There are several reasons why this language is dangerous.
- When safety is an individualist activity, we neglect the critical element of trust in work. When we focus on the self, it is also naïve, because so much of tackling risk is contingent on context and others who come before or after you. This idea of a focus on the self, ego and the individual is also disastrous when things go wrong. When something goes wrong, the last person of any comfort, solace or hope is the ego-centric individual who we already know can’t help, listen or care. This ideology/myth is also a Western cultural thing and doesn’t represent social reality. No wonder we have chemical engineers telling us to not talk about culture.
- In SPoR this is why we emphasise dialectic, trust, relationships, social meaning, helping, care and community. The language of ‘safety starts with me/you’ (https://youtu.be/gLOh0q82kwo?si=GDp0b9QnrG7Oy89-; https://youtu.be/q71WY-TxtWg?si=vKOyKshoOch38D8n ; https://youtu.be/UzGnmYFLMko?si=j8r52VAnu2lKpSOx ; https://youtu.be/CxXl3gsY5o0?si=IYmG1dSlZ2BJD7xh ) erodes all of this. Afterall, language is the bedrock of culture, not behaviours. Culture is NOT ‘what we do around here’.
- And, this language is everywhere (https://youtu.be/D7WRrTyBCoI?si=q4pM9mSocF1Mql-1) and it is anti-motivational and anti-learning. It is what Safety is so good at, stating what something is, by what it isn’t. We see this often in the safety discourse on just culture’ when it means neither or with the company safetyculture that has nothing to do with safety or culture.
- The same applies for the silly myth/mantra make safety ‘personal’ (https://youtu.be/KUi5KwiZC6U?si=gFUg3wZrlHHBKtwc; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9WthTBEKsw; https://youtu.be/5UlZ0q101KQ?si=Bop_fJQVAnsy5EQp ) Just more safety goop with no methodology clutching for slogans to find meaning (https://safetyrisk.net/punking-safety-when-its-not/ ). All of this is like telling someone ‘Take care’, use ‘common sense’ or ‘be careful’. Just more meaningless language with no meaning that fills the air with safety noise.
- I have discussed the myths of ‘safety is a choice you make’ and ‘all accidents are preventable’ previously (https://safetyrisk.net/is-safety-a-choice-you-make/; https://safetyrisk.net/why-safety-isnt-a-choice-you-make/) and this language is also naïve in the same way. The language suggests that safety is contingent on an individual and on their choice when in reality we know all social living and movement is contingent on many things both prior, in context and long after one has left the scene. And of course, the language of ‘all accidents are preventable’ just fosters blame and zero ideology (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/ ). None of this is helpful for risk and safety.
The language, discourse and Discourse we use about risk and safety is foundational to establishing a wise and mature culture about risk.
There is much better language we should use when we want to inspire people about safety. Similarly, the nonsense language of ‘heroes’ alienates people and works against psychosocial health in the workplace. How strange all this noise from safety podcasts and safety propaganda from a perspective with no expertise in the psychology of motivation or learning.
There is little point in talking about ‘psycho-social health’ then in the next breath, promote individualism, blame, ego, self and behaviourism. All that results from this is contradiction and confusion, and people then just see safety as some kind of stupidity that just polices hazards and loves paperwork (https://vimeo.com/932711888 ).
Greg Smith reminds us that if anything should go wrong that you will be held accountable to your language in a court of law (https://vimeo.com/163648220).
So, your talk matters and ought to be meaningful if one wants to motivate others to risk and safety consciousness. This can be done by simply dumping the dumb slogans and myths and reframing one’s language so that Risk Makes Sense (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/risk-makes-sense/)
There are plenty of constructive, practical and positive alternatives one can find in SPoR. All you have to do is ask.
Dr Rob Long
Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)
- Selling Safety and the Safety of Selling Safety Culture - January 19, 2025
- You Can’t ‘Bust’ Myths - January 18, 2025
- There is No Such Thing as an HRO - January 18, 2025
- Understanding the SPoR Worldview - January 17, 2025
- How to Escape the Safety=Zero Cult - January 14, 2025
Rob Long says
Damien, of course you are entitled to ‘read between the lines’ as you wish except that words in themselves and grammar have meaning and are also interpreted according to a defined hermeneutic. It is a simple grammarly rule that me (singular) can never mean us (plural). In safety and a court of law, it would never find in your favour about ‘reading between the lines’. You can’t play games with grammar and words with lawyers and liability.
Damien Francis Jameson says
Hi Rob. Thanks for your reply and I agree with you regarding language and grammar, but I believe that sometimes one needs to read between the lines. I maintain that with out ‘me’ there is no ‘us’… and this is where my belief stems from.
Damien jameson says
While I agree with almost everything said in this article, I have to disagree that “Safety starts with me” is rubbish. I have always believed in this one slogan, in that if I don’t operate with the mindset of safety being how I should be, then I am blocking discourse and closing off all possibility of relating to others. For me, “Safety starts with me” means that I make the choice to be open and cooperative with others, which by extension leads to trust and dialectic rather than negating those things. It is my attitude and beliefs that help create the culture that surrounds me, and if I am personally not open and receptive then I am not operating as I should. So, my safety starts with me, and my attitude and feelings link me with others working with or around me. Great oaks from little acorns grow.
Rob Long says
Damien, thanks for your response. The language is however very clear despite your interpretation of it. The grammar is clear. ‘Safety starts with me’ is about ‘me’, not us. It is individualist language despite whatever spin you want to put to it, it is not its grammarly meaning. Language has to have meaning, we can’t make of it what we want.
Given what you believe about safety your language should be ‘safety starts with us’.
George says
One of my favorite slogans is “Zero Harm Vision”. We have this slogan where I work and I find it embarrassing every time I see it written or uttered by one of the educated, highly compensated elites in power. The classic debate in my mind is do they KNOW how silly and damaging this language is and just do not care? OR is it they are ignorant and/or lack the cognitive capacity to accept the decades of data and research on the power semiotics has on the collective unconscious? It is probably a mix. But ultimately, I really believe even if they took a course in SPOR, the cognitive dissonance would be powerful enough (plus the motivation of wealth) that silly slogans like “Zero Harm Vision” would stay in place. To be fair, they are sort of telling you they have no idea what they are doing in the very slogan they use. Since “Zero harm” is literally impossible (or desirable unless you never want to learn, love, earn money at a job or experience what being a person is), having a “vision” for that means they want to lead us to a place that does not and cannot exist. Heck, let’s extend this to other “visons” shall we? I have a “vision” for hourly workers at my company getting a raise to $100.000.000.000 an hour at my job this week. Anyone inspired by that? Now of course, if you say this is not realistic or achievable then YOU are the problem. How dare you?! I guess that means you are ok that they struggle financially? I am using the word “Vision” in what I want so that alone means its well thought out and on solid ground, right?
Rob Long says
Thanks George. I always find it amusing that those who are the most noisy about motivation and inspiration have no expertise in it. Good olde safety, expert in everything: linguistics, psychology, culture, perception, learning and brain surgery.