The trouble is, that when you call slogans ‘principles’ without any articulated ethic, you create new problems and dangerous by-products.
The slogan ‘blame fixes nothing’ is a dangerous and false slogan.
The reality is, when something goes seriously wrong, the courts and regulators seek blame in order to apportion responsibility, learn from error and provide compensation. The last thing a victim wants to hear is the nonsense slogan ‘blame fixes nothing’. Blame fixes many things.
I have been a part of coronial enquiries and court cases where blame is a portioned, consequences are adjudicated, compensation is awarded and rectification for a problem is delivered. And, things improve.
One of the reasons Safety loves slogans is so that it doesn’t have to articulate a mature ethic about risk. And, the slogans that are concocted by various groups (HOP and SD) come from sources with no expertise in Ethics. Similarly, the AIHS BoK chapter on Ethics is clearly written with no expertise in Ethics. What a great platform with which to launch unethical conduct.
The real danger is preaching slogans is that they are culturally dangerous, simplistic and drive decision making based on simplistic thinking. Slogans are the foundation of propaganda. Goebbels would be proud.
Principles emerge from a sophisticated moral philosophy that collectively anchor back to a founding ethic. If a principle is ‘a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behaviour or for a chain of reasoning’ then, this slogan ‘blame fixes nothing’ is clearly a falsehood. Therefore, it cannot be a principle.
When you have no founding articulated ethic nor methodology, slogans help to create a market and sell an idea to an uncritical audience. Slogans are the foundation for propaganda not education and learning. Slogans are a form of indoctrination for an uncritical market. However, in the end, such slogans will be held against organisations that profess it, in a court of law.
I can see a lawyer now in court ripping to shreds an organisation who uses such a silly slogan such as ‘blame fixes nothing’.
Our (Greg Smith and I) Risky Conversations video series (https://vimeo.com/showcase/3938199) and free book download https://www.humandymensions.com/product/risky-conversations/ articulate clearly, a methodology and ethic of risk. This methodology (legal, ethical and social psychology) demonstrates clearly that slogans such as these are dangerous.
Greg makes it very clear (in Case study of BHP) that any language (including slogans) used by an organisation whether it’s in training, posters, conversation or discourse will be held against you in a court of law should something go wrong.
So, what this slogan does, as do all slogans, is set up organisations for failure and dangerous consequences, should something go wrong. As we know, from our studies in linguistics, all language is given meaning in a court of law regardless of what you want it to mean. Zero means zero in a courtroom and lawyers are experts in linguistics. Zero language looks pretty stupid when in a courtroom being prosecuted for a fatality. Similarly, this silly slogan ‘blame fixes nothing’ tells a court and a lawyer that responsibility in an organisation is not important.
Sloppy language is a common characteristic in safety culture, where language doesn’t need to make sense and nonsense linguistics is accepted as normal.
The outcome for any nonsense, false language is that safety loses credibility. When you avoid the skills required in finding blame and get seduced by the nonsense of positive psychology (that gets reagitated in HOP), you become blind to a holistic approach to safety. Slogans create echo chambers.
Similarly, the silly safety differently slogan; ‘people are not a hazard to control but a resource to harness’ is a re-statement of the same thing. When is Safety going to stop speaking nonsense to people?
Just because blame is used by some inappropriately or harmfully, doesn’t mean it must be jettisoned. Blame can be done well or poorly. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the safety curriculum to support psychosocial skill development.
There are many psychological stressors in safety that are used incompetently, yet without curriculum reform, not much will change. All this talk about psychological safety is useless without curriculum reform.
Do you have any thoughts? Please share them below