The Relationship between Communication Climate and Psychological Safety: A study of the World Vision in Addis Ababa
| dc.contributor.advisor | Gebru, Amanuel | |
| dc.contributor.author | Tsegaye, Fikru | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-11-24T07:32:58Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-11-08T13:41:45Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-11-24T07:32:58Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2023-11-08T13:41:45Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2021-06 | |
| dc.description.abstract | The research paper attempted to explore bi-variate associations between communication climate and psychological safety on sample size of 194 collected from World Vision Ethiopia, Addis Ababa from professional employees who amounts to 347. Gibb’s (1961) conceptualization of communication climate and Costigan & Schmeidler (1984) operationalization of it was employed. Edmondson (1999) defined and operationalized psychological safety. The Likert scale data analysis reveals a positive monotonic relationship with communication climate and psychological safety. A Spearman correlation for the data revealed a significant relationship between communication climate and state of psychological safety, r = +.504, n = 194, p < .01, two tails. A Spearman Correlation Coeffient of p=0.504 is large in terms of magnitude of effect size and represents a large associations (Cohen, 1988). The corresponding coefficient of determination (r2) is 25.4, indicating that 25.4% of the variability of the communication climate can be predicted from the relationship with psychological safety. Moreover, variable-to-variable correlations shows that appreciation is positively related with all variables of supportive communication behavior while mutual trust is negatively associated with all variables of defensive communication behavior. Overall, the majority of respondents (79.9%) perceptions reveal that there is open, supportive and respectful communication in the organization. The feeling of psychological safety also found out to be high. Most of the Employees (62.9%) feel confident and safe to speak up with the concerns they have without being afraid of negatives consequences. Nevertheless, the research study determined behaviors of defensive communication climate: Superiority, neutrality, control, and psychological safety team norms: reaction to mistakes and accepting diversity for priority intervention. The research study suggested some measures to counter these behaviors, boost the supportive communication behaviors, and team psychological safety. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://etd.aau.edu.et/handle/123456789/28925 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.publisher | AAU | en_US |
| dc.subject | Communication climate, psychological safety, supportive communication behaviors, defensive communication behaviors, monotonic relationship, Correlation, Spearman, | en_US |
| dc.title | The Relationship between Communication Climate and Psychological Safety: A study of the World Vision in Addis Ababa | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |