
of a proactive open-door policy. The policy and related educational supports would teach leaders
to leave their workspace and develop one-on-one connections with employees. Third, beginning
with the vulnerable population of individuals who disclose IPV-PA occurring at home, create
comprehensive policies to support time off, flex time, and protective measures for the workplace
(Giesbrecht, 2022; Kulkarni & Ross, 2016). Develop operational structures through people,
processes, systems, and policies to develop the workplace as a safe zone to create a respectful
environment where disclosure and transparency are supported by preparedness to offer resources
and accommodation, including employee assistance programs (Pollack et al., 2010).
These three recommendations have been integrated into a proposed comprehensive
DEPTH program to enable disclosure-friendly environments and help organizations prepare for
disclosure when it occurs. The DEPTH program will be comprised of a training sequence and
policy kit. The training sequence focuses on leadership training of dyadic psychological safety
and proactive open-door communication strategy. The program includes manager and nonmanager safe zone training (Pollack et al., 2010) and a proactive open-door (Badjie et al., 2020;
Bani-Melhem et al., 2021; Evans et al., 2023) and safe zone policy kit (Giesbrecht, 2022; Glass
et al., 2016). It will be supported by the development of assessments, observation guides, online
micro-learning, experiential learning, and quick-to-access job aids (Carter & Youssef-Morgan,
2022; Cauwelier, 2019).
125
The DEPTH program was created with a result-first approach within the framework of
the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) new world model to assure effective training
operationalization. The model considers learning behavior, attributes, and leadership reactions to
education surrounding preparedness for employee disclosure. Limitations and delimitations of
the study were reinforced by suggested opportunities for future research.
This dissertation was written with the mission of the Rossier School of Education at the
University of Southern California in mind. These findings are important because they show one
leader can make a significant difference in the lives of their employees when they empower them
in times of struggle. The study also found employee equity, performance self-efficacy, and longterm positive career outcomes are achievable when organizations commit to psychologically safe
practices, including policies, training, and systems that support leadership behavior that inspires
disclosure of needs. When organizations are prepared for how to respond to disclosure, they are
better equipped to provide resources and accommodation, which mitigates risks around
incidents, instructional gaps, innovation, and issues surrounding employee identity.
Organizational preparedness on how to address IPV-PA disclosure is particularly important as
the career outlook for women experiencing IPV-PA at home shows low performance selfefficacy, increased errors in the workplace, erratic job histories, and poor long-term career
outcomes. This study showed that the future for these women can change with the influence of
one psychologically safe leader.
Finally, silence culture is born from the cultural normalization and reward of keeping
silent. Disclosure matters because without it, leaders lack data about their organizations, and
employees do not ask for the education or accommodations they need to do their jobs well.
Companies lose employee trust. Loss of trust incentivizes employees to protect themselves by
126
remaining silent, which results in the loss of employees and revenue. It is a cycle that can be
broken.
127
References
Abdelrahman, R. M. (2020). Metacognitive awareness and academic motivation and their impact
on academic achievement of Ajman University students. Heliyon6(9), Article e04192.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04192
Adhia, A., Gelaye, B., Friedman, L. E., Marlow, L. Y., Mercy, J. A., & Williams, M. A. (2019).
Workplace interventions for intimate partner violence: A systematic review. Journal of
Workplace Behavioral Health, 34(3), 149–166.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2019.1609361
Ahmed, E. I. (2023). A systematic review of authentic leadership literature in educational
research from 1997 to 2021. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 1–
39. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221120467
Ajjawi, R., Bearman, M., Sheldrake, M., Brumpton, K., O’Shannessy, M., Dick, M., French, M.,
& Noble, C. (2022). The influence of psychological safety on feedback conversations in
general practice training. Medical Education, 56(11), 1096–1104.
https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14881
Alami, A., Zahedi, M., & Krancher, O. (2023). Antecedents of psychological safety in agile
software development teams. Information and Software Technology, 162, Article 107267.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107267
Algner, M., & Lorenz, T. (2022). You’re prettier when you smile: Construction and validation of
a questionnaire to assess microaggressions against women in the workplace. Frontiers in
Psychology, 13, Article 809862. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.809862
AlHashmi, M., Jabeen, F., & Papastathopoulos, A. (2019). Impact of leader–member exchange
and perceived organisational support on turnover intention: The mediating effects of
128
psychological stress. Policing, 42(4), 520–536. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2018-
0081
Alsaker, K., Moen, B. E., Baste, V., & Morken, T. (2016). How has living with intimate partner
violence affected the work situation? A qualitative study among abused women in
Norway. Journal of Family Violence. Journal of Family Violence, 31(4), 479–487.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-016-9806-2
Andersen, P. A., & Guerrero, L. K. (1996). Principles of communication and emotion in social
interaction. In P. A. Andersen & L. K. Guerrero (Eds.), Handbook of communication and
emotion: Research, theory, applications, and contexts (pp. 49–96). Academic Press.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012057770-5/50005-9
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A
state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of
Management, 40(5), 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
Aranzamendez, G., James, D., & Toms, R. (2015). Finding antecedents of psychological safety:
A step toward quality improvement. Nursing Forum, 50(3), 171–178.
https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12084
Argenti, P. A. (2017). Strategic communication in the c-suite. International Journal of Business
Communication, 54(2), 146-160. https://doiorg.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1177/2329488416687053
Arriaga, X. B., & Schkeryantz, E. L. (2015). Intimate relationships and personal distress: The
invisible harm of psychological aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
41(10), 1332–1344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215594123
129
Auernhammer, J., & Roth, B. (2021). The origin and evolution of Stanford University’s design
thinking: From product design to design thinking in innovation management. Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 38(6), 623–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12594
Bacchus, L. J., Ranganathan, M., Watts, C., & Devries, K. (2018). Recent intimate partner
violence against women and health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort
studies. BMJ Open, 8(7), Article e019995. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019995
Badenes-Ribera, L., Frias-Navarro, D., Bonilla-Campos, A., Pons-Salvador, G., & Monterde-iBort, H. (2015). Intimate partner violence in self-identified lesbians: A meta-analysis of
its prevalence. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 12, 47–59.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-014-0164-7
Badjie, G., Thoyib, A., Hadiwidjojo, D., & Rofiq, A. (2020). Testing the relationship of
employee empowerment and organisational performance. Jurnal Analisis Bisnis
Ekonomi, 18(2), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.31603/bisnisekonomi.v18i2.3732
Bai, M., Zheng, X., Huang, X., Jing, T., Yu, C., Li, S., & Zhang, Z. (2023). How serving helps
leading: Mediators between servant leadership and affective commitment. Frontiers in
Psychology, 14, 01–09. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1170490
Bani-Melhem, S., Quratulain, S., & Al-Hawari, M. A. (2021). Does employee resilience
exacerbate the effects of abusive supervision? A study of frontline employees’ selfesteem, turnover intention, and innovative behaviors. Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
Management, 30(5), 611–629. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2021.1860850
Basit, A. A. (2017). Trust in supervisor and job engagement: Mediating effects of psychological
safety and felt obligation. The Journal of Psychology, 151(8), 701–721.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2017.1372350
130
Battaglia, T. A., Finley, E., & Liebschutz, J. M. (2003). Survivors of intimate partner violence
speak out: Trust in the patient-provider relationship. Journal of General Internal
Medicine, 18(8), 617–623. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21013.x
Bellot, A., Muñoz-Rivas, M. J., Botella, J., & Montorio, I. (2024). Factors associated with
revictimization in intimate partner violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Behavioral Sciences, 14(2), Article 103. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14020103
Beppari, S., & Chowdhury, S. (2021). Stress, anxiety, and depression amongst working mothers
in the IT industry. International Journal of Professional Studies, 12(1), 23–31.
https://www.ijps.in/abstract.php?id=77
Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond:
Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication
Research, 1(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x
Blodgett, C. & Lanigan, J. D. (2018). The prevalence and consequences of intimate partner
violence intrusion in the workplace. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma,
27(1), 15-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2017.1330297
Borchers, A., Lee, R. C., Martsolf, D. S., & Maler, J. (2016). Employment maintenance and
intimate partner violence. Workplace Health & Safety, 64(10), 469–478.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2165079916644008
Branicki, L., Kalfa, S., Pullen, A., & Brammer, S. (2023). Corporate responses to intimate
partner violence. Journal of Business Ethics, 187(4), 657–677.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05461-6
Brimhall, K. C., Tsai, C. Y., Eckardt, R., Dionne, S., Yang, B., & Sharp, A. (2023). The effects
of leadership for self-worth, inclusion, trust, and psychological safety on medical error
131
reporting. Health Care Management Review, 48(2), 120–129.
https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000358
Brink, K. E. (2022). Identifying I-O and HRM practices is necessary but not sufficient for lasting
change. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and
Practice, 15(4), 578–582. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.78
Brunstein, J. C., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1996). Effects of failure on subsequent performance: The
importance of self-defining goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2),
395–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.395
Brycz, H., Atroszko, P., Wyszomirska-Góra, M., & Wright, R. A. (2021). The role of
metacognition, type of feedback, and kind of incentives for motivation to learn. Current
Issues in Personality Psychology, 9(4), 316–327.
https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2021.107070
Brykman, K. M., & Maerz, A. D. (2023). How leaders inspire voice: The role of voice climate
and team implicit voice theories. Journal of Business and Psychology, 38(2), 327–345.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09827-x
Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Ramirez, A. J., Jr., Dunbar, N. E., Kam, K., & Fischer, J. (2002).
Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and
nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 657–
677. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02567.x
Burgoon, J. K., & Le Poire, B. (1999). Nonverbal cues and interpersonal judgements: Participant
and observer perceptions of intimacy, dominance, composure and formality.
Communication Monographs, 66(2), 105–124.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376467
132
Bush, S., Michalek, D., & Francis, L. (2020). Perceived leadership styles, outcomes of
leadership, and self-efficacy among nurse leaders: A hospital-based survey to inform
leadership development at a US regional medical center. Nurse Leader, 19(4), 390–394.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mnl.2020.07.010
Cai, L., Xiao, Z., & Ji, X. (2023). Impact of supervisor developmental feedback on employee
innovative behavior: Roles of psychological safety and face orientation. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 38(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-2021-0670
Capezza, N. M., & Arriaga, X. B. (2008). You can degrade but you can’t hit: Differences in
perceptions of psychological versus physical aggression. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 25(2), 225–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407507087957
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. E. (2009). Learning behaviours in the workplace: The role
of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety. Systems Research
and Behavioral Science, 26(1), 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.932
Carney, M. M., & Barner, J. R. (2012). Prevalence of partner abuse: Rates of emotional abuse
and control. Partner Abuse, 3(3), 286–335. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.3.3.286
Carter, J. W., & Youssef-Morgan, C. (2022). Psychological capital development effectiveness of
face-to-face, online, and micro-learning interventions. Education and Information
Technologies, 27(5), 6553–6575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10824-5
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2014). Dispositional optimism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,
18(6), 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.003
Casad, B. J., & Bryant, W. J. (2016). Addressing stereotype threat is critical to diversity and
inclusion in organizational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 8.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00008
133
Castillo-Montoya, M. (2016). Preparing for interview research: The interview protocol
refinement framework. Qualitative Report, 21(5), 811–831.
https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2016.2337
Castro, D. R., Anseel, F., Kluger, A. N., Lloyd, K. J., & Turjeman-Levi, Y. (2018). Mere
listening effect on creativity and the mediating role of psychological safety. Psychology
of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(4), 489–502.
https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000177
Cauwelier, P. (2019). Building high-performance teams through action learning. Action
Learning, 16(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767333.2019.1562693
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). Costs of intimate partner violence against
women in the United States. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and
Control. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/6543/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022). Fast facts: Preventing intimate partner
violence. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/fastfact.html
Chowhan, J., & Pike, K. (2023). Workload, work–life interface, stress, job satisfaction and job
performance: A job demand–resource model study during COVID-19. International
Journal of Manpower, 44(4), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-05-2022-0254
Christopher, W. (2023). Help me be heard: The effect of servant leadership, psychological
safety, and race on employee voice (Publication No. 30318426) [Doctoral dissertation,
Drexel University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Chughtai, A. A. (2022). Trust propensity and job performance: The mediating role of
psychological safety and affective commitment. Current Psychology, 41(10), 6934–6944.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01157-6
134
City of New York. (2022). NYC new domestic and gender-based violence workplace policy.
https://www.nyc.gov/site/ocdv/services/nyc-new-domestic-and-gender-based-violenceworkplace-policy.page
Clauss, K., Bardeen, J.R., Thomas, K.N., & Benfer, N. (2019). The interactive effect of
emotional reactivity and maladaptive metacognitive beliefs on anxiety. Cognition and
Emotion, 34, 393 - 401. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2019.1625752
Conchie, S. M. (2013). Transformational leadership, intrinsic motivation, and trust: A
moderated-mediated model of workplace safety. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 18(2), 198–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031805
Connell, M. (2017). Compliance meets human resources: Monitoring competence and integrity.
Journal of Financial Compliance, 1(2), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.69554/CDQC1482
Conroy, S., Trzebiatowski, T., & Liou, R. (2023). Intimate partner violence disclosure in the
workplace: Examining frequency, workplace occurrences, and pay level. Journal of
Workplace Behavioral Health, 38(4), 353–371.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2023.2214740
Coutifaris, C. G. V., & Grant, A. M. (2021). Taking your team behind the curtain: The effects of
leader feedback-sharing and feedback-seeking on team psychological safety.
Organization Science, 33(4), 1574–1598. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1498
Cox, L. K. (2021). How to stop the most common productivity prohibitors [Infographic].
https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/productivity-prohibitors
Crawford, L. M., & Knight Lynn, L. (2020). Interviewing essentials for new researchers. In G. J.
Burkholder, K. A. Cox, L. M. Crawford, & J. H. Hitchcock, (Eds.). Research design and
methods: An applied guide for the scholar-practitioner (pp. 147–159). Sage.
135
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. SAGE Publications.
D’Amico Guthrie, D., & Fruiht, V. (2020). On-campus social support and hope as unique
predictors of perceived ability to persist in college. Journal of College Student Retention,
22(3), 522–543. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025118774932
Deen, C. M., He, Y., Gregg, H., Restubog, S. L. D., & O’Leary‐Kelly, A. (2022). Intimate
partner aggression and work: An interdisciplinary review and agenda for future research.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(2), 236–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2585
Dempsey, L., Dowling, M., Larkin, P., & Murphy, K. (2016). Sensitive interviewing in
qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 39(6), 480–490.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21743
Deng, H., Leung, K., Lam, C. K., & Huang, X. (2019). Slacking off in comfort: A dual-pathway
model for psychological safety climate. Journal of Management, 45(3), 1114–1144.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317693083
Desai, V., Conte, A. H., Nguyen, V. T., Shin, P., Sudol, N. T., Hobbs, J., & Qiu, C. (2023).
Veiled harm: Impacts of microaggressions on psychological safety and physician
burnout. The Permanente Journal, 27(2), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/23.017
De Stobbeleir, K., Ashford, S., & Zhang, C. (2020). Shifting focus: Antecedents and outcomes of
proactive feedback seeking from peers. Human Relations, 73(3), 303–325.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726719828448
Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted rules of
self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 461–488.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925
136
Devaraj, L., Geisler, B., Cooper, C., & Begin, A. S. (2023). Impact of COVID-19 policies on
hospitalists’ psychological safety. Southern Medical Journal, 116(9), 772–775.
https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001595
Dokkedahl, S., Kok, R. N., Murphy, S., Kristensen, T. R., Bech-Hansen, D., & Elklit, A. (2019).
The psychological subtype of intimate partner violence and its effect on mental health:
Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews, 8(1), Article
198. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1118-1
Dutton, M. A., Green, B. L., Kaltman, S. I., Roesch, D. M., Zeffiro, T. A., & Krause, E. D.
(2006). Intimate partner violence, PTSD, and adverse health outcomes. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 21(7), 955–968. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260506289178
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Edmondson, A. C. (2019). The role of psychological safety: Maximizing employee input and
commitment. Leader to Leader, 2019(92), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.20419
Edmondson, A. C., & Bransby, D. P. (2023). Psychological safety comes of age: Observed
themes in an established literature. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 55–78. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych120920-055217
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future
of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych031413-091305
137
Edwards, J., & Kloos, K. (2022). National coaching certification program in Canada:
Understanding the relationship dynamics between coach evaluators and the coach.
Leisure, 48(1), 149–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/14927713.2022.2159864
Elsayed, A. M., Zhao, B., Goda, A. E. M., & Elsetouhi, A. M. (2023). The role of error risk
taking and perceived organizational innovation climate in the relationship between
perceived psychological safety and innovative work behavior: A moderated mediation
model. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1042911.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1042911
Erhun, W. O., Jegede, A. O., & Ojelabi, J. A. (2022). Implications of failure on students who
have repeated a class in a faculty of pharmacy. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching &
Learning, 14(2), 166–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2021.11.022
Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2019). Leader’s integrity and employee silence in healthcare
organizations. Leadership in Health Services, 32(3), 419–434.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LHS-03-2018-0021
Fichten, C. S., Tagalakis, V., Judd, D., Wright, J., & Amsel, R. (1992). Verbal and nonverbal
communication cues in daily conversations and dating. The Journal of Social Psychology,
132(6), 751–769. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1992.9712105
Filiak, M., & Zavadovska, Y. (2022). The main factors of balancing the development of the
organization in the transition to a program-oriented approach. Business Navigator.
https://doi.org/10.32847/business-navigator.70-14
Follingstad, D. R. (2009). The impact of psychological aggression on women’s mental health
and behavior: The status of the field. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 10(3), 271–289.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838009334453
138
Follingstad, D. R., Coyne, S., & Gambone, L. (2005). A representative measure of psychological
aggression and its severity. Violence and Victims, 20(1), 25–38.
https://doi.org/10.1891/vivi.2005.20.1.25
Follingstad, D. R., Rutledge, L. L., Berg, B. J., Hause, E. S., & Polek, D. S. (1990). The role of
emotional abuse in physically abusive relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 5(2),
107–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00978514
Foucreault, A., Ollier-Malaterre, A., & Ménard, J. (2018). Organizational culture and work-life
integration: A barrier to employees’ respite? International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 29(16), 2378–2398. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1262890
Fox, K. (2019, January 2). Ireland criminalizes emotional abuse with new domestic violence law.
CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/02/health/ireland-coercive-control-domestic-abuseintl/index.html
Frazier, L. M., & Tupper, C. (2018). Supervisor prosocial motivation, employee thriving, and
helping behavior: A trickle-down model of psychological safety. Group & Organization
Management, 43(4), 561–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601116653911
Frye, N. E., & Karney, B. R. (2006). The context of aggressive behavior in marriage: A
longitudinal study of newlyweds. Journal of Family Psychology, 20(1), 12–20.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.20.1.12
Futures Without Violence. (2023). Get the facts.
https://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/resources-events/get-the-facts/
Garcia, E. R., Stoever, J. K., Wang, P., & Yim, I. S. (2021). Empowerment, stress, and
depressive symptoms among female survivors of intimate partner violence attending
139
personal empowerment programs. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(19–20), 9557–
9579. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519869693
Geller, E. S. (2022). Psychological safety: The optimal context for injury prevention.
Professional Safety, 67(1), 18–20. https://www.proquest.com/scholarlyjournals/psychological-safety/docview/2619125051/se-2
Gerpott, F. H., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Wenzel, R., & Voelpel, S. C. (2019). Age diversity
and learning outcomes in organizational training groups: The role of knowledge sharing
and psychological safety. International Journal of Human Resource Management,
32(18), 3777–3804. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1640763
Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data (Vol. 6). Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526441867
Giesbrecht, C. J. (2022). Toward an effective workplace response to intimate partner violence.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(3-4), 1158–1178.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520921865
Gimby. (2024). Creating accessible spaces for experiential learning in an online environment. In
Papers on Postsecondary Learning and Teaching. (Vol. 7).
Glass, N., Hanson, G. C., Laharnar, N., Anger, W. K., & Perrin, N. (2016). Interactive training
improves workplace climate, knowledge, and support towards domestic violence.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 59(7), 538–548.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22601
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Pearson.
140
Glowacz, F., Dziewa, A., & Schmits, E. (2022). Intimate partner violence and mental health
during lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 19(5), Article 2535. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19052535
Gosai, J., Jowett, S., & Do Nascimento-Júnior, J. R. (2023). When leadership, relationships and
psychological safety promote flourishing in sport and life. Sports Coaching Review,
12(2), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/21640629.2021.1936960
Gracia, E., Lila, M., & Santirso, F. A. (2020). Attitudes toward intimate partner violence against
women in the European Union: A systematic review. European Psychologist, 25(2), 104–
121. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000392
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical
framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your “house.”
Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12–26.
https://doi.org/10.5929/2014.4.2.9
Haesevoets, T., De Cremer, D., De Schutter, L., McGuire, J., Yang, Y., Jian, X., & Van Hiel, A.
(2021). Transparency and control in email communication: The more the supervisor is
put in cc the less trust is felt. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(4), 733–753.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04220-w
Hassan, S., DeHart‐Davis, L., & Jiang, Z. (2019). How empowering leadership reduces
employee silence in public organizations. Public Administration (London), 97(1), 116–
131. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12571
He, P., Sun, R., Zhao, H., Zheng, L., & Shen, C. (2022). Linking work-related and non-workrelated supervisor–subordinate relationships to knowledge hiding: A psychological safety
141
lens. Asian Business & Management, 21(4), 525–546. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-
020-00137-9
Heath, C., & Sitkin, S. B. (2001). Big-B versus big-o: What is organizational about
organizational behavior? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(1), 43–58.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.77
Henderson, C., & Gronholm, P. C. (2018). Mental health related stigma as a ‘wicked problem’:
The need to address stigma and consider the consequences. International Journal of
Environmental Research on Public Health, 2, 15(6), Article 1158.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15061158
Heron, R. L., & Eisma, M. C. (2021). Barriers and facilitators of disclosing domestic violence to
the healthcare service: A systematic review of qualitative research. Health & Social Care
in the Community, 29(3), 612–630. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13282
Hildreth, J. A. D., & Anderson, C. (2016). Failure at the top: How power undermines
collaborative performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(2), 261–
286. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000045
Hora, S., Lemoine, G. J., Xu, N., & Shalley, C. E. (2021). Unlocking and closing the gender gap
in creative performance: A multilevel model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(3),
297–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2500
Hosseini, Z., Yarelahi, M., Rahimi, S. F., & Salmani, F. (2023). Investigating the factors related
to work-family conflicts experienced by working women: A systematic review. Health
Scope, 12(1), 153–174. https://doi.org/10.5812/jhealthscope-129738
Hu, Q., Li, P., Jiang, B., & Liu, B. (2023). Impact of a controlling coaching style on athletes’
fear of failure: Chain mediating effects of basic psychological needs and sport
142
commitment. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 01-11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1106916
IDEO. (2011). Human centered design toolkit (2nd ed.).
International Organization for Standardization. (2021). Occupational health and safety
management: Psychological health and safety at work, guidelines for managing
psychosocial risks (ISO 45003:2021). https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:45003:ed1:v1:en
Jamal, N., Young, V. N., Shapiro, J., Brenner, M. J., & Schmalbach, C. E. (2023). Patient
safety/Quality improvement primer, Part IV: Psychological safety—Drivers to outcomes
and well-being. Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 168(4), 881–888.
https://doi.org/10.1177/01945998221126966
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
Johnson, J., Lakhan, R., Lecci, L., Dovidio, J. F., & Schellhaas, F. M. H. (2020). Trait emotional
intelligence moderates the impact of failure feedback: Out-Group derogation in Fiji.
Social Psychological & Personality Science, 11(7), 975–982.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619896151
Johri, R., & Misra, R. K. (2014). Self-efficacy, work passion and wellbeing: A theoretical
framework. The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 8(4), 20.
Jones-Sewell, N. (2017). Personal lives and the effects on workplace productivity [Unpublished
doctoral dissertation]. Nova Southeastern University.
https://nsuworks.nova.edu/shss_dcar_etd/64
143
Jordan, C. E., Campbell, R., & Follingstad, D. (2010). Violence and women’s mental health: The
impact of physical, sexual, and psychological aggression. Annual Review of Clinical
Psychology, 6(1), 607–628. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-090209-151437
Jung, O. S., Kundu, P., Edmondson, A. C., Hegde, J., Agazaryan, N., Steinberg, M., & Raldow,
A. (2021). Resilience vs. vulnerability: Psychological safety and reporting of near misses
with varying proximity to harm in radiation oncology. Joint Commission Journal on
Quality and Patient Safety, 47(1), 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2020.09.005
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement of
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287
Kalender, Z. Y., Marshman, E., Schunn, C. D., Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Singh, C. (2020).
Damage caused by women’s lower self-efficacy on physics learning. Physical Review
Physics Education Research, 16(1), Article 010118.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010118
Karam, C. M., Greenwood, M., Kauzlarich, L., O’Leary, K. A., & Wilcox, T. (2023). Intimate
partner violence and business: Exploring the boundaries of ethical enquiry. Journal of
Business Ethics, 187(4), 645–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05462-5
Kashif, A. M., & Malik, J. A. (2020). An investigation of metacognitive bias in permanent
employees: The cognitive-emotion nexus. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 30(1), 43.
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/investigation-metacognitive-biaspermanent/docview/2479008258/se-2
Khong, H., Celik, I., Le, T. T. T., Lai, V. T. T., Nguyen, A., & Bui, H. (2023). Examining
teachers’ behavioural intention for online teaching after COVID-19 pandemic: A large-
144
scale survey. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 5999–6026.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11417-6
Kierkegaard, S. (1844). The concept of anxiety: A simple psychologically orienting deliberation
on the dogmatic issue of hereditary sin. Princeton University Press.
Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2023). Empowering leadership improves employees’ positive
psychological states to result in more favorable behaviors. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 34(10), 2002–2038.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2022.2054281
Kim, Y., Cohen, T. R., & Panter, A. T. (2023). Workplace mistreatment and employee deviance:
An investigation of the reciprocal relationship between hostile work environments and
harmful work behaviors. Group & Organization Management, 48(4), 1173–1202.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231151747
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Klenke-Borgmann, L., Digregorio, H., & Cantrell, M. A. (2023). Role clarity and
interprofessional colleagues in psychological safety: A faculty reflection. Simulation in
Healthcare, 18(3), 203–206. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000662
Kotter, J. (2012). The 8-step process for leading change. Kotter International.
https://www.kotterinc.com/8-step-process-for-leading-change/
Kulkarni, S., & Ross, T. C. (2016). Exploring employee intimate partner violence (IPV)
disclosures in the workplace. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 31(4), 204–221.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2016.1213637
145
Kumar, D. S., Nair, K. U., & Purani, K. (2023). Servicescape design: Balancing physical and
psychological safety. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 41(4), 473–488.
https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-06-2022-0259
Kumar, S. (2015). Intimate partner violence and work: A hermeneutic phenomenological study
of middle-class women’s empowerment through work (Publication No. 3731087)
[Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington University]. ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/intimate-partner-violencework-hermeneutic/docview/1728035816/se-2
Kumar, S. (2017). My dissertation healed me: A retrospective analysis through heuristic inquiry.
The Qualitative Report, 22(11), 3025–3038. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-
3715/2017.3051
Kumar, S., & Casey, A. (2020). Work and intimate partner violence: Powerful role of work in
the empowerment process for middle-class women in abusive relationships. Community
Work & Family, 23(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2017.1365693
Lane, J., & Lane, A. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior and
Personality, 29(7), 687–693. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2001.29.7.687
Lantrip, K. R., Luginbuhl, P. J., Chronister, K. M., & Lindstrom, L. (2015). Broken dreams:
Impact of partner violence on the career development process for professional women.
Journal of Family Violence, 30(5), 591–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-015-9699-5
LeBlanc, M. M., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2014). Intimate partner aggression and women’s
work outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(4), 399–412.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037184
146
Lee, J., Loretta Kim, S., & Yun, S. (2023). Encouraging employee voice: Coworker knowledge
sharing, psychological safety, and promotion focus. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 34(5), 1044–1069.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.2018014
Lee, S. E., & Dahinten, V. S. (2021). Psychological safety as a mediator of the relationship
between inclusive leadership and nurse voice behaviors and error reporting. Journal of
Nursing Scholarship, 53(6), 737–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12689
Lee, S. Y., & Kim, S. H. (2021). Empowering leadership and learning from failures on employee
voice behaviors: The mediating effects of psychological safety. Korean Journal of
Human Resource Development, 24(3), 87–113.
https://doi.org/10.24991/KJHRD.2021.09.24.3.87
Legerski, J., & Bunnell, S. L. (2010). The risks, benefits, and ethics of trauma-focused research
participation. Ethics & Behavior, 20(6), 429–442.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2010.521443
Lelebina, O., & Lemière, S. (2024). “When things aren’t going well at home and at work, it is
hard”: What can companies do about domestic violence? European Management
Journal, 42(2), 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2023.11.005
Lemieux, C. L., Collin, C. A., & Watier, N. N. (2019). Gender differences in metacognitive
judgments and performance on a goal-directed wayfinding task. Journal of Cognitive
Psychology, 31(4), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2019.1625905
Lewin, K. (1947). Field theory in social science. Harper & Row.
147
Li, A. N., & Tan, H. H. (2013). What happens when you trust your supervisor? Mediators of
individual performance in trust relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(3),
407–425. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1812
Li, M., Richards, D., Smith, S., & Xu, Y. (2012). An online advisory system to empower victims
of domestic violence. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 30(1),
35–60. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03003
Lindeman, M. (1997). Ingroup bias, self‐enhancement and group identification. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 27(3), 337–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-
0992(199705)27:3<337::AID-EJSP825>3.0.CO;2-S
Lindhout, P., & Reniers, G. (2022). The “transparency for safety” triangle: Developing a smart
transparency framework to achieve a safety learning community. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19), Article 12037.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912037
Litwic-Kaminska, K., Błachnio, A., Kapsa, I., Brzeziński, Ł., Kopowski, J., Stojković, M., Hinić,
D., Krsmanović, I., Ragni, B., Sulla, F., & Limone, P. (2023). Resilience, positivity and
social support as perceived stress predictors among university students. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(19), Article 6892.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20196892
Liu, L., Wan, Z., & Wang, L. (2023). Cross-level research on the impact of self-serving
leadership on employee innovation behavior: The roles of workplace anxiety and team
psychological safety. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1069022
148
López-Cabarcos, M. Á., López-Carballeira, A., & Ferro-Soto, C. (2021). How to moderate
emotional exhaustion among public healthcare professionals? European Research on
Management and Business Economics, 27(2), Article 100140.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2020.100140
Lyons, P., & Bandura, R. (2020). Employee learning stimulated by manager-as-coach. Journal of
Workplace Learning, 32(8), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-09-2020-0153
MacGregor, J. C. D., Naeemzadah, N., Oliver, C. L., Javan, T., MacQuarrie, B. J., & Wathen, C.
N. (2022). Women’s experiences of the intersections of work and intimate partner
violence: A review of qualitative research. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. Trauma,
Violence & Abuse, 23(1), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020933861
MacGregor, J. C. D., Oliver, C. L., MacQuarrie, B. J., & Wathen, C. N. (2021). Intimate partner
violence and work: A scoping review of published research. Trauma, Violence & Abuse,
22(4), 717–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019881746
MacGregor, J. C. D., Wathen, C. N., Olszowy, L. P., Saxton, M. D., & MacQuarrie, B. J. (2016).
Gender differences in workplace disclosure and supports for domestic violence: Results
of a pan-Canadian survey. Violence and Victims, 31(6), 1135–1154.
https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-15-00078
Mao, J., Chiang, J. T., Chen, L., Wu, Y., & Wang, J. (2019). Feeling safe? A conservation of
resources perspective examining the interactive effect of leader competence and leader
self-serving behaviour on team performance. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 92(1), 52–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12233
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
149
Matias, C. E. (2016). Feeling white: Whiteness, emotionality, and education. Springer.
Maticka-Tyndale, E., Barnett, J. P., & Trocaire. (2020). Exploring the relationship between
stigma, stigma challenges, and disclosure among slum-dwelling survivors of intimate
partner violence in Kenya. Violence Against Women, 26(10), 1188-1208. https://doiorg.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1177/1077801219856101
Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2021). Sound and safe: The role of leader motivating language and
follower self-leadership in feelings of psychological safety. Administrative Sciences,
11(2), Article 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11020051
McCroskey, C., & McCain, T. A. (1974). The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech
Monographs, 41(3), 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757409375845
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Meuser, J. D., & Smallfield, J. (2023). Servant leadership: The missing community component.
Business Horizons, 66(2), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2022.07.002
Miall, N., Francis, S. C., Stöckl, H., & Tucker, J. D. (2023). Working from home and intimate
partner violence among cis-women during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from a
global, cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 23(1), Article 965.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15785-7
Miao, Q., Eva, N., Newman, A., & Cooper, B. (2019). CEO entrepreneurial leadership and
performance outcomes of top management teams in entrepreneurial ventures: The
mediating effects of psychological safety. Journal of Small Business Management, 57(3),
1119–1135. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12465
150
Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee
silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why. Journal of
Management Studies, 40(6), 1453–1476. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00387
Mills, M. S., & Watson, J. H. (2021). Breaking free: The role of psychological safety and
productive failure in creative pathmaking. TechTrends, 65(4), 668–676.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00620-w
Moake, T. R., Oh, N., & Steele, C. R. (2019). The importance of team psychological safety
climate for enhancing younger team members’ innovation-related behaviors in South
Korea. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 19(3), 353–368.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595819887192
Montgomery, T., Berns, J. S., & Braddock, C. H., III. (2020). Transparency as a trust-building
practice in physician relationships with patients. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 324(23), 2365–2366. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.18368
Mousa, M., Boyle, J., Skouteris, H., Mullins, A. K., Currie, G., Riach, K., & Teede, H. J. (2021).
Advancing women in healthcare leadership: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of
multi-sector evidence on organisational interventions. EClinicalMedicine, 39, Article
101084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101084
Murvartian, L., Saavedra-Macías, F. J., & Infanti, J. J. (2023). Public stigma toward women
victims of intimate partner violence: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent
Behavior, 73, 101877-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2023.101877
Mura, M., Lettieri, E., Radaelli, G., & Spiller, N. (2016). Behavioural operations in healthcare: A
knowledge sharing perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 36(10), 1222–1246. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-04-2015-0234
151
Nadinloyi, K. B., Sadeghi, H., & Hajloo, N. (2013). Relationship between job satisfaction and
employees mental health. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 293–297.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.554
National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. (2016). America’s LGBT Economy.
https://nglcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/REPORT-NGLCC-Americas-LGBTEconomy-1-1.pdf
National Safety Council. (2023, May 25). Workers who feel psychologically safe less likely to be
injured at work. https://www.nsc.org/workplace/safety-topics/psychological-safetycorrelates-to-physicalsafety
Necula, R. M. (2023). Social prejudices and empowerment in cases of domestic violence on
women: A social work perspective. Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty:
Social Sciences, 12(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.18662/lumenss/12.1/75
Nguyen, T.-M., Nham, T. P., Froese, F. J., & Malik, A. (2019). Motivation and knowledge
sharing: A meta-analysis of main and moderating effects. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 23(5), 998–1016. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2019-0029
Nicolaides, A., Poell, R. F., Kowalski, R., & Russell, C. (2020). The only option is failure:
Growing safe to fail workplaces for critical reflection. Advances in Developing Human
Resources, 22(3), 264–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422320927296
Niolon, P. H., & Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Preventing intimate
partner violence across the lifespan: A technical package of programs, policies, and
practices. Government Printing Office. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ipvtechnicalpackages.pdf
152
Offergelt, F., Spörrle, M., Moser, K., & Shaw, J. D. (2019). Leader‐signaled knowledge hiding:
Effects on employees’ job attitudes and empowerment. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 40(7), 819–833. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2343
Ogbe, E., Harmon, S., van den Bergh, R., & Degomme, O. (2020). A systematic review of
intimate partner violence interventions focused on improving social support and mental
health outcomes of survivors. PLoS One, 15(6), 01–27
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235177
Otaye‐Ebede, L., & Shaffakat, S. (2022). Breaking through despite the odds: Learning from the
career experiences of successful BAME women. Proceedings - Academy of Management,
2022, Article 11935. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2022.11935abstract
Ottu, I. F. A., & Inwang, W. C. (2017). Perceived self-efficacy, domestic violence and women’s
ability to break industrial glass ceiling. Advancing Women in Leadership, 33, 177–187.
https://doi.org/10.21423/awlj-v33.a108
Pachner, T. M., Showalter, K., & Maffett, P. (2022). The effects of workplace support on
workplace disruptions: Differences between White and Black survivors of intimate
partner violence. Violence Against Women, 28(14), 3400–3414.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012211060858
Packard, T. (2021). Organizational Change for the Human Services.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197549995.001.0001
Park, C. L., & Ai, A. L. (2006). Meaning making and growth: New directions for research on
survivors of trauma. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 11(5), 389–407.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15325020600685295
Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in observation. Sage.
153
Paycor. (2022, June 8). Domestic violence leave laws by state.
https://www.paycor.com/resource-center/articles/domestic-violence-leave-laws-by-state/
Pendell, R. (2022). The world’s $7.8 trillion workplace problem. Gallup.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/393497/world-trillion-workplace-problem.aspx
Peterson, C., Kearns, M. C., McIntosh, W. L., Estefan, L. F., Nicolaidis, C., McCollister, K. E.,
Gordon, A., & Florence, C. (2018). Lifetime economic burden of intimate partner
violence among U.S. adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 55(4), 433–444.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.04.049
Ping, H., Liu, X. T., & Chen, X. (2017). An exploration into the relationship among
organizational trust, psychological safety and work stress. Management Review, 29(10),
108–119. http://journal05.magtech.org.cn/jweb_glpl/EN/
Pio, E., & Moore, V. (2022). Battered South‐Asian diasporic women: Culture, secrets and work.
Gender, Work and Organization, 29(2), 536–560. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12780
Plester, B. A., & Lloyd, R. (2023). Happiness is ‘being yourself’: Psychological safety and fun in
hybrid work. Administrative Sciences, 13(10), Article 218.
https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13100218
Plouffe, R. A., Ein, N., Liu, J. J. W., St. Cyr, K., Baker, C., Nazarov, A., & Don Richardson, J.
(2023). Feeling safe at work: Development and validation of the psychological safety
inventory. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 31(3), 443–455.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12434
Poitras, M. E., Bélanger, E., Vaillancourt, V. T., Kienlin, S., Körner, M., Godbout, I., BernardHamel, J., O’Connor, S., Blanchette, P., Khadhraoui, L., Sawadogo, J., Massougbodji, J.,
Zomahoun, H. T. V., Gallani, M. C., Stacey, D., & Légaré, F. (2021). Interventions to
154
improve trainers’ learning and behaviors for educating health care professionals using
train-the-trainer method: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of
Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 41(3), 202–209.
https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000375
Pollack, K. M., Austin, W., & Grisso, J. A. (2010). Employee assistance programs: A workplace
resource to address intimate partner violence. Journal of Women’s Health, 19(4), 729–
733. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2009.1495
Popovych, I., Blynova, O., Halian, I., & Savchuk, O. (2020). Self-efficacy of future athletes with
different levels of psychological safety. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 20(5),
2718–2724. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2020.05370
Potter, D., & Starke, J. (2022). Building a culture of conscious leadership. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003272793
Prewitt, J. E., & Weil, R. (2014). Organizational opportunities endemic in crisis leadership.
Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(2), 72–87.
Price, A. D. F., Bryman, A., & Dainty, A. R. J. (2004). Empowerment as a strategy for
improving construction performance. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 4(1),
27–37. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-6748(2004)4:1(27)
Probst, T., Chizh, A., Hu, S., Jiang, L., & Austin, C. (2020). Explaining the relationship between
job insecurity and creativity: A test of cognitive and affective mediators. Career
Development International, 25(3), 247–270. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-04-2018-0118
Purdy, E., Borchert, L., El‐Bitar, A., Isaacson, W., Jones, C., Bills, L., & Brazil, V. (2023).
Psychological safety and emergency department team performance: A mixed‐methods
155
study. Emergency Medicine Australasia, 35(3), 456–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-
6723.14149
Rathore, R., & Singh Rathore, S. P. (2024). Machine learning applications in human resource
management: Predicting employee turnover and performance. International Journal for
Global Academic & Scientific Research, 3(2), 48–59.
https://doi.org/10.55938/ijgasr.v3i2.77
Reeves, C. A., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (2009). Study of the effects of intimate partner violence
on the workplace. U.S. Department of Justice.
https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/227266.pdf https://doi.org/10.1037/e566452009-
001
Rego, A., Cunha, M. P., & Giustiniano, L. (2022). Are relationally transparent leaders more
receptive to the relational transparency of others? An authentic dialog perspective.
Journal of Business Ethics, 180(2), 695–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04792-
6
Remtulla, R., Hagana, A., Houbby, N., Ruparell, K., Aojula, N., Menon, A., Thavarajasingam, S.
G., & Meyer, E. (2021). Exploring the barriers and facilitators of psychological safety in
primary care teams: A qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), Article
269. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06232-7
Robinson, S. B., & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE.
Rosenberg, S. (2017). Respectful collection of demographic data. Medium. Retrieved from
https://medium.com/@Tiffany.sarai.rosenberg/respectful-collection-of-demographicdata-56de9fcb80e2
156
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
SAGE.
Sahoo, C. K., Behera, N., & Tripathy, S. K. (2010). Employee empowerment and individual
commitment: An analysis from integrative review of research. Employment Relations
Record, 10(1), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.929171358881019
Samios, C., Raatjes, B., Ash, J., Lade, S. L., & Langdon, T. (2020). Meaning in life following
intimate partner psychological aggression: The roles of self-kindness, positive reframing,
and growth. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(7–8), 1567–1586.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519898437
Sánchez-Prada, A., Delgado-Alvarez, C., Bosch-Fiol, E., Ferreiro-Basurto, V., & Ferrer-Perez,
V. A. (2022). Bystanders of intimate partner violence against women and their
willingness to intervene: An analysis of secondary data in Spain (2005-2020). PloS One,
17(9), e0274822–e0274822. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274822
Sanner, B., & Bunderson, J. S. (2015). When feeling safe isn’t enough: Contextualizing models
of safety and learning in teams. Organizational Psychology Review, 5(3), 224–243.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386614565145
Sarkar, A. (2022). Factors associated with general self-efficacy of women leaders in India.
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 43(7), 1080–1097.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-12-2021-0540
Schaubroeck, J., Peng, A. C., Hannah, S. T., Ma, J., & Cianci, A. M. (2021). Struggling to meet
the bar: Occupational progress failure and informal leadership behavior. Academy of
Management Journal, 64(6), 1740–1762. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0956
157
Schein, E. H. (1993). On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning. Organizational
Dynamics, 22(2), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(93)90052-3
Schein, E. H., & Bennis, W. G. (1965). Personal and organizational change through group
methods: The laboratory approach. John Wiley & Sons.
Schumpeter, J. (1994). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Routledge. (Original work
published 1942)
Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 7(2), 112–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209508406961
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.
Doubleday/Currency.
Sharififard, S., Opong, C., & Ghazi, A. (2020). Collaborative and spiritual inquiry: Positive
leadership in organizational change and higher education.
Shea, T., Cooper, B., De Cieri, H., Sheehan, C., Donohue, R., & Lindsay, S. (2018). Postincident
support for healthcare workers experiencing occupational violence and aggression.
Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 50(4), 344–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12391
Sheffler, P., Rodriguez, T. M., Cheung, C. S., & Wu, R. (2022). Cognitive and metacognitive,
motivational, and resource considerations for learning new skills across the lifespan.
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 13(2), Article e1585.
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1585
Showalter, K. (2016). Women’s employment and domestic violence: A review of the literature.
Aggression and Violent Behavior, 31, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2016.06.017
Showalter, K., Marçal, K., Maguire-Jack, K., Eubank, K. M., Machinga, R. O., & Park, Y.
(2024). The protective effect of employment policies on intimate partner violence.
158
Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2024.2312101
Showalter, K., & McCloskey, R. J. (2021). A qualitative study of intimate partner violence and
employment instability. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(23-24), NP12730–
NP12755. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520903140
Sidana, S., & Mishra, S. (2022). A study of service failures and recovery in retail banking and its
psychological impact on employees’ performance. NeuroQuantology, 20(12), 2283–
2294. https://doi.org/10.14704/NQ.2022.20.12.NQ77205
Siemsen, E., Roth, A. V., Balasubramanian, S., & Anand, G. (2009). The influence of
psychological safety and confidence in knowledge on employee knowledge sharing.
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 11(3), 429–447.
https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.1080.0233
Singh, R., & Ramdeo, S. (2023). From diversity to inclusion in the workplace. Contemporary
perspectives in human resource management and organizational behavior: Research
overviews and gaps to advance interrelated fields. Springer International Publishing.
Siyal, S. (2023). Inclusive leadership and work engagement: Exploring the role of psychological
safety and trust in leaders in multiple organizational contexts. Business Ethics, the
Environment & Responsibility, 32(4), 1170–1184. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12556
Smeets, L., Gijselaers, W. H., Meuwissen, R. H. G., & Grohnert, T. (2021). Beyond
psychological safety: The role of direct supervisor behavior in fostering learning from
errors at the workplace. Vocations and Learning, 14(3), 533–558.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-021-09272-6
159
Smith, S. G., Basile, K. C., Gilbert, L. K., Merrick, M. T., Patel, N., Walling, M., & Jain, A.
(2017). National intimate partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): 2010–2012 state
report. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Solansky, S. T., Wang, Y., & Quansah, E. (2023). A fear‐based view of wisdom: The role of
leader fear of failure and psychological empowerment. Business Ethics, the Environment
& Responsibility, 32(1), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12497
Staggs, S. L., Long, S. M., Mason, G. E., Krishnan, S., & Riger, S. (2007). Intimate partner
violence, social support, and employment in the post-welfare reform era. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 22(3), 345-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260506295388
Statista. (2024, July 5). Employed women U.S. 2023.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/192378/number-of-employed-women-in-the-us-since1990/#statisticContainer
Stibbe, T., Huang, J., Paucke, M., Ulke, C., & Strauss, M. (2020). Gender differences in adult
ADHD: Cognitive function assessed by the test of attentional performance. PLoS One,
15(10), Article e0240810. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240810
Stratman, J. L., & Youssef-Morgan, C. M. (2019). Can positivity promote safety? Psychological
capital development combats cynicism and unsafe behavior. Safety Science, 116, 13–25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.031
Straus, M. A., & Sweet, S. (1992). Verbal/Symbolic aggression in couples: Incidence rates and
relationships to personal characteristics. Journal of Marriage and Family, 54(2), 346–
357. https://doi.org/10.2307/353066
160
Swanberg, J., Macke, C., & Logan, T. K. (2007). Working women making it work: Intimate
partner violence, employment, and workplace support. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
22(3), 292–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260506295387
Swanberg, J. E., & Logan, T. K. (2005). Domestic violence and employment: A qualitative
study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(1), 3–17.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.1.3
Swanberg, J. E., Macke, C., & Logan, T. K. (2006). Intimate partner violence, women, and work:
Coping on the job. Violence and Victims, 21(5), 561–578. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-
6708.21.5.561
Thompson, M. J., Hackney, K., Crawford, W., Bonner, J. M., & Carlson, D. S. (2023). Partner
psychological abuse: Can you leave home at work? Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 96(2), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12427
Title 18, Crimes and criminal procedure: Part 1, Crimes, Chapter 44, Firearms, 18 USC 921 §
(a)(32) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/html/USCODE2009-title18-partI-chap44.htm
Tolentino, L.R., Garcia, P.R.J.M., Restubog, S.L.D., Scott, K.L. and Aquino, K. (2017), Does
domestic intimate partner aggression affect career outcomes? The role of perceived
organizational support. Human Resources Management, 56, 593-611. https://doiorg.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1002/hrm.21791
True, G., Stewart, G. L., Lampman, M., Pelak, M., & Solimeo, S. L. (2014). Teamwork and
delegation in medical homes: Primary care staff perspectives in the Veterans Health
Administration. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 29(Suppl 2), 632–639.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2666-z
161
Tynan, R. (2005). The effects of threat sensitivity and face giving on dyadic psychological safety
and upward communication. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(2), 223–247.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02119.x
U.S. Department of Commerce. (2023, October 30). Minority businesses help drive America’s
economic success. U.S. Department of Commerce.
https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2023/10/minority-businesses-help-drive-americaseconomic-success
U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. (n.d.). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964. https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964
Vanderheiden, E., Mayer, C. H. (2020). “There is a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets
in”: An introduction to mistakes, errors and failure as resources. In: Vanderheiden, E.,
Mayer, CH. (eds) Mistakes, errors and failures across cultures. (pp. 1-47) Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35574-6_1
Vanderheiden, E., & Mayer, C. H. (2023). Creating women’s empowerment through the
constructive mastery of life crises. In C.-H. Mayer, E. Vanderheiden, O. BraunLewensohn, G. Chen, K. Sueda, B. Mangolothi, S. Safdar, & S. Kim (Eds.), Women’s
empowerment for a sustainable future: Transcultural and positive psychology
perspectives (pp. 13–30). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-031-25924-1_2
Vaughn, A. R., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Johnson, M. L. (2020). Impostor phenomenon and
motivation: Women in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 45(4), 780–795.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1568976
162
Vito, R., Schmidt-Hanbidge, A., Brunskill, L., Mudge, C., & Suteu, D. (2023). Evaluation of
leadership training and resilience development outcomes during the COVID-19
pandemic. Human Service Organizations, Management, Leadership & Governance,
48(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2023.2287742
Vomberg, A., Homburg, C., & Gwinner, O. (2020). Tolerating and managing failure: An
organizational perspective on customer reacquisition management. Journal of Marketing,
84(5), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920916733
Vu, H. M. (2020). Employee empowerment and empowering leadership: A literature review.
Technium: Romanian Journal of Applied Sciences and Technology, 2(7), 20–28.
https://doi.org/10.47577/technium.v2i7.1653
Walters, K. N., & Diab, D. L. (2016). Humble leadership: Implications for psychological safety
and follower engagement. Journal of Leadership Studies, 10(2), 7–18.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21434
Walton, C. C., Purcell, R., Pilkington, V., Hall, K., Kenttä, G., Vella, S., & Rice, S. M. (2023).
Psychological safety for mental health in elite sport: A theoretically informed model.
Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01912-2
Wang, A.-C., Kim, T.-Y., Jiang, Y., & Tang, G. (2022). Employee proactive goal regulation and
job performance: The role modeling and interacting effects of leader proactive goal
regulation. Human Relations, 75(2), 373–400.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720984838
Wang, H.-F., Chen, Y.-C., Yang, F.-H., & Juan, C.-W. (2021). Relationship between
transformational leadership and nurses’ job performance: The mediating effect of
163
psychological safety. Social Behavior and Personality, 49(5), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.9712
Wang, J., Leung, K., & Zhou, F. (2014). A dispositional approach to psychological climate:
Relationships between interpersonal harmony motives and psychological climate for
communication safety. Human Relations, 67(4), 489–515.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713495423
Wang, X., Guchait, P., & Pasamehmetoglu, A. (2020). Tolerating errors in hospitality
organizations: Relationships with learning behavior, error reporting and service recovery
performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(8),
2635–2655. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-01-2020-0001
Waterman, R. H., Jr., Peters, T. J., & Phillips, J. R. (1980). Structure is not organization.
Business Horizons, 23(3), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(80)90027-0
Wathen, C. N., MacGregor, J. C. D., & MacQuarrie, B. J. (2018). Relationships among intimate
partner violence, work, and health. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(14), 2268–
2290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515624236
Weinberg, R., Gould, D., & Jackson, A. (1979). Expectations and performance: An empirical test
of Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 1(4), 320–331.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jsp.1.4.320
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. The Free Press.
Weziak-Bialowolska, D., Bialowolski, P., Sacco, P. L., VanderWeele, T. J., & McNeely, E.
(2020). Well-being in life and well-being at work: Which comes first? Evidence from a
164
longitudinal study. Frontiers in Public Health, 8, Article 103.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00103
Widiss, D. A. (2018). Addressing the workplace effects of intimate partner violence. In Violence
and abuse in and around organisations (pp. 127-144). Routledge.
Wilhelm, H., Richter, A. W., & Semrau, T. (2019). Employee learning from failure: A team-asresource perspective. Organization Science, 30(4), 694–714.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1255
World Health Organization. (2021). Violence info – Intimate partner violence.
https://apps.who.int/violence-info/intimate-partner-violence
Wu, C.-H., & Parker, S. K. (2017). The role of leader support in facilitating proactive work
behavior: A perspective from attachment theory. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1025–
1049. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314544745
Xu, G., Huang, D., Liu, S., & Zhang, X. (2023). The effects of feeling envied on employees’
psychological safety and work engagement: The role of workplace friendship.
Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941231169670
Yalçın, B., Baykal, Ü., & Türkmen, E. (2022). Why do nurses choose to stay silent? A
qualitative study. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 28(1), Article e13010.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.13010
Yang, Y., Li, Z., Liang, L., & Zhang, X. (2021). Why and when paradoxical leader behavior
impact employee creativity: Thriving at work and psychological safety. Current
Psychology, 40(4), 1911–1922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0095-1
Yi, H., Hao, P., Yang, B., & Liu, W. (2017). How leaders’ transparent behavior influences
employee creativity: The mediating roles of psychological safety and ability to focus
165
attention. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(3), 335–344.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816670306
Zeng, J., & Xu, G. (2020). Linking ethical leadership to employee voice: The role of trust. Social
Behavior and Personality, 48(8), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.9200
Zhou, Y., Zhang, A., Liu, X., Tan, X., Miao, R., Zhang, Y., & Wang, J. (2023). Protecting
public’s wellbeing against COVID-19 infodemic: The role of trust in information sources
and rapid dissemination and transparency of information over time. Frontiers in Public
Health, 11, Article 1142230. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1142230
Zimmerman, D. P., Roussin, J., & Garmston, R. J. (2020). Transforming teamwork: Cultivating
collaborative cultures. Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872932
166
Appendix A: Interview Questions With RQ Mapping
Question Framework Mapping
Tell me a little about the job or jobs
you had when you were living in
an abusive home environment.
Leadership journey Icebreaker, RQ3
What industry was the company in? Leadership journey RQ3
To ensure we explore your full
story, where were you located at
the time? If you are comfortable
answering, what do you identify
as your race? What do you
identify as your sexuality?
Demographics, leadership
journey
RQ3
While you were in this role, tell me
about the leader who empowered
you most to succeed when you
struggled with your performance
at work.
Perception of leader
behavior
RQ1
What types of workplace struggles
did you have at this time? What,
if anything, did you do to ask the
leader for help?
Lived experience with
workplace struggle
experience with leader
behavior
RQ1/RQ2
What time frame are you speaking
about here?
Context and second
qualification check
Context/qualification
How, if at all, did you bring up
problems and tough issues with
this leader?
Lived experience with
disclosure in a dyadic
relationship
RQ1
How did this leader treat you when
you struggled with your
performance in the workplace?
Lived experience with
workplace struggle,
Perception of
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
Considering how your leader
treated you, did you view your
experience having these
difficulties in the workplace as a
positive, negative, neutral
Lived experience with
workplace struggle,
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1/RQ2
167
Question Framework Mapping
occurrence? Why did you view it
that way?
As you look back on your role at
the time you were experiencing
intimate partner violence or
psychological aggression at
home, how, if at all, was it more
challenging to believe in your
ability to perform well at work at
the time?
Lived experience
performance self-efficacy
RQ2
How would you describe the belief
you had in your ability to perform
well at work at this time? What
impact, if any, did this leader
have on this belief?
Lived experience
performance self-efficacy
RQ2
What words, if any, would you use
to describe the behavior of your
leader when you were struggling
with performance in the
workplace?
Lived experience with
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
What motivated your decision to
disclose your situation at home to
your leader?
Lived experience with
disclosure in a dyadic
relationship,
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
How did this leader, if at all, teach
you how to learn from the
struggles you were experiencing
in the workplace?
Lived experience with
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
How did this leader, if at all, exhibit
transparency to you?
Lived experience with
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
How, if at all, did the leader show
your professional contribution to
the organization was valued?
Lived experience with
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
Would you say your leader
respected differences between
Lived experience with
psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ1
168
Question Framework Mapping
people? How, if at all, did they
show that?
What resources or leadership
training, if any, did the
organization have to help those in
situations like this?
Lived experience, leader
behavior long-term
influence
RQ3
How, if at all, did the way this
leader behaved toward you
influence the way you lead
today? How, if at all, did the
experience impact your ability to
take risks with communication
today?
Current behavior as a
leader
RQ3
What else, if anything, do you have
to share about your experience
with or perception of this leader?
Lived experience with
workplace struggle,
Psychologically safe
leader behavior
RQ 1, RQ2
What else, if anything, do you have
to share about how this has
empowered or positively affected
you now?
Current behavior as a
leader
RQ3
169
Appendix B: Communications Used for This Study
Social media post, word of mouth advertising:
1. Are you a woman who was in a verbally abusive relationship with an intimate partner
between 2010 and 2019?
2. Did you have a leader at work who empowered you when you were struggling with
workplace performance (mistakes, errors, failure)?
3. Did you disclose the abuse you were experiencing at home to the leader who
empowered you in the workplace while you were experiencing any form of failure?
Doctoral candidate completing a university dissertation study seeks women to interview. Take
the pre-qualification survey. https://usc.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eL1g1dOromeXx0a
Communication to those selected for the study:
Hello!
Thank you for taking the time to complete the pre-qualification survey. Based on your
answers, you qualify to participate in the dissertation study. Attached is a study consent form. If
you would like to connect with me to ask questions prior to providing consent to participate,
please email me at bdhansen@usc.edu
What’s next: After you sign the consent form, I will email you to schedule a time to
conduct an interview that should not last more than an hour.
Review the consent form: The consent form is attached.
About the consent form: Your participation in the study is voluntary, and you may
withdraw consent at any time. The interview will be conducted on Zoom. After transcription, all
recordings will be deleted, and your information will be anonymized for the study.
170
Reciprocity: If you wish to receive a copy of the dissertation after it is published, I would
be happy to provide that to you. Likewise, all participants who complete the study will receive a
$20 Starbucks gift card.
Thank you for your time so far, and I look forward to connecting with you to conduct the
interview.
Sincerely,
Diane Dye Hansen, MCM, Doctoral Candidate
University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Women who experience intimate partner violence (IPV) or psychological aggression (PA) at home are more likely to struggle with performance at work. Few studies have examined the experience of performance struggle, IPV-PA, and demonstration of psychologically safe leadership behavior. Fewer studies examine disclosure. Thus, this study examined the lived experiences of women who experienced IPV-PA and disclosed the experience at the workplace to understand whether leaders created dyadic psychological safety to support these women when they struggled with workplace performance. I interviewed 11 women who, at some point, experienced struggle with workplace performance and disclosed the experience of IPV-PA to their supervisors. The research questions concern the participants’ perceptions and the psychologically safe behavioral characteristics of a leader who empowered them and the participants’ experience of their performance self-efficacy. The study resulted in four findings on the connection between psychological safety, trust, disclosure, performance self-efficacy, and the workplace environment. Transparent and consistent psychologically safe leadership behavior helped the participants build the trust to disclose IPV-PA and receive accommodation, which helped improve their performance. Leaders’ proactive and positive leadership communication supported the participants’ performance. The positive leadership experiences empowered the participants’ career success. The workplace acted as a compartmentalized safe zone that helped the participants improve their performance outcomes. Leaders made a difference in the participants’ self-efficacy, performance, and future career outcomes.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Leadership psychological safety: exploring its development and relationship with leader-member exchange theory
PDF
CEASE Intimate Partner Violence (IPV): A healthcare-based intervention program
PDF
Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States
PDF
The role of self-efficacy in Armenian American women leaders in higher educational institutions in Southern California
PDF
Foundational practices of structural change: the relationship of psychological safety and organizational equity
PDF
Trust in the 100% remote workplace in high growth technology consulting firms
PDF
Learning in the workplace: investigating perceived workload, work motivation, and choice independence in the construction industry
PDF
The relationship among gender, race/ethnicity, sense of validation, science identity, science self-efficacy, persistence, and academic performance of biomedical undergraduates
PDF
Barriers to practice: primary care patient experience and quality health outcomes in the Veterans Health Administration
PDF
Emotional intelligence self-perceptions in non-clinical leaders: an examination into a healthcare organization
PDF
The impact of the mindful method Youth Empowerment Seminar (YES!) on students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, and academic performance for becoming college- and career-ready
PDF
Leading from the margins: exploring the perspectives of Black women in leadership roles at predominantly white institutions
PDF
Enduring in silence: understanding the intersecting challenges of women living with multiple sclerosis in the workplace
PDF
Racial and gender gaps in executive management: a retrospective examination of the problem cause and strategies to address disparities
PDF
The role of psychological safety in medical device quality
PDF
The bi-directional impact of work-family conflict and family-work conflict on entrepreneurs, executives and organizations in high stress careers
PDF
Exhaustion of Black women in corporate settings: a study to identify helpful interventions
PDF
Beyond commitments: a qualitative examination of the persistent disparities faced by Black women in executive leadership roles post the 2020 crisis and beyond
PDF
Minding the gender gap: self-efficacy and women senior leadership roles in banking
PDF
Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions
Asset Metadata
Creator
Hansen, Barbara Diane
(author)
Core Title
Disclosure of abuse to empowerment: exploring psychological safety as a leadership tool to support women struggling with workplace performance
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2024-12
Publication Date
10/22/2024
Defense Date
10/03/2024
Publisher
Los Angeles, California
(original),
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
dyadic psychological safety,interpersonal psychological safety,intimate partner violence,leadership,performance self-efficacy,psychological aggression,psychological safety,trust,workplace disclosure,workplace performance
Format
theses
(aat)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Canny, Eric (
committee chair
), Andres, Mary (
committee member
), Seli, Helena (
committee member
)
Creator Email
bdhansen@usc.edu,diane@peopleriskconsulting.com
Unique identifier
UC11399CW51
Identifier
etd-HansenBarb-13604.pdf (filename)
Legacy Identifier
etd-HansenBarb-13604
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
theses (aat)
Rights
Hansen, Barbara Diane
Internet Media Type
application/pdf
Type
texts
Source
20241104-usctheses-batch-1220
(batch),
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
dyadic psychological safety
interpersonal psychological safety
intimate partner violence
performance self-efficacy
psychological aggression
psychological safety
trust
workplace disclosure
workplace performance