Clinical Organizational Science (COS) and Psychological Safety: Repositioning Edmondson's Theory from Culture to Structural Condition
DroR Inc. has published a new theoretical framework, Clinical Organizational Science (COS), in an international journal. The framework redefines psychological safety as a 'structural condition' rather than a 'cultural outcome,' integrating it as an enabling condition for structural interventions based on complex systems science.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: May 19, 2026 at 19:00
- 🔍 Collected: May 19, 2026 at 10:31
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: May 28, 2026 at 16:34 (222h 2m after Collected)
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.
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.
FAQ
臨床組織科学（COS）とは何ですか？
複雑系科学、神経科学、組織心理学、行動科学を統合したフレームワークです。組織を「アトラクター」として捉え、個人の行動変容ではなく相互作用構造への介入を通じて組織変革を目指します。
Edmondsonの心理的安全性理論とCOSの関係は？
COSはEdmondsonの知見を継承しつつ、心理的安全性を単なる「雰囲気」や「文化」ではなく、構造的介入（Field Gradient Theory等）を可能にするための「構造的基盤条件（enabling condition）」として再定義しています。
COSにおける組織変革の定義は何ですか？
「個人の行動変容」ではなく「組織アトラクターの遷移」として捉えています。個人の習慣化と組織レベルの変化をつなぐ「emergence bridge（創発の橋）」という概念を提案しています。
心理的安全性をどのように観察・測定しますか？
抽象的な空気ではなく、具体的な相互作用パターンとして扱います。例えば、ネガティブな情報の開示に対して、組織が防衛反応ではなく共有された問題として扱うかどうかが重要な指標となります。
COSの具体的な技法にはどのようなものがありますか？
中核技法として、Field Gradient Theory（場勾配理論）、Loop Conversion Design（ループ変換設計）、Neural Base Design（神経基盤設計）が提示されています。