EQV Psychological Safety Audit
EQV Framework  ·  Assessment Instrument

Psychological
Safety Audit

Multi-Rater Assessment  |  20 Items  |  Four Dimensions
Esse Quam Videri — To Be Rather Than to Seem
Progress
0%
About This Audit

What We're Measuring—and Why It Matters

The EQV Psychological Safety Audit measures whether the behavioral conditions of psychological safety are genuinely present in your team—not simply whether people report feeling safe. Google's Project Aristotle identified psychological safety as the single most important factor in high-performing teams. Yet most leaders dramatically overestimate how safe their team members actually feel.

Your candid ratings produce the most accurate and actionable results. All responses are confidential and will be aggregated for reporting. Rate each statement based on observable behavior—what actually happens—not what you hope or intend.

01 — Voice Behavior
02 — Error Response
03 — Challenge Tolerance
04 — Inclusion in Decision-Making
Rating Scale
1Strongly
Disagree
2Disagree
3Neutral
4Agree
5Strongly
Agree
Rate what you observe, not what you wish.
Dimension 01
Voice Behavior
Measures whether team members consistently and comfortably raise ideas, questions, concerns, and critical information—including information that may be inconvenient or unwelcome.
1
Team members regularly share ideas and suggestions, even when those ideas challenge the current approach.
2
People on this team feel comfortable raising concerns or problems before they become serious issues.
3
I have observed team members speak up in meetings even when their perspective differs from the majority view.
4
In this team, questions are welcomed and taken seriously, not dismissed or minimized.
5
Team members proactively share information that leadership or peers might not want to hear.
Dimension 02
Error Response
Evaluates how the team and organization actually respond when mistakes are made. High psychological safety teams treat errors as learning opportunities; low psychological safety teams treat them as threats.
6
When mistakes are made on this team, the focus is on understanding what went wrong and improving—not on assigning blame.
7
Team members are comfortable admitting errors or gaps in knowledge without fear of judgment.
8
Leaders in this organization model accountability by openly acknowledging their own mistakes.
9
This team uses failures and setbacks as deliberate learning opportunities rather than events to move past quickly.
10
People are not punished, formally or socially, for making well-intentioned errors in this organization.
Dimension 03
Challenge Tolerance
Examines whether team members can genuinely disagree with leadership or peers without experiencing professional or social consequences. Performative tolerance—appearing open while penalizing dissent—scores low on this dimension.
11
In this organization, it is safe to disagree with a leader's decision or direction without negative repercussions.
12
Differing viewpoints and constructive dissent are actively encouraged in this team's decision-making processes.
13
I have observed team members challenge assumptions or push back on decisions without being dismissed or marginalized.
14
Leaders in this organization respond to challenge and pushback with curiosity rather than defensiveness.
15
Debate and productive conflict are treated as healthy and necessary parts of how this team operates.
Dimension 04
Inclusion in Decision-Making
Measures whether diverse perspectives are genuinely integrated into the team's decisions—not merely invited as a formality. True inclusion means input is actively sought, seriously considered, and visibly reflected in outcomes.
16
Leadership actively seeks input from team members before finalizing significant decisions.
17
People from different roles, backgrounds, and levels have a genuine opportunity to influence decisions that affect them.
18
When team members provide input, they receive clear and honest communication about how that input was considered.
19
Decisions in this organization reflect a diversity of perspectives, not just the views of the most senior voices.
20
This team creates intentional space for quieter or less dominant voices to contribute meaningfully.
Qualitative Reflection

Open Response Questions

Optional but strongly encouraged. Your words provide context that scores alone cannot capture.

1. In your experience, when is it most difficult to speak up on this team? What tends to get in the way?

2. Describe a specific moment when you observed psychological safety being demonstrated—or notably absent—on this team.

3. What is one change leadership could make that would most improve the sense of safety and openness on this team?

Your Scores

Scores update as you complete each dimension. Final scores are calculated upon submission.

Voice Behavior—
Error Response—
Challenge Tolerance—
Inclusion in Decisions—
Overall Audit Score—

Audit Submitted

Thank you. Your responses have been recorded and will be compiled into your EQV Psychological Safety Profile.
You will receive your full report and action plan from your EQV facilitator.

EQV Framework  ·  Esse Quam Videri  ·  eqvframework.com