The best way to understand HOP is to see how HOP describes itself.
Examine the language of the following:
The premise of HOP is the idea that human error is inevitable so perhaps through better process systems management and analysis, organizations might lessen the effect of human error through the promotion of defenses that reduce risk.
Yep, traditional safety.
Human and Organisational Performance (HOP) is a systematic way of analysing mistakes to efficiently handle them. It helps us comprehend how people behave and how to create a system that is mistake-resistant.
Yep, traditional safety.
HOP (also called the “New View” in some circles) is a global movement towards using the social sciences to better understand how to design resilient systems.
Yep, traditional safety.
- https://www.sbec.com/Insights/Embracing-HOP-How-Five-Principles-Changed-The-Way-We-Think-Of-Safety-/
HOP emphasizes understanding the systemic factors contributing to such events.
Yep, traditional safety.
Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) focuses on using social sciences to better understand and respond to mistakes in the workplace. (with semiotic of brain centrism)
Yep, traditional safety.
Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) is a framework that seeks to enhance safety in the workplace by examining how work is done and how people interact with the systems around them.
Yep, traditional safety.
HOP is a risk-based operating philosophy that recognizes error is part of the human condition, and an organization’s processes, systems and culture influence employees’ decisions, actions, and consequently, their likelihood of success. (BTW, HOP is not a philosophy and has no articulated ethic)
Yep, traditional safety.
Enter Human and Organisational Performance (HOP), a transformative approach that shifts the focus from blaming individuals for mistakes to understanding how systems, processes, and organisational culture influence human behaviour.
Yep, traditional safety.
HOP is all about getting to the bottom of why mistakes happen instead of playing the blame game.
Yep, traditional safety.
HOP is a philosophy and a group of techniques mainly developed in the nuclear industry to achieve peak human performance. (again, HOP is NOT a philosophy, its 5 slogans)
Yep, traditional safety.
The article dismantles the idea that it’s either/or when it comes to HOP and BBS. It shows how to make them fit together, pointing out that this is simply the case of combining new and old thinking.
Yep, traditional safety.
HOP is an operating philosophy providing a new way of looking at work, people and the systems in which people get work done
Yep, traditional safety.
Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) management, is defined as the ability to anticipate, respond to and learn from disruption and opportunities.
Yep, traditional safety.
This might do but the list is extensive and it is all anchored to traditional safety. When you have no methodology or method and just 5 slogans, its easy just to ass a patch on to traditional safety and keep rolling along. Let’s be clear HOP has no articulated ethic or philosophy, its 5 slogans. In the end it’s all about systems, performance, behaviours, performance, mistakes/errors, performance, hazards, performance, controls, performance and yes, performance.
Yep, traditional safety.
If you are interested in an ethic of risk, you can study here: https://cllr.com.au/product/an-ethic-of-risk-workshop-unit-17-elearning/
If you want to understand what a philosophy is, you can study here: https://cllr.com.au/product/philosophy-and-spor-module-23/
If you want to understand a different methodology and method from traditional safety then you can connect here: admin@spor.com.au
If you want to get some practical, positive and effective methods for tackling risk that are actually different and work, you can read here:
- https://www.humandymensions.com/product/spor-and-semiotics/
- https://www.humandymensions.com/product/it-works-a-new-approach-to-risk-and-safety-book-for-free-download/
RICARDO MONTERO says
I agree, HOP is traditional safety, there is not any new in it, but,…there are bad performance “traditional safety” strategies and there are god performace “traditional safety” strategies. There are many god results around the world with “traditional safety”. What I can not read are the good results with “no traditional safety”, including SPOR. Perhaps you can write about the meaning of “good results” and “good performance” in safety
Rob Long says
Ricardo, I have written extensively on the good results of SPoR, I don’t know what else I could do. All my writing is saturated with evidence of the effectiveness of SPoR. If you want to read about it, its there.