Culture is NOT a Construct
Stating that culture is a ‘construct’ is like saying god is a ‘construct’ or reality is a ‘construct’. The choice of the metaphor ‘construct’ says much more about the source than a mature understanding of culture. The same applies when Safety declares that ‘structure creates culture’ (https://safetyrisk.net/structure-does-not-create-culture/ ). Both propositions indicate that the sources have little clue about culture, similarly little clue about Linguistics.
In order to speak about any-thing, we make it a thing. This doesn’t mean it is a ‘thing’ but rather there is a limit to language. Understanding the paradox of metaphor (Metaphors We Live By) and language is foundational to discussion of any-thing.
When we look to language as a source of understanding we must also understand that there is much in life that cannot be communicated by language. Culture is one of those ‘things’. Many of the things we experience in life are beyond words and language. This is why we often turn to Poetics, Music, para-linguistics, Semiotics and aesthetics to express knowing and being. If we don’t understand this we come out with metaphors like ‘construct’ and ‘structure’ to explain culture.
Safety struggles with Linguistics because it’s not part of its worldview, just as Semiotics and Poetics are foreign. Most often we see Safety sprouting forth on matters like culture, that it doesn’t understand, using ‘constructs’ like engineering metaphors to try to explain the inexplicable. This is why Safety confuses culture with systems and behaviours (what we do around here).
The first rule about culture is to make sure you don’t turn to Safety to learn about culture.
Yes, we do have to communicate about culture but this is best done outside the bounds of Rationalism, Behaviourism and Engineering, the worldviews that dominate safety. You can’t apply these Safety ‘constructs’ to an understanding of culture, mythology or historiography. The omission of any discussion of Religion in relation to culture espoused by Safety demonstrates, it knows little about culture, mythology and history. There is little one can understand about mythology without expertise in Religion. Such expertise doesn’t come from engineering.
Anyone with any expertise in culture (eg. Anthropology) knows that Religion and belief are the starting place for understanding, not so Safety. Culture is not ‘constructed’, it has always emerged from ‘being’. One really can’t understand culture without a foundation in existentialist, phenomenologist and religious knowing. Trying to explain culture is like trying to explain evolution or ecology, Allostasis or Quantum. The same applies for myth, religion and history. Trying to explain in text the experience of life and being is like trying to explain faith and belief.
Similarly, culture is not a ‘property’. Again, a materialist metaphor applied to the non-material. Culture also has very little to do with systems. All of this is Safety struggling to understand what it doesn’t understand from the constraints of a Safety worldview. This is what happens when Safety is locked in its own bubble and lacks any Transdisciplinary intelligence. This is why the mono-disciplinary AIHS BoK starts from the premise that safety knows all about everything. This is why Safety is so religious about what it knows because it knows so little about Religion. You only have to watch ‘The Spirit of Zero’ from global Safety to comprehend this. When your lens on the world is safety, then your world-view is myopic.
One of the reasons why Safety is so ignorant about culture is, all that it ‘constructs’ as belief about culture emerges from its own blindness and ignorance. This is one of the characteristics of Safety (culture). This is how Safety ends up speaking about safety as ‘saving lives’. This is how Safety ends up with a list of ‘10 Cardinal rules’. This is how safety becomes ‘god’ to Safety.
When you think culture is engineered as a ‘construct’, ‘property’ or ‘structure’ (methodology) then whatever method emerges (as an ideology), will seek to tackle culture from such an ideology. No wonder Safety fails miserably when it tries to affect culture.
If you want to learn about a Transdisciplinary approach to culture in a positive and constructive way, you can study here: https://cllr.com.au/product/culture-leadership-program-unit-15-overseas-elearning/
Prof. Robert Long
Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)
- Is Safety Mindful of Its Apotheosis? - October 7, 2026
- Safety Symbols as Fetishes - October 6, 2026
- Seduction and Simulacra in Safety - October 4, 2026
- Psychosocial Contexts and Risk Factors - September 27, 2026
- Is Safety the Sum of What it Worships? - September 26, 2026
A foreword from the Safe365 Safety Culture Maturity Report
Why safety culture matters?
As we reflect on the lack of improvement in safety statistics in the UK, Australia and NZ over the past 20 years, our need to take a more granular view of WHY we don’t see further improvements in work-related harm reduction is imperative.
Despite advances in technology and a deeper technical understanding of the regulations, tools, systems and processes behind health and safety, we still see work-related harm at rates that none of us are content with.
What is needed beyond imposing more regulation and compliance criteria or issuing more international safety standards?
The answer, at least in part is culture.
Safety culture, as it’s become known, isn’t a new construct. In fact, it’s a subset of overall organisational culture. It addresses the specific attitudes, beliefs and values required to embed safety into the entire DNA of a company. Safety Culture Maturity is a process of measuring an organisation against a series of markers for ‘what good looks like’. This contrasts with a compliance approach that measures whether or not an organisation is meeting minimum
regulatory requirements.
Compliance requirements and the systems and processes they drive form an important, foundational part of culture. The presence of true safety culture, however, extends beyond this. It includes the reality of how those systems and processes are implemented, the success
of that implementation, and the essential leadership ingredients that must be demonstrated to foster the right culture. A culture of engagement, commitment and advocacy amongst every member of the organisation.
Embedding a culture of safety is about taking safety outside of just the safety function.
Safety culture creates a reality where every individual conducts their day-to-day job with an ingrained awareness of the risks around them.
They consider the people those risks may affect, and understand the safeguards put in place to allow for work to be undertaken safely.
At the most advanced end of safety culture, there’s an embedded practice of proactive behaviour – a habitual nature to look out for both themselves and others with every action contemplated and taken.
At the most advanced end of safety culture,…… I can feel the bile rising
Matt, not talking about important critical matters is the endorsement of ignorance. Then to make this rule 1 and 2 is the ultimate in moronic stupidity. Only Safety could celebrate such an infantile idea. More so, to then designate oneself as a fictitious hero demonstrates the height of arrogance.
What sad indictment of an industry that doesn’t know how dumb it is.
Recently my mother had a series of strokes and was diagnosed with Dementia and Alzheimers, this in itself was a very traumatic moment for myself and my siblings.
To further complicate this I also have seven children who have a close relationship with their Grandmother.
And it was only 12 months ago the we lost Dad.
As a parent and a son, a brother and a friend I need to tconverse about this with people. I need to come to terms with this situation. I want to know the unknowable. I want to influence my families’ culture in a positive way towards the death of a loved one.
I can only do that if I have a conversation. ‘Talking about it’ suggests a monologue.
When I see asinine rules such as ‘The first rule of Culture is don’t talk about Culture’ I get infuriated.
To narrow down a sliver of life, call it Safety Culture ,as if it doesn’t interact with the rest of the world, and then suggest the best way to influence it is to not talk about about, but introduce controls is perhaps cowardly and lazy.
Culture is complicated, messy, hard to influence, sometimes obtuse.
It requires hard work.
It is always present, and like any other part of your job, ignore or mute it at your peril.
Losing a parent of child or, looking on to the suffering of someone we love is nearly unbearable. and it is in these times we need each other so much, to listen, care and be.
Life and death are the beginning and end of what drives belief, the foundation of culture. You can trace the power of belief and faith back thousands of years. It is the foundation of all cultures and civilizations of the past and present.
The denial of death (Becker) is one of the strange processes of zero ideology. Zero fears death and denies fallibility whilst all religions acknowledge it.
In pastoral psychology we know that silence about critical issues creates toxicity. In culture studies we know that silence and selective silence like that practiced in Safety creates toxicity.
Of course, this is why the safety industry is not where one looks in moments of suffering and in need of resilience.
What a strange industry that fears harm and injury and then when harm and injury come, has no idea what to do.