A systematic and causal review of the link between leader-driven psychological safety and work outcomes

Leader-driven psychological safety has attracted growing organizational investment and a rapidly expanding empirical literature, yet the causal quality of the evidence underpinning the performance case, that is, the claim that leader behavior improves work outcomes through psychological safety, has never been systematically evaluated. This review takes a critical and methodological stance, conducting the first systematic causal audit of 47 articles published in highly ranked peer-reviewed journals between 1990 and January 2026. Applying a diagnostic protocol that evaluates concepts, measures, and study design, we find that 82% of coded entries operationalize the leader antecedent through follower ratings, rendering the evidence causally indeterminate at the point of measurement. No observational study employs a design-based identification strategy, and no study provides causal evidence for the full theoretical chain from leader behavior through experienced psychological safety to work outcomes. Ninety percent of coded entries are diagnosed as implausible causal inference. Only 10% of coded entries reach partial causal evidence, establishing a credible estimate for the antecedent-to-mediator link and leaving the mediator-to-outcome relationship descriptive only. The associations reported across the literature therefore neither confirm nor refute the theoretical argument. We offer theoretical and methodological recommendations for future research, provide a prescriptive roadmap with five pathways toward a more causally rigorous research program, and introduce a diagnostic flowchart to help scholars and practitioners assess the trustworthiness of available evidence.