In the world of safety, the predominant language is about the control of ‘hazards’ (objects). We see this even in psychosocial discourse where the focus should be on persons, social meaning, ethics and an understanding of power, but it is not. In SPoR we talk about the influence of persons in tackling risk. There is the difference.
The focus of traditional ergonomics is on the task and how it fits the human (see Kroemer and Grandjean, Fitting the Task to the Human). In the traditional approach to ergonomics the focus is on measurement and what can be measured.
We see other approaches in safety (eg. Energy-Based Safety) where Safety again gets excited by a focus on objects. We see regulators and ‘codes of practice’ that focus on psychosocial ‘hazards’ and still there remains no focus on: persons, personhood, ethics or the Socialitie of work. Moreso, we see in supposed ‘new safety paradigms’ a continued focus on ‘organisational performance’.
It seems that whenever safety comes into the room, it’s focus is on objects not subjects. Its duty is to safety not persons. Indeed, you will find nowhere across the globe an articulation in safety of an ethic that tackles the challenges of personhood, ethics and moral meaning in work.
If you want to learn how to be inclusive in your approach to risk then you can register for the program in Holistic Ergonomics in Edinburgh 4-6 February 2026 presented by Dr Robert Long and Dr Nippin Anand. You can register here: https://novellus.solutions/mec-events/social-psychology-of-risk-conference-spor-europe-2026/
You can read about the program here: https://spor.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Edinburch-Flyer.pdf
The workshop will focus on practical methods that enable a focus on persons rather than ‘hazards’. The focus will be on how The Ethics of Risk should guide engagement, understanding and methods in tackling risk. These methods help understand the nature of personhood, the dynamics of power and, why persons should be central to the way we work (ergon).
It is also rare that you will be able to get to experience Nippin and Rob working together in such a workshop, particularly in the Northern Hemisphere. So, take this opportunity and register because places at the venue are limited.
Prof. Robert Long
Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)
- Poetics and Risk Workshop, From Language to Doing - December 12, 2025
- Divergent Thinking About Risk - December 7, 2025
- Stop the Train I Want to Get Off - December 7, 2025
- Safety Leadership - December 7, 2025
- Espoused Theory and Theory-in-Use in Safety - December 7, 2025
Rob Sams says
Imagine if we had the capacity, desire, and motivation to consider how all these methods, tools, and approaches (and indeed different worldviews) could (try to) ‘safely’ coexist alongside and with each other… #cohesion
What’s stopping this from occurring? Or is it simply that in the world we live in, it has to be one way or the other…?
Could one of the challenges be that the different disciplines and approaches are rarely interested in listening to one another, let alone in exploring and being curious about how they might work together to support people and organisations in learning, caring, and working together?
There is much talk of adopting a trans-disciplinary approach in SPoR (and in blogs on this site), which makes sense to me. Surely, though, in addition to critiquing other disciplines/approaches, this also involves being curious about how they operate and accepting what they bring to the table (as well as what they don’t)?