Monday, February 29, 2016

A View Askew

We recently completed a project conducting safety supervision at a maintenance shutdown (typically called a “turnaround”) at a chemical plant. These jobs are always interesting because it allows us to really interact with workers at the sharp end who are from various different contractor organizations and trades. These workers not only provide unique perspectives on how things are done in their own organizations, but the contractor employees can also share stories about how other plants operate, the good, the bad and the ugly.

In these interactions with workers though, a common, disturbing theme kept arising – a significant distrust, and often fear of safety staff. We aren’t sure if we were just paying more attention this time, or if perhaps there were more instances of this during this turnaround than in others, but it was very consistent. For many workers our interactions always had to begin with a period of suspicion. The workers saw us as potential threats, coming over to tell them what they were doing wrong and chastise them. Some workers never even gave us the chance, choosing to avoid us as much as possible.

Luckily, these were in the minority. We were able to spend time with many of the workers, building up trust, trying to show them that we weren’t a threat. Once trust was established, we starting asking about perceptions of safety people and where the lack of trust comes from. Some of the answers we heard were very disconcerting.
  • Safety people are arrogant, thinking they are better than everyone else.
  • Safety people are more interested in telling you what they know, which leads them to telling you how to do a job that you have many years of experience in, but they have no experience in.
  • The only time safety people leave the desk is to tell you what you’re doing wrong.
  • One contractor described working at a plant where safety professionals would be assigned areas to “police”.
  • Safety people are around to enforce rules that only make it hard to do work.

If you’re a safety professional and you don’t read the above list with some amount of embarrassment, there is something wrong. If this is what workers think of us, we have a problem.

Now, there may be some who would argue that we aren’t in the safety business to make friends with the workers, but to help them be safe. There’s some truth in this. But if a trust gap exists between us and our workers the problem is not that we are failing a popularity contest, the problem is that significant risk may exist in that gap.

For example, when talking with one worker about how we’d like to know more about his job, he laughed and said no way. The less we know, the better, he said. Why? Because all we’d do is make doing his job impossible if we knew exactly what he was doing.

Think about that. Keep in mind that (a) this was a worker who we have a pretty good, respectful relationship with, and (b) he was very conscientious, not one to take unnecessary risks. But because he saw safety professionals as people who merely make his job harder he withheld information about his job from us. Our intense focus on rules, controls and constraints convinced him that he could find a way to protect himself. He did not need our help because he didn’t see us as a help to him at all.

How does us knowing less about how work is done make things any better, or safer?

The unfortunate reality we are finding as we interact with workers is that the safety profession’s intense focus on setting a standard and ruthlessly enforcing that standard is that we are losing touch with one of our most important resources in safety – our workers. In an environment of intense rule compliance we may risk losing things like trust, communication, collaboration, critical thinking, creativity and innovation. Not only is the loss of these things a potential loss to the organization, think about accident reports for major disasters and note how often issues such as communication come up as a contributing factor. By relentlessly focusing on compliance at the sharp end we may be working to prevent minor events, but making us more vulnerable to more severe events.

To combat this, we need to release the reigns a bit. Sure, rules, regulations, policies and procedures have a role to play here, but we have to keep our priorities straight. Our workers are our best resource. Our people are not a problem to control, they are a solution to harness. In our turnaround, once we were able to build trust with workers two things happened. First, we were able to more effectively learn about work processes, which allowed us to identify better ways to improve things. Not only were we able to find better solutions to compliance problems, but we were able to make work easier in many cases.

Second, and perhaps most importantly, by building trust with workers, we were able to tap into a vast source of knowledge, experience, creativity and innovation. We were able to ask workers what they would do to improve our turnarounds. The answers we got from workers at all levels of the organization were fantastic. We found ways to not only improve traditional safety processes (e.g., ways to improve fall protection and lockout/tagout processes), but also ways to enhance productivity, collaboration and planning amongst contractor organizations. As a result, not only did we have a successful turnaround by almost any measure, we also set the stage for future success through creating an environment of participation. Paradoxically, by taking the focus off of compliance, we increased accountability. People were taking responsibility for not only their immediate tasks, but in how their role played into the bigger picture of creating a safe and productive turnaround.


The time has come for the safety profession to look in the mirror and see how we are contributing to some of the problems we are seeing. Perhaps the reason we are seeing so many rule-violators is because we create systems where workers have no choice but to violate rules to get the job done. By seeing people as a problem to control and focusing only on safety as the absence of negative events put ourselves into a vicious cycle of self-fulfilling prophecies – we think people are a problem to control, so we implement processes that treat them that way, eroding trust, creating problems, which confirms our beliefs. If we step outside of this cycle and begin to see safety as a capacity to achieve success and our workers as a solution to harness in creating this capacity we just might begin to see success where before we only saw negatives.

2 comments:

  1. Some interesting observations here about the safety industry. I've experienced similar observations and conversations. It seems that 'safety' has become just another arm of policing, or at least that is the perception of many.

    Here is some further evidence to back up your observations. This is a quote from a friend who worked as a Safety Advisor for a large international FMCG organisation in Australia:

    When I introduce myself to people they usually ask the standard question; “so what do you do?” When I tell them I’m a Safety Advisor, it’s really not often that I get a positive response. Most of the time people’s faces change, and not in a good way. Their eyes scan me as though I am a different breed of a person. Sometimes they even step back slightly as if I’ve got some sort of highly communicable disease. Often they’ll say something like “oh, you’re one of those people”. Or “and you seriously enjoy that?” Or “that has got to be one of the worst jobs in the world” or “how do you enjoy all of that paperwork?”
    Safety Advisor from an International Organisation (2014)

    Get's me to thinking about why?

    I wonder if there are two significant contributors?

    1) the type of people that 'safety' attracts; i.e. those who have a desire to control others (often in the name of 'safety' and 'caring', but control nonetheless) and;

    2) what impact do the social arrangements have on how people working in safety go about things. That is, the regulatory, the organisational and the societal influences and expectations. It seems as a society that we can't cope with harm and suffering (see 'Helicopter parenting). I don't believe that we should want to welcome harm and suffering, but we do need to stop pretending that we can rid the world of such things.

    It will take some mature conversations, some very different thinking and a number of people to walk away from the control and fear mongering that is the current world of 'safety' before much changes I suspect.

    At least the conversations are happening and the dissonance for some is building.

    Cheers, Rob Sams

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great comments Rob! It is a shame and the part that annoys me the most is that not only are the safety professionals creating a profession that will lead to unhappiness (by distancing themselves from others) and ineffectiveness (by trying to manufacture control where none is possible), but the people we are meant to serve also suffer as a result.

    Your two contributors are interesting. I think it's a confluence of factors. I recently did a little research into media effects and how that would potentially influence public perceptions of human factors. Long story short, the media (news and entertainment) consistently portrays human endeavors in terms of stories with heroes and villains. This, it seems to me, simultaneously contributes to and is a reflection of beliefs regarding human agency in the world - i.e., do good and good things happen, do bad and you get what you deserve. I don't want to go so far as to say that this is causal in any way (it is always more complex than that, as you know) but I believe it shows that this mindset of coupling of agency and outcomes is inherent in our culture. It is a foregone conclusion for many which leads to some reverse logic - if someone is hurt then they must have done something to deserve it. In a sick way it may follow then that if you see someone doing something wrong then it is a result of moral or mental deficiency in them, which must be ruthlessly controlled. Safety then becomes "I need to protect you, from you, in spite of you". Of course this is a vicious cycle of distrust and harm. Such a shame.

    Ron

    ReplyDelete