Jess Lawrence is a senior researcher at Interventions Alliance. She was invited by HMPPS Evidence and Insights Team to present at their Insights Festival.

My presentation “Psychological Safety for Practitioners working with People from Minority Groups” coincided with the final day of Trans Awareness Week (19^th November).

 

The presentation drew on my research on the experiences of justice involved trans people, and subsequent paper on the importance of psychological safety in advancing practitioners’ knowledge and practice when working with this cohort.

 

What is psychological safety?

 

Psychological safety shapes how people interact at work and impacts many aspects of the workplace, including performance, problem-solving, learning, innovation, job satisfaction, stress, leadership, and mentoring.

 

When people feel psychologically safe, they feel more able to ask for help or feedback, make decisions, and take risks without worrying about being punished if things go wrong. It’s vital for learning, improving practice, and helping both individuals and organisations learn from mistakes.

 

Working with justice-involved people is complex and requires many different roles and skills to work well together. Levels of psychological safety can vary across these groups — from frontline staff to middle managers to senior leaders.

 

Why is it important?

 

In our work, staff often need to quickly understand new situations and solve problems while juggling many competing priorities. Sometimes there’s time to ask for help, but often decisions must be made immediately.

 

Because policies can’t cover every scenario, staff need to feel psychologically safe to make the decisions they think are best for the person in front of them. They should trust that their team will back them and that they won’t be punished if the decision turns out to be wrong.

 

The research found that some support workers felt so afraid of making a mistake with trans clients that they did nothing at all. This fear suggests they didn’t feel psychologically safe to ask for help, try new approaches, or learn collectively from situations that didn’t go as planned.

 

Interpersonal level – learning needs

 

Most staff said they needed more training — from basic trans awareness to information about the specific needs and experiences of trans people in the justice system. They wanted guidance on how to advocate for trans people in a respectful way, and how to challenge misgendering or transphobia without overstepping. Although staff were comfortable having sensitive conversations, they often weren’t sure how to handle situations that required specific advocacy or correcting others’ language.

 

Some staff used personal experience or did their own research but still worried about saying the wrong thing. They often checked their understanding with others — usually LGBT colleagues. LGBT staff said they were usually the ones sharing information, organising Pride events, and challenging problematic comments or misgendering from service users, which could be exhausting.

 

When staff worked with a trans person, they tried to create space for them to talk about their experiences and needs. This is good practice, but it requires having trust already in place — something trans people may not feel automatically due to prior negative experiences with other services. Staff often had to put in extra work to help trans service users feel safe and accepted.

 

Building psychological safety was important — both between practitioners and trans clients, and between colleagues. When people feel safe, they are more willing to share information. The person sharing must feel respected, and the person asking must respond appropriately. This is especially important in relationships with power differences, such as practitioner vs. client or someone with a protected characteristic vs. someone without. These power dynamics often overlap, and at least doubled the challenges for trans people involved in the justice system.

 

Group level – supporting and challenging others

 

Practitioners commonly turn to their peers first when they need advice or support, often through quick conversations or reflective practice sessions. In terms of psychological safety, the success of these approaches depends on being able to ‘air your dirty laundry’ with colleagues – however some staff may only feel able to do this with colleagues at their own level, rather than managers.

 

Staff said they were confident challenging openly transphobic language from service users but were less sure about when or how to correct misgendering. Several factors affected whether they stepped in, and some staff wanted clearer guidance from managers on what to do.

 

Organisational level – policies and responsibility for decisions

 

Organisations can demonstrate inclusive practice both by the policies in place and the spaces they create. For trans people, having all bathrooms gender neutral meant there was no need to have (or brace for) ‘that discussion,’ didn’t out or ‘other’ them and contributed considerably to their feeling relaxed, safe and accepted in spaces.

 

The hubs where the research was carried out had “participant agreements” that all clients sign when they join. These agreements explain what behaviour is expected from both clients and staff, and how clients can raise concerns if they feel they’re not being treated respectfully.

 

These policies make the organisation’s stance clear, which helps staff feel more confident in their decisions, as psychological safety is bolstered when personal views align with the organisation’s values.

 

A common issue when discussing trans people is balancing risk and inclusivity, often focusing on trans women’s access to gendered spaces, with little attention to trans men or non-binary people.

 

In practice, if a trans person wanted to attend a single-gender group, staff assessed this on a case-by-case basis. There were good examples where the risk was judged to be very low or small changes were made so the trans service user could take part.

 

Staff with more experience in trans or LGBT inclusion relied on their judgement, while others depended more on formal risk procedures and looked to senior staff for clear direction. However, many talked about not knowing “where the line is” or what the organisation’s exact position was.

 

When staff asked managers for guidance but didn’t receive it, they felt isolated, pressured, and unsure whether their decisions were defensible. Clear roles and shared responsibility were essential for staff to feel psychologically safe at an organisational level.

 

Summary

 

Although this blog focuses on psychological safety when working with trans people, the same ideas apply to working with any minority group.

 

Psychological safety is essential for learning about people’s experiences and understanding how to work with them respectfully. It also helps staff feel confident in challenging bias, discrimination, or incorrect language, and in knowing when and how to advocate for someone.

 

It allows people to recognise, admit, share, and learn from mistakes. It also encourages staff to ask for support or feedback, which strengthens learning and development.

 

Psychological safety works best when staff values align with the organisations, and when policies and expectations are clear. Decision-making should be shared across all levels so no one feels they must justify their actions alone.

 

Finally, different justice settings require different approaches to supporting people with different needs and psychological safety at all levels for the staff supporting them is key in providing appropriate and holistic care.

 

Justice staff who feel psychologically safe to ask questions, be themselves, and try new ideas are better equipped to help service users overcome barriers and move towards crime-free lives.