The Safety of Work

You’ll hear six key principles for effective behavioral substitution, drawing parallels between healthcare and safety contexts. They discuss how these principles can guide both the removal of ineffective practices and the implementation of new ones, emphasizing the importance of considering practical needs, existing skills, and organizational resources when making such changes. The episode provides valuable insights for safety professionals looking to improve their organization's safety practices through evidence-based substitution strategies. Discussion Points:((00:00) Introduction and episode overview on swapping as a decluttering strategy(00:59) Background discussion on behavioral science and de-implementation(02:27) Understanding decluttering and de-implementation in healthcare context(05:08) Example of de-implementation in clinical practice and patient care(06:55) Introduction to the paper and authors' background(16:32) First principle: Evidence and rationale for substitute behaviors(19:49) Second principle: Meeting both clinical and practical objectives(24:51) Third principle: Clear explanability of new practices(26:29) Fourth principle: Time considerations for substitute behaviors(28:30) Fifth principle: Alignment with existing skills(31:40) Sixth principle: Cost implications of substitute behaviors(34:39) Three practical takeaways and implementation strategies, the answer to this episode’s questionLike and follow, send us your comments and suggestions for future show topics! Quotes:"You can't swap out something that people believe works for something that they don't believe works." - Drew Rae"A lot of the safety, if not all the safety work we do in organisations is about anxiety reduction, not necessarily about improving safety.” - David Provan"Rather than thinking about decluttering as just what we can reduce or take away, it may be more useful to think about it as a process of gradually swapping out each thing that's not working well." - Drew Rae"If you can't explain the substitute behavior with the same ease which you can explain the behavior that you want to be implemented, then people have to work a bit harder and they might go. Why are we making this all so complex?" - David Provan“That's the point they're making here, is like maybe the patient doesn't need care, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't acknowledge their need for care and their need to be taken seriously.” - Drew RaeResources:The Big Six: key principles for effective use of Behavior substitution in interventions to de-implement low-value careThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

The discussion challenges traditional views of supervision by emphasizing the importance of psychological safety and predictable relationships between supervisors and workers. Through analysis of interviews with both supervisors and supervisees, the research highlights how effective supervision requires balancing organizational needs with worker support while maintaining clear boundaries and expectations. The findings suggest that organizations should focus on developing explicit supervision models that promote both technical expertise and relationship skills. Discussion Points:(00:00) Introduction - what makes an effective supervisor?(02:29) Narrowing research focus, specific industry context(06:07) Introduction to the research paper and authors' backgrounds(09:46) The literature review's structure and key findings(22:12) Research methodology, interview approach, eight core themes, Theme 1: Safety and establishing predictable relationships(26:00) Theme 2-3: Emotional impact of work and learning/growth(35:45) Theme 4-5: Leadership behaviors and integrity/justice(42:12) Theme 6-7: Balancing supervision functions and organizational processes(51:14) Key takeaways and practical implications for organizations(55:00) The answer to our question: What are the attributes of an effective supervisor? The answer is, everything you expect, but with a new emphasis on the safety and predictability of that relationship.Like and follow, send us your comments and suggestions for future show topics! Quotes:"There is a ton of safety research which says that frontline supervision - that direct relationship between a team leader and the people they're supervising - is really, really important for safety." - Drew Rae"Supervision is a really important aspect of safety and safety management." - David Provan"Power is inherent in these relationships... Supervisors don't have a lot of formal power, so the supervisor themselves often won't feel that they have power at all." - Drew Rae"This is not an exploratory study. This is a properly conducted piece of high quality, qualitative research, and I think it does draw novel insights." - Drew Rae Resources:Safety as a Fifth Dimension in Supervision: Stories from the FrontlineThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

The podcast dives into the balance between hard and soft skills in safety education, challenging traditional views on their categorization. It emphasizes the importance of narrative skills, highlighting their role in communicating values and driving change. Insights from UK business leaders showcase the critical need for effective storytelling in safety. The conversation advocates for integrating both technical expertise and narrative capabilities, ultimately redefining how safety professionals are prepared for complex organizational landscapes.

In this discussion, we dissect various models of safety culture, scrutinizing how organizations perceive, measure, and manage these concepts. From artifacts like management systems to individual attitudes and behaviors, we delve into the inconsistencies and challenges of these models. We also revisit historical perspectives, such as Dov Zohar's work, to understand their influence on contemporary safety paradigms. Our conversation critically examines the missteps of industries like nuclear and aviation, which have mandated the management of ambiguous concepts without solid scientific grounding. We advocate for a shift from vague cultural mandates to actionable strategies, offering insights into enhancing clarity and effectiveness in both regulatory practices and organizational improvements. This episode aims to inspire a reevaluation of safety culture, pushing for a more scientifically grounded and practical approach to safety science. Some highlights from the paper:Safety culture as a concept is examined from scientific and pragmatic perspectives.The case is made for the removal of safety culture from the safety science lexicon.Much safety culture research is vulnerable to a fallacy of logic – we should not take a selection of parts to equal the whole.Robust research of the various individual ‘elements’ of safety culture, in methodologically appropriate ways, will enhance the field of safety science and better support improvements in practice. Discussion Points:(00:00) Introduction: Rethinking Safety Culture - An overview of the conversation around safety culture and its evolving significance(07:04) Challenges in Defining Safety Culture - Exploring the difficulties in pinning down a clear and universal definition of safety culture(10:00) Safety Culture Research Models & Philosophies - different research models in safety culture, and the philosophy behind them, issues with lumping all safety-related terms together(17:00) Three Definitions of Safety Culture - Is it social, individual, or organizational? Each perspective offers a unique research approach(21:00) Perceptions of Safety Culture - The way we understand safety culture might differ greatly from someone else’s interpretation(22:00) Buckets of Safety Culture: Young vs. Mature Organizations(24:23) The Importance of Specificity Over Vagueness, difference between safety climate and safety culture(29:11) The One-Question Survey: Industry Perspectives and Practical Insights - Examining the one-question survey methodology, participant responses, and the insights gathered from industry perspectives.(36:00) Safety Performance vs. Safety Culture Discussing the distinction between safety performance and the broader concept of safety culture.(39:52) Clarifying Definitions: Drew and David’s Papers(40:25) Meta Takeaway: Defining 'Culture' Specifically - ask yourself what you actually mean and define it specificallyConclusions and TakeawaysThe final question: Is it time to stop talking about safety culture? The answer: "Yep."Like and follow, send us your comments and suggestions! Quotes:“The paper itself is very very stylish and self -aware and that's important not just for readability but for the state that this conversation is in...it's got all of these references that show that they're very aware of the landmines that people keep stepping on, in just even trying to write and untangle safety culture.” - Drew“When someone uses the term ‘safety culture’, it's very common for them to be thinking about everything from commitment of people, compliance with procedures, level of resources, the balancing of goals, safety communication, leadership. All of these individual things just get lumped together into this term ‘safety culture.” - David“The moment you start trying to turn it into practical actions, that's when everything starts to crumble - when there aren't good, agreed definitions.”- Drew“You can't just wander into a company and say, ‘I want to study company culture.’ That's like a marine biologist going into the ocean and saying, ‘I want to look at things that live in the ocean’...Be precise, be narrow, be specific about what it is that you actually want to look at.” - Drew Resources:Seeking a scientific and pragmatic approach to safety culture in the North American construction industryEp.44 What do we mean when we talk about safety culture?Dov Zohar’s Published ResearchThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

The discussion dives into the challenges of using ChatGPT for safety advice, revealing its biases and limitations. Topics like mobile phone use while driving and fall prevention for older adults highlight critical gaps in AI-generated guidance. The hosts emphasize the necessity of expert insights, especially in emergencies. They also explore data privacy concerns related to fitness apps and the complexities of burnout and workplace pressures. Ultimately, the episode serves as a cautionary tale about over-reliance on generative AI in safety matters.

Dive into a debate on whether safety is truly a key driver for business value. Unpack the complexities of safety performance and its relationship with organizational success. Analyze the differences between viewing safety as compliance versus a strategic priority. Discover the surprising effects of compliance training on safety culture. Critique the methodologies behind safety research and call for more rigorous evidence. Explore the intricate links between safety management and overall business performance, urging a deeper understanding.

From the perceived control in everyday activities like driving, to the dread associated with nuclear accidents, we discuss how emotional responses can sometimes skew our rational assessments of risk. Finally, we explore the ethical and practical challenges of balancing emotional and analytical approaches in risk communication, especially in high-stakes scenarios like terrorism and public safety. The conversation touches on real-world examples, such as the aftermath of the September 11 attacks and the controversial discussions around gun ownership. We emphasize the importance of framing and narrative in conveying risk information effectively, ensuring that it resonates with and is clearly understood by diverse audiences.  Discussion Points:Understanding risk perception, Paul Slovic's work and how it has shaped safety practices and decisions in everyday life“Affect heuristic” in decision making, influenced by emotions and past experiences, leading to inconsistencies in risk perception.Feeling in-control vs. “scary concepts”, risks are perceived differently due to emotions, control, and misunderstandings of probabilities, as seen in driving Risks are assessed differently based on probabilities, outcomes, framing, and context, influencing decision-makingOther studies, looking at how people see risk, assessing your personal fear or risk from causes of death from cancer to stroke to car accidents to shark attacks vs. your own bathroomBalance between emotional and analytical risk evaluationMath and statistical examples of how risk is presented and perceivedPost 9/11 terrorist fears vs. statistics Ethical considerations in communication, and challenges in conveying risk informationTakeaways The answer to our episode’s question: “the short answer is both” Like and follow, send us your comments and suggestions! Quotes:“Risk is analysis where we bring logic, reason, and science or data or facts, and bring it to bear on hazard management.” - David“There may not be a perfect representation of any risk.” - Drew“If that's the important bit, then blow it up to the entire slide and get rid of the diagram and just show us the important bit.”- Drew“It's probably a bit unfair on humans to say that using feeling and emotion isn't a rational thing to do.” - David“The authors are almost saying here that for some types of risks and situations, risk as a feeling is great.” - David Resources:The Paper: Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk and RationalityThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

The discussion provides an in-depth examination of the principles of multimedia, modality, and redundancy, all of which are crucial for optimizing learning and information retention. The episode also offers a wealth of practical strategies for interactive design and meticulous preparation, aimed at enhancing audience engagement and comprehension. These strategies include the use of visual aids, storytelling techniques, and audience participation elements to create a more dynamic and immersive experience. By adopting these methods, presenters can not only convey their message more effectively but also make the learning process more enjoyable and impactful for their audience. The Paper’s AbstractActive training techniques are effective because they engage learners in tasks that promote deep thought, discussion, problem-solving, social interaction, and hands-on learning. Passive training is less effective because learners are relegated to merely listening and watching as an instructor does all of the mental, social, and physical work. Bullet-point lectures may be poorly suited for meaningful training because they usually adopt a model of passive learning and they tend to combine spoken words and displayed text in ways that may actually decrease comprehension. PowerPoint can serve as a tool to promote active learning if we eliminate lengthy bullet lists and use instructional images to guide group discussions, problem-solving activities, and hands-on experiences. Discussion Points:Background on the author Mitch Ricketts and the paperActive vs. passive learningConstructive and interactive learningBalancing text and images using multimedia, modality, and redundancy principlesUse of questions on slides to prompt discussion and interactionImportance of managing cognitive load for audience engagementClear, concise content and the value of signaling in presentationsThe significance of preparation and creating separate presentations for different needsStrategies for creating effective slides focused on visuals over textMoving away from bullet points to use impactful images and labelsTakeaways - What you SHOULD do on your slidesThe answer to our episode’s question is, the short answer here is the title of the paper- "No more bullet points." Quotes:“This is what you might call an applied literature review. It's someone taking the literature and interpreting that literature for a particular purpose.” - Drew“There's a lot of research that says that a lot of high school and university teachers rely on fairly outdated and disproven theories about these different modes of learning.” - Drew“If that's the important bit, then blow it up to the entire slide and get rid of the diagram and just show us the important bit.”- Drew“if you're a learner and you see a giant pair of goggles on a PowerPoint slide with just the word “goggles”, then all you're going to be doing now is just listening to what the presenter is saying. And hopefully they're saying something about goggles.” - David“Slides aren't there to look interesting and slides aren't there to carry the weight of the content. Think of them as visual support.” - Drew Resources:The Paper: No More Bullet PointsThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

We examine whether a safe work environment truly enhances productivity and engagement or if it stifles business efficiency. Historical incidents like the Union Carbide disaster and BP's Deepwater Horizon blowout are analyzed to question if neglecting safety can still lead to profitability. Finally, we break down the misconception that good safety practices automatically translate to business profitability. We highlight the tangible benefits such as enhanced publicity, stronger client relationships, and improved employee satisfaction, and stress the importance of complex discussions about the actual costs vs. benefits of safety practices.The Paper’s AbstractThis research addresses the fundamental question of whether providing a 15 safe workplace improves or hinders organizational survival, because there are conflicting predictions on the relationship between worker safety and organizational performance. The results, based on a unique longitudinal database covering over 100,000 organizations across 25 years in the U.S. state of Oregon, indicate that in general organizations that provide a safe workplace have significantly lower odds and 20 length of survival. Additionally, the organizations that would in general have better survival odds, benefit most from not providing a safe workplace. This suggests that relying on the market does not engender workplace safety.Discussion Points:Is safety “good for business”? Examining the relationship between safety and business viabilityBhopal and the costs, Occidental - you can still make money without safetyThe backgrounds and qualifications of the paper’s authorsWorkplace safety can both benefit and hinder organizational survival due to productivity prioritization and potential risksWorkplace safety and business performance are complexly related, with a study showing a decrease in survival odds and length due to safety prioritizationSafety compliance at the lowest minimal cost may hinder productivity and divert attention from safety, leading to increased risksSafety is not inherently good for business; instead, it can bring tangible benefits like publicity, client relationships, and employee satisfactionStrict regulations and upfront investments in safety are necessary for fostering a safer work environment and ensuring business successTakeaways - Stop claiming safety is “good for business”The answer to our episode’s question is, “So the short answer is on average, no. At least according to this study, businesses are more likely to survive in the short term and long term if they're hurting more people more seriously.”Quotes:“The sorts of things that you do to improve safety are the sorts of things that I thought should also improve productivity and reliability in the long run.” - David“Which is science, right? That's what it's about. We think we're right until we get a new piece of information and realize that maybe we weren't as right as we thought we were.” - David“Even though there is a reasonably high volume of research out there, it's really hard to look very directly at the question.”- Drew“So we know from this data that it's not true that providing a safe workplace makes you more competitive.” - DrewResources:The Paper: The Tension Between Worker Safety and Organization SurvivalThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork

David and Drew share insights into Dr. Provan’s PhD research journey, exploring the scarce guidance and fragmented views within academic research on safety practices. They discuss the challenges of painting a clear picture of the day-to-day responsibilities of safety professionals and how this prompted an in-depth investigation into the profession. As we peel back the layers of existing literature, we touch on the difficulty and complexity of condensing a vast array of theories and studies into a cohesive academic narrative.The varied titles and the global patchwork of research that span numerous fields are explored, and although David’s search through databases and beyond revealed a trove of about 100 relevant articles, more insights may remain hidden. The discussion culminates with a look at the strategies employed by safety professionals to wield influence, foster trust, and align safety objectives with organizational goals. David's firsthand experiences and academic findings paint a vivid picture of the complex identity and influence that safety professionals must navigate in their pivotal roles.The Paper’s AbstractSafety professionals have been working within organizations since the early 1900s. During the past 25 years, societal pressure and political intervention concerning the management of safety risks in organizations has driven dramatic change in safety professional practice. What are the factors that influence the role of safety professionals? This paper reviews more than 100 publications. Thematic analysis identified 25 factors in three categories: institutional, relational, and individual. The review highlights a dearth of empirical research into the practice and role of safety professionals, which may result in some ineffectiveness. Practical implications and an empirical research agenda regarding safety professional practice are proposed.Discussion Points:Safety professionals - are they a “necessary evil”?The role and perception of safety professionals, scarcity and fragmentation of literature, and challenges in condensing research. Safety positions have many varying titles globally.Institutional, organizational, and individual factors, regulatory environments, and professional associationsSafety professionals face challenges when reporting to line managers, limiting their ability to challenge leadership and prioritize protection over workers.Balancing safety independence and bureaucracyA construction industry study - testing bureaucracyAlliance vs. Influence - Safety professionals act as the conscience of the organization, using constructive challenge and alliances to advocate for safety and align goals with broader objectives.Influence and trust in safety management - relational legitimacy, influence tactics, and symbolic enablers to promote best practices and trust within organizations.Practical takeaways from the paperThe answer to our episode’s question is, “This is still an area of safety science that is a prime candidate for more PhD and postdoc research.” Quotes:“I went into this going, what has been published on the safety profession? And to do that, went to a couple of the key databases and used very deliberate keyword searches…” - David“That was probably one of the first challenges- is that this role gets called so many different things in one country, let alone globally.” - David“The included pieces were all in peer-reviewed publications, but there's a range of quality to those publications.”- David“This connection between the bureaucratic activities of safety professionals and the value that the people who are exposed to the risk see in having a safety team was one of the most stark research findings in the literature.” - David“Don't learn how to do your job from a TED Talk regardless of how inspirational a new view that talk is.” - DrewResources:The Paper: Bureaucracy, Influence, and BeliefsThe Safety of Work PodcastThe Safety of Work on LinkedInFeedback@safetyofwork