Clinical Organizational Science (COS) and Psychological Safety: Repositioning Edmondson's Theory from Culture to Structural Condition

Clinical Organizational Science (COS) repositions Amy C. Edmondson’s theory of psychological safety as an 'enabling condition' for the functioning of Field Gradient Theory and Loop Conversion Design.

DroR Inc. (Headquarters: Shibuya-ku, Tokyo; CEO: Makoto Yamanaka), a research-practice firm that observes and designs the 'invisible interaction structures' of organizations based on complex systems science and neuroscience, has published a paper titled 'Clinical Organizational Science: An Integrative Framework for Structural Intervention in Complex Organizations' in the international journal 'Frontiers in Psychology' (Organizational Psychology section).

The English news release regarding this paper was distributed via EurekAlert!, and the problem statement for COS as a whole has been featured on the international science news site Phys.org. This release outlines psychological safety not as a cultural slogan, but as a structural condition that allows interventions to function effectively.

This release is part of a series explaining Clinical Organizational Science (COS) being distributed from May 7 to June 5. In this installment, we explore the relationship between Edmondson’s theory of psychological safety and COS, detailing how COS connects with existing theories, where it extends them, and what verifiable questions it presents.

### Definition of Clinical Organizational Science (COS) COS is a framework for theorizing interaction structures that actively reproduce an organization's stable state and for intervening in those structures by integrating complex systems science, neuroscience, organizational psychology, and behavioral science. COS views organizational change as a 'transition of organizational attractors' rather than 'individual behavioral change.' It presents Field Gradient Theory, Loop Conversion Design, and Neural Base Design as core techniques. It also proposes the 'emergence bridge' as a concept connecting individual habit formation with organization-level change.

### What Edmondson’s Psychological Safety Theory Established Amy C. Edmondson’s research showed that a state where interpersonal risks can be taken within a team supports learning behavior, sharing problems, candid speaking, and learning from failure. COS strongly inherits these insights. Psychological safety is not a peripheral concept in COS but a core structural condition.

### How COS Extends the Theory: From 'Cultural Outcome' to 'Structural Condition' In many workplaces, psychological safety is often treated as a 'good culture' or a 'friendly atmosphere.' While not denying this view, COS goes a step further by positioning psychological safety as a structural condition that enables the transition of organizational attractors. In other words, repetitive practices—such as trust-building, acknowledgment, sharing gratitude, physical check-ins, and the '3 Good 1 More' method—support psychological safety as a 'reproduction structure of interaction' rather than just a mood.

### Observation Indicators of Psychological Safety in COS In COS, psychological safety is treated as observable interaction patterns rather than an abstract atmosphere. For example, how an organization reacts to the disclosure of negative information (failures, problems, or bad news) is a critical indicator. If such information is treated as a shared problem rather than triggering defensive reactions, it indicates a healthy organizational attractor state.