Why Safety Programs Fail
“No one ever suspected the extensive and conscientious efforts applied to control safety in the organisation would have failed so spectacularly”
These are the famous words uttered by so many senior managers and directors, while in shock, after a workplace disaster.
Nothing in the monthly safety report or annual review of the Key Risk Register hinted at such a catastrophic loss scenario. Subsequently, each successive “positive report” increased the false impression of low risk and a sense that controls were in place and effective, when in reality the precarious situation was just waiting for an adverse circumstance to trigger the calamity.
Why does this happen? One suggestion is feel good reporting, which concentrates on the level of activity, rather than on the serious risk exposures.
We have noticed some safety managers concentrate on reporting all the “good stuff” they are doing, and not on the things they have not had time or budget to review or develop effective and sustainable programs for. They mistakenly believe to report such things may adversely reflect on their personal performance or “commitment to the team”. In reality they are “disguising” the systemic inadequacies in organisational resourcing or processes.
The Problem with “Safety First”
We have all heard safety slogans such as Safety First, so what is the potential problem with this? One unfortunate and unintended influence of pushing Safety First is to separate safety from the operational requirements, rather than building safety into every procedure and process.
If we place priorities on segments of the task, staff will have to continually make choices between production and safety, and safety rarely wins, particularly if personnel believe the safety rule is excessive or not applicable at this time or to their situation.
Toyota is famous world-wide for their fantastically efficient and reliable production system called Toyota Production System (TPS), where they shun separate safe work procedures, and focus on standardised work.
Standardised work instructions include everything the workers need to know to perform their tasks, and nothing more or less. Safety is an important part of every piece of standardised work, along with quality, efficiency, and reliability.
The solution is to build-in safety, not prepare separate safe work procedures. Having said this, it will take some time for most organisations to develop the culture and capability to do this routinely moving forward. So start the journey now!
Let’s Communicate Safety
Most organisations have safety notice boards, safety posters, safety videos, safety awards, safety contests with prizes, and similar efforts to communicate or motivate staff to work safely.
Are they effective, and do they change attitudes and behaviour?
Safety expert, Dan Petersen*, says little research has been done in this area, and what little research has been done has provided conflicting findings. Petersen also states that we do not know if any of these well-intended things motivate or even communicate effectively with workers.
* Safety Management a Human Approach, ASSE, 2001
Safety is one of the few professional areas which run competitions and offer prizes to get people to follow the rules. By comparison accountants, engineers and scientists don’t rely on competitions to achieve compliance with their important processes.
So why are safety programs unique in their use of posters and competitions etc? It is possible that most safety managers don’t have sufficient budget or resources to do anything else, or lack the engineering knowledge to help design the hazards out.
Even though there is no compelling evidence to show these motivational type activities are effective, careful selection and application should cause no harm to the safety program and may still appeal to the interest of some of the workforce, who like variety in their information flow.
Un-focussed Training
Training is an integral part of every safety program, and no one would sensibly suggest we stop doing it. However, anecdotal observations by our team suggest a large proportion of safety training is wasted as it is boring, un-disciplined and not focused on the key risks and precautions.
For example, we still see many site inductions taking way too long. Many attempt to repeat every bit of safety detail even those not applicable to the site or the tasks in hand, or provide work instructions already covered by formal work certifications.
What we should be doing is only instructing on site specific hazards and procedures eg site traffic controls, site first aid and emergency arrangements, safety officer & H&S Rep(s), worker facilities, key activities for the day and any special precautions.
If interested in an independent review of your safety program give us a call.
