• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

SafetyRisk.net

Humanising Safety and Embracing Real Risk

  • Home
    • About
      • Privacy Policy
      • Contact
  • FREE
    • Slogans
      • Researchers Reveal the Top 10 Most Effective Safety Slogans Of All Time
      • When Slogans Don’t Work
      • CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
      • 500 OF THE BEST AND WORST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2023
      • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
      • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
      • Safety Acronyms
      • You know Where You Can Stick Your Safety Slogans
      • Sayings, Slogans, Aphorisms and the Discourse of Simple
      • Spanish Safety Slogans – Consignas de seguridad
      • Safety Slogans List
      • Road Safety Slogans 2023
      • How to write your own safety slogans
      • Why Are Safety Slogans Important
      • Safety Slogans Don’t Save Lives
      • 40 Free Safety Slogans For the Workplace
      • Safety Slogans for Work
    • FREE SAFETY eBOOKS
    • Free Hotel and Resort Risk Management Checklist
    • FREE DOWNLOADS
    • TOP 50
    • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS
    • Find a Safety Consultant
    • Free Safety Program Documents
    • Psychology Of Safety
    • Safety Ideas That Work
    • HEALTH and SAFETY MANUALS
    • FREE SAFE WORK METHOD STATEMENT RESOURCES
    • Whats New In Safety
    • FUN SAFETY STUFF
    • Health and Safety Training
    • SAFETY COURSES
    • Safety Training Needs Analysis and Matrix
    • Top 20 Safety Books
    • This Toaster Is Hot
    • Free Covid-19 Toolbox Talks
    • Download Page – Please Be Patient With Larger Files…….
    • SAFETY IMAGES, Photos, Unsafe Pictures and Funny Fails
    • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
    • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • Social Psychology Of Risk
    • What is Psychological Health and Safety at Work?
    • Safety Psychology Terminology
    • Some Basics on Social Psychology & Risk
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk – Prof Karl E. Weick
    • The Psychology of Leadership in Risk
    • Conducting a Psychology and Culture Safety Walk
    • The Psychology of Conversion – 20 Tips to get Started
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk And Safety
    • Psychology and safety
    • The Psychology of Safety
    • Hot Toaster
    • TALKING RISK VIDEOS
    • WHAT IS SAFETY
    • THE HOT TOASTER
    • THE ZERO HARM DEBATE
    • SEMIOTICS
    • LEADERSHIP
  • Dr Long Posts
    • ALL POSTS
    • Learning Styles Matter
    • There is no Hierarchy of Controls
    • Scaffolding, Readiness and ZPD in Learning
    • What Can Safety Learn From Playschool?
    • Presentation Tips for Safety People
    • Dialogue Do’s and Don’ts
    • It’s Only a Symbol
    • Ten Cautions About Safety Checklists
    • Zero is Unethical
    • First Report on Zero Survey
    • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it!
  • THEMES
    • Psychosocial Safety
    • Resiliencing
    • Risk Myths
    • Safety Myths
    • Safety Culture Silences
    • Safety Culture
    • Psychological Health and Safety
    • Zero Harm
    • Due Diligence
  • Free Learning
    • Introduction to SPoR – Free
    • FREE RISK and SAFETY EBOOKS
    • FREE ebook – Guidance for the beginning OHS professional
    • Free EBook – Effective Safety Management Systems
    • Free EBook – Lessons I Have Learnt
  • Psychosocial Safety
    • What is Psychosocial Safety
    • Psychological Safety
      • What is Psychological Health and Safety at Work?
      • Managing psychosocial hazards at work
      • Psychological Safety – has it become the next Maslow’s hammer?
      • What is Psychosocial Safety
      • Psychological Safety Slogans and Quotes
      • What is Psychological Safety?
      • Understanding Psychological Terminology
      • Psycho-Social and Socio-Psychological, What’s the Difference?
      • Build a Psychologically Safe Workplace by Taking Risks and Analysing Failures
      • It’s not weird – it’s a psychological safety initiative!
You are here: Home / Robert Long / Cultural Silences in Safety – Aesthetics

Cultural Silences in Safety – Aesthetics

July 25, 2022 by Dr Rob Long Leave a Comment

imageWhenever we do our culture program we work through the many beliefs, rituals and practices in societies that foster harm. So much for the nonsense of zero harm. Just watch the latest episode of 4 Corners to get an insight into just how much harm people want in order to fulfil a cultural myth. Why do people so readily wish to harm themselves? They seek meaning and purpose in their lives.

So many cultural activities foster harm to the body, from birth rituals, initiation rituals, rite of passage rituals and endless rituals considered essential for in and outgroup membership.

But Safety never talks about the essentials of culture and is silent about so many factors that are critical to understanding culture. Safety doesn’t discuss the dynamic of ritual.

Of course, then Safety wonders why it has no effect on culture change.

Similarly, Safety doesn’t talk about worldviews, philosophies, ideologies or methodologies, because in such research it may have to admit its own subjectivities and name its own trajectories that result in harm.

Another of the many cultural silences in safety is Aesthetics. Why does this matter?

Aesthetics matters because understanding Aesthetics is central to understanding ethics, politics and personhood.

So many of the cultural silences in safety relate to avoidance in discussing: worldview, perception, imagination, discovery, learning, poetics, envisioning, affordances, embodiment, emotions, feeling and the way it understands the world. Such is the bankrupt mono-disciplinary worldview of safety.

Aesthetics are about the richness of life and it is from all things experienced in life and being (that are not measurable) that we gain our greatest meaning and purpose. Yet Safety, relegates any discussion of such meaning to the fringe, Safety never talks about Aesthetics. This silence is beautifully maintained by the myth of ‘what gets measured gets managed’. When in reality, ‘all that counts can’t be counted’.

In the Safety worldview, life is framed in Kantian disinterest and the myth of objectivity. Safety dreams that its view of ethics (in duty as Natural Law) can be found in ‘check our gut’ and ‘do the right thing’ . Such is the mythology of objectivity in safety.

Based on Kantian brain-centrism we now have an industry steeped in engineering and Behaviourism that imagines the human body as a thing that gets injured and counted and the brain as a problem because it is rarely rational. Indeed, in Safety there is simply no discussion of the body-mind problem. The fact that Safety envisions no relevance to such a discussion is an indictment of this mono-disciplinary industry that enjoys the atmosphere of its own bubble.

Safety simply doesn’t discuss:

  • The body as a social resonance mechanism;
  • The body as a means and end in communication and social interaction
  • Embodied enactment, action and gesture as thinking
  • Meaning and purpose as embodied
  • The body as shaping, expressing and sharing ‘thoughts’ and
  • The body as a representational device.

Such is the bankrupt idea that the brain is the centre of thinking. So much research demonstrates clearly that brain-centrism is not true. See the list of suggested readings at the end of this blog.

One of the most important principles in an ethic of personhood in SPoR is that the whole person is Mind, not just the brain on top of a body. Indeed, SPoR considers ‘thinking’ as what happens between human persons in social space.

If it happens outside of the skull, Safety has little interest.

Safety so often is presented conceptually as a collection of right propositions and concepts, and this is often declared as ‘learning’. So, if you get your propositions and concepts right, safety will improve and such brain movement is defined as ‘learning’. When it is not.

In true Cartesian and Kantian style, Safety defines cognition as brain-centric, which is not about Cognition but Cognitivism. (Similarly, Safety is more interested in Scientism than Science as open enquiry). All the silences in safety are evidence of everything Safety is closed to.

The outcome in brain-centrism, is some strange quest for purity of mind and thinking. And in such discourse, there is no discussion of an ethic, meaning, personhood or Socialitie. Indeed, silence about personhood is essential if one wants to maintain a deontological ethic of duty and check your gut.

In Kantian thought, the brain gives meaning to Aesthetics, so art, music, dance and embodied experience is only understood through detachment (objective removal to the subject). The moment something becomes the subject of feelings and emotions (another silence in safety), all is subjective and removed from rational (brain) processing. In this way, all things Aesthetic are devalued and relegated to the subjectivities of emotions and feelings. Aesthetics are constructed as what you do on the weekend but have no relevance to work or safety. In this way, dis-embodied rationalism is elevated and embodied experience is devalued. Indeed, in safety – the emotions and risk are most often demonized.

We see this kind of thinking throughout safety, especially in the mythology of incident investigation. There is no investigations training on the market that discusses the subjectivity of the investigator as central to investigating (except for SEEK ). This silence about subjectivity makes such training fundamentally dishonest and unethical. The myth of objectivity is another silence of safety, ensuring the delusion that emotions and feeling have no part in decision making, thus investigations are constructed as brain-activity and all non-compliance as irrational.

When Kant defined such things as beauty, taste and perception, they were relegated to the fringe of being in rejection of the body and personhood as a ‘thinking ecological Mind’. Thus, leaving society with the delusion of brain-centrism and the idea that anything to do with Aesthetics was subjective, stuck in feelings and he irrational. We see this in Areily’s nonsense book Predictably Irrational. Areily even understands the non-rational as a mystical force. This is how Safety comes up with nonsense language as ‘Resilience Engineering’.

In this way, rational thinking is deified and the emotions and feelings demonized. From Augustine to Descartes to Kant we then got a church preoccupied with the sins of the body, sexual ‘sin’ and the body as the carrier of sin. We still see this today in the church, in all its forms. This is why the church is so preoccupied with sex.

The church has left us with this strange idea that a person is not a whole or unified in body-Mind but rather two segments mystically yoked together. What we then define as a ‘person’ is a bodily organism operated by a brain. And not just a brain but a brain-as-computer.

This is why the way we define person is so fundamental to ethics and why a safety-view of ethics never wants to discuss the issue of personhood.

So, Society and safety are now lumbered with the idea that Aesthetics is: ‘a set of principles concerned with the nature and appreciation of beauty. and the branch of philosophy which deals with questions of beauty and artistic taste’. Therefore, any knowing that is non-propositional is relegated to the subjective and propositional thinking is privileged. In his way, there are two senses of meaning: descriptive (cognitive meaning) and emotive (noncognitive meaning). This dichotomy, duality and binary way of defining personhood is dangerous. In this way cognition is understood as brain-centric and embodied experiential meaning is not even defined as ‘cognition’.

Yet, all persons make sense of the world experientially, emotively and unconsciously.

All professional Educators study meaning, linguistics and personhood as central to ethics, knowing and learning. When we study early childhood that is pre-conceptual, pre-textual, pre-lingual, and pre-propositional, we see how children construct meaning without any of these tools that brain-centrism defines as essential to sense making.

Indeed, paralinguistics, gesture, embodied communications and emotions are how children develop meaning. These processes never stop even after persons develop ways of using text, voice and language.

This is why understanding ritual is so important to an understanding of persons who make meaning. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a birthday party, wedding, funeral or teen group meeting, so much of meaning is not constructed through text but through gesture and ritual. All embodied meaning is pre-reflective, what Damasio calls the Feeling of What Happens.

The certitude and comfort of safety is not constructed through text, rational propositions or checklists but rather through the gestures and rituals that accompany such texts and propositions.

All meaning is relational. Persons make sense of the world and what it means through Socialitie.

For example, when love gives me meaning it is hardly a brain-centric activity but rather a whole of being activity so much so, that we always describe love as coming from the heart. We never say ‘I love you with all of my brain’, it simply doesn’t make sense. When we think of every love song on the planet we use the language of heart, soul and gut (Workspace, Headspace and Groupspace) and still we can’t capture it through rational explanation. Yet, love is central to meaning and personhood. As is all Aesthetic knowing.

Contrary the mythology of Safety (https://safetyrisk.net/barrys-latest-safety-innovation-discovery/ ; https://safetyrisk.net/safety-starts-with-us/ ) people are not motivated by money and if it seems so, it is only ever temporary. The greatest motivator in life (and work) is meaning.

It is through our bodies that we connect to the world and find meaning and then maybe later try to intellectualize it. And then when we try to rationalize experience, we can’t do it justice, because embodied cognition is the deepest form of knowing.

So, in safety we never read about risk as a ‘dance’ but it is. There is no ‘fixing’ risk. Risk is essential for learning. Risk is a wicked problem. In safety, we never hear about leadership as an ‘art’ (DePree) nor about performance as embodied enactment (Elam). We never hear of Holistic Ergonomics but always human ‘factors’. Humans are always spoken of as ‘factors’ in a system, not as persons in the world. How interesting that the Aesthetics of Drama is relegated to the study of theatre and movies yet it is our daily political experience.

All living is about movement in the world and there is no learning without embodied movement. Stasis and zero are the enemy of learning. The only way to eliminate risk is to not move in the world. And all movement in the world is Aesthetic.

Aesthetics should not be shifted to the theatre or art gallery as a removed activity for the subjective emotions but rather Aesthetics is about our embodied movement in the world. This is also how First Nations people understand the world and why they are so connected to it. First Nations people intuit belonging to the world as an unconscious state of being. The world is not something one ‘rationalizes’ about. First Nations people ‘know’ the world through Aesthetics. How can we understand this?

My heuristics help me intuitively enact skills on an excavator and this no different than playing a guitar. When I get to intuitive knowing I no longer have to ‘think’ about what I do, regardless of what some silly Risk Assessment states. When I stop looking at the chord shapes and enter into the music, I can recall songs I never thought about and play ‘beyond’ thinking. This is how we operate all equipment once we have learned it (https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/when-objects-become-extensions-of-you/ ). But you don’t have to play the guitar to know this, we know this when we feel the end of a pen in our hand even though the instrument we hold as no nerve endings. Similarly, the excavator driver ‘feels’ the tip of the bucket through his hands as it becomes an extension of his knowing.

All human engagement with the world involves non-rational unconscious knowing ‘performed’ without ‘thinking’. The language of ‘complacency’ of course is safety nonsense (https://safetyrisk.net/the-assp-getting-complacency-completely-wrong/ ) that enables dismissal of any talk of the human unconscious (another silence in safety), decision making or persons. The language of ‘complacency’ emerges and only makes sense (meaning), from the dualist worldview of engineering and safety.

If one really wants to understand human judgment and decision making (in culture) then such an understanding won’t be found in a safety engineering text (nor ASSP journal). If one really wants to understand why people do what they do, such an understanding will never be developed though behaviourism or binary thinking.

If you really are seeking an understanding of why people do what they do, one needs to step outside of safety and its worldview. One needs to look at anything Safety is silent about and then investigate why?

A Reading List

So, next time you are thinking about what to read, don’t pick up a safety book, there will be nothing ‘different’ there. Try one of these:

  • Claxton, G., (2015) Intelligence in the Flesh. Yale University Press. New York.
  • Colombetti, G., The Feeling Body, Affective Science Meets the Enactive Mind. MIT Press, London.
  • Damasio, A., (1994) Descartes’ Error, Emotion, Reason, and The Human Brian. Penguin, New York.
  • Damasio, A., (1999) The Feeling of What happens, Body and Emotions in the Making of Consciousness. Harvest Books, New York.
  • Durt, C., Fuchs, T., and Tews, C., (eds.) (1997) Embodiment, Enaction, and Culture. MIT Press. London.
  • Fuchs, T., (2018) Ecology of the Brain, The Phenomenology and Biology of the Embodied Mind. Oxford University Press. London.
  • Ginot, E., (2015) The Neurophsychology of the Unconscious, Integrating Brain and Mind in Psychotherapy. Nortons. New York.
  • Noe, A., (2009) Out of Our Heads, Why You Are Not Your Brian and Other Lessons from The Biology of Consciousness. Hill and Wang. New York.
  • Panksepp, J., (1998) Affective Neuroscience, The Foundations of Human Animal Emotions. Oxford University Press. London.
  • Thompson, E., (2010) Mind in Life, Biology, Phenomenology, and the Science of the Mind. Belknap Press. London.
  • Tversky, B., (2019) Mind in Motion, How Action Shapes Thoughts. Basic Books. New York.
  • Van Der Kolk, B., (2015) The Body Keeps the Score, Brain, Mind and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Penguin, New York.
  • Varela, F., Thompson, E ., and Rosch, E., (1993) The Embodied Mind, Cognitve Science and Human Experience. MIT Press, London.

Indeed, start with

  • Johnson, M., (2007) The Meaning of the Body, Aesthetics of Human Understanding. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
  • Johnson, M., (1987) The Body in the Mind, The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
  • More about Rob
Dr Rob Long

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions
Dr Rob Long

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

  • Culture and Risk Workshop – Feedback - March 24, 2023
  • Practical Case Studies in SPoR Presented at Vienna Workshops - March 21, 2023
  • Risk iCue Video - March 20, 2023
  • Rethinking Leadership in Risk - March 20, 2023
  • Gesture and Symbol in Safety, the Force of Culture - March 20, 2023
Dr Rob Long
PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.

Please share our posts

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Robert Long, Safety Culture Silences Tagged With: aesthetics, neuroscience, socialitie

Reader Interactions

Do you have any thoughts? Please share them below Cancel reply

Primary Sidebar

Search and Discover More on this Site

Never miss a post - Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,516 other subscribers

Recent Comments

  • Leon Lindley on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Rob Long on Entertainment, Suckers and Making Money From Safety
  • Rob Long on Celebrating 60 Years of Lifeline
  • Gregg Ancel on Entertainment, Suckers and Making Money From Safety
  • Rob Sams on Celebrating 60 Years of Lifeline
  • Rob long on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Rob Long on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Rob Long on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Rob Long on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Admin on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Leon Lindley on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Admin on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Mariaa Sussan on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Brian Darlington on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Leon Lindley on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Narelle Stoll on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Narelle Stoll on Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Brian Edwin Darlington on SPoR Workshops Vienna 26-30 June
  • Rob Long on How to Manage Psychosocial Risks in your organisation
  • Brian Edwin Darlington on Jingoism is NOT Culture, but it is for Safety

RECOMMENDED READING

viral post – iso 45003 and what it cannot do

Introduction to SPOR – FREE!!

Psychosocial Safety and Mental Health Series

Celebrating 60 Years of Lifeline

Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness

Duty of Care is NOT Duty to Care (for persons)

Safety, Ethics, SPoR and How to Foster the Abuse of Power

Psychosocial Spin – Naming Bad as Good, Good Work Safety!

How to Manage Psychosocial Risks in your organisation

The Delusions of AI, Risk and Safety

Health, the Poor Cousin of Safety

Psychosocial Health Conversations – Three

Conversations About Psychosocial Risk – Greg Smith, Dr Craig Ashhurst and Dr Rob Long

More Posts from this Category

NEW! Free Download

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Footer

VIRAL POST – The Risk Matrix Myth

Top Posts & Pages. Sad that most are so dumb but this is what safety luves

  • 500 OF THE BEST AND WORST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2023
  • Free Safety Moments and Toolbox Talk Examples, Tips and Resources
  • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
  • Road Safety Slogans 2023
  • 15 Safety Precautions When Working With Electricity
  • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
  • Safety Acronyms
  • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
  • Free Risk Assessment Template in Excel Format

Recent Posts

  • Culture and Risk Workshop – Feedback
  • Practical Case Studies in SPoR Presented at Vienna Workshops
  • Risk iCue Video
  • Rethinking Leadership in Risk
  • ‘Can’t Means Won’t Try’ – The Challenge of Being Challenged
  • Gesture and Symbol in Safety, the Force of Culture
  • Human Factors is Never About Humans
  • Celebrating 60 Years of Lifeline
  • Smart Phone Addiction, FOMO and Safety at Work
  • Entertainment, Suckers and Making Money From Safety
  • Breaking the Safety Code
  • The Futility of the Centralised Safety Management System?
  • Liking and Not Liking in Safety, A Tale of In-Group and Out-Groupness
  • Risk iCue Video Two – Demonstration
  • Radical Uncertainty
  • The Safety Love Affair with AI
  • Safety is not a Person, Safety as an Archetype
  • Duty of Care is NOT Duty to Care (for persons)
  • What Can ‘Safety’ Learn From a Rock?
  • Safety, Ethics, SPoR and How to Foster the Abuse of Power
  • Psychosocial Spin – Naming Bad as Good, Good Work Safety!
  • SPoR Workshops Vienna 26-30 June
  • What Theory of Learning is Embedded in Your Investigation Methodology?
  • How to Manage Psychosocial Risks in your organisation
  • Risk You Can Eat
  • Triarachic Thinking in SPoR
  • CLLR NEWSLETTER–March 2023
  • Hoarding as a Psychosis Against Uncertainty
  • The Delusions of AI, Risk and Safety
  • Health, the Poor Cousin of Safety
  • Safety in The Land of Norom from the Book of Nil
  • Psychosocial Health Conversations – Three
  • Conversations About Psychosocial Risk – Greg Smith, Dr Craig Ashhurst and Dr Rob Long
  • Jingoism is NOT Culture, but it is for Safety
  • CLLR Special Edition Newsletter – Giveaways Update
  • The Disembodied Human and Persons in Safety
  • 200,000 SPoR Book Downloads
  • What SPoR Network is.
  • Trinket Safety
  • How to Know if Safety ‘Works’
  • Due Diligence is NOT Quantitative
  • SPoR Community Network
  • Conversations About Psychosocial Risk Session 2 – Greg Smith, Dr Craig Ashhurst and Dr Rob Long
  • The Psychology of Blaming in Safety
  • By What Measure? Safety?
  • Safe Work Australia a Vision for No Vision
  • Do we Need a Different Way of Being in Safety?
  • Non Common Sense Mythology
  • Language Shapes Culture in Risk
  • What Does Your Risk and Safety Icon Say?

VIRAL POST!!! HOW TO QUIT THE SAFETY INDUSTRY

FEATURED POSTS

Surfacing – Making the Unconscious Conscious

A Question of Ethics

Risk and Safety as a Wicked Problem

Zero Discourse and Perfectionism

Safety People Don’t ‘Save Lives’

What or Who Is Safety?

Framing Your World

The Binary Barnacle

Social Psychology Applied to the Discernment of Risk

Safety as Avoidance

Off to a Flying Start in Learning with CLLR

Understanding Safety Myths

Mental Health, Risk and Safety – Part 2

Framing Folly and Fantasy in Safety

The Dynamics of Dehumanisation

SOCD – Safety Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

Dialogue Do’s and Don’ts

Happy New Year and the ‘Good Life’ Paradox

Social Psychology Of Risk Workshops

SPoR, Ideology and Safety Myth

Clarity Enabled

The Convenience of Complacency

The New Leadership – Risk and Safety

You Don’t Want a Compliance Culture

Social Psychology of Risk Workshop-Sydney

Actions in ‘Bad Faith’

No Soft Skills in Safety

WHS Research Symposium 2019

Risk Psychometrics, Spin and Snake Oil

The Conundrum in Discerning Risk

Bad Moon Rising

Talking Risk Videos – Humanising Workers Compensation

Chronic Unease is Not Enough

The Mystery of the Emotions

The Human Safety Newsletter is Out

Body Memory and Safety

The Strange Challenge of Unlearning in Safety

What is Your Risk iCue?

Culture About Much More Than Structure

Risk Intelligence, Thinking and Decision Making

More Posts from this Category

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,516 other subscribers

How we pay for the high cost of running of this site – try it for free on your site

WHAT IS PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY?

What is Psychological Safety at Work?


WHAT IS PSYCHOSOCIAL SAFETY