Safety is a mono-disciplinary endeavour, anchored to the philosophies of Rationalism, Positivism and Behaviourism.
If you seek out knowledge from this industry, that’s the methodology that generates all that follows. The method that follows has been the same in safety since 1931. These dominant philosophies result in the weird outcome of engineers and behaviourists sprouting forth about what they don’t know on culture.
If you want to see the outcome of these philosophies look no further than the global safety conference held in Sydney in 2023. Here on the front page of global safety (https://visionzero.global/) is its religion – zero. If you want to know about culture and safety, start here. See Figure 1. Zero Vision Centre Stage.
Figure 1. Zero Vision Centre Stage.
You might like to think that culture is debatable or that safety is multi-disciplinary but this one photo captures the opposite. There is no diversity, variability, critical thinking, intelligence or maturity in the ideology of zero (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/).
One can try to be diplomatic and compromise with zero discourse, but it cannot compromise or be diplomatic with you. Zero is absolute, there can be no compromise in zero.
The foundation of culture is belief and, in safety= Zero one must believe. See Figure 2. We Believe, taken from the Safety World Congress 2017.
Figure 2. We Believe
It doesn’t really matter how the industry seeks to package its ideology. It is clearly a religion and bears all the characteristics of a religion.
This is how we get Safety talking about Safety Saves, see Figure 3. Safety Saves. This picture taken from the foyer for a safety conference sponsored by a behaviourist safety organisation.
Figure 3. Safety Saves.
Or this picture Figure 4. Safety Heaven from a well-known behaviourist in the safety industry.
Figure 4. Safety Heaven.
Then we have one of the safety favourites, the Bradley Curve (See Figure 5.)
Figure 5. The Bradley Curve
Just read this and see that humans have a ‘natural instinct’ for harm (Original Sin) and that to defy zero incidents is a ‘heresy’. Of course, at the other end of the curve we get the evangelical free will of choice to achieve zero!
Then we have the classic Spirit of Zero (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VIRXEuniWA&t=4s) video complete with apocalyptic visions and Pentecostal healings. See Figure 6. Zero Vision where the lame are made to walk and the blind see!
Figure 6. Zero Vision.
Please try to deny the evidence that this is the not culture of safety.
______________
If you frame your view of the world through safety this is where you end up.
The first place to start to see if a presenter on culture has any expertise about culture is to see if they talk about religion, myth, ritual, semiosis, customs or faith-belief. If these don’t get a mention then what you are getting is safety and a contribution to the pooling of ignorance. Whatever you are getting, its not about culture.
The only place where you will find the idea that there is a ‘debate’ about culture is in the safety industry.
Suggest to any First Nations person that the idea of culture is debatable and you will be laughed at!
Those with expertise and intelligence in culture don’t waffle on about behaviourist-rationalist discourse about ‘does culture exist?’.
One of the key characteristics of the culture of safety is the pooling of ignorance and regurgitation of amateur hour about culture.
Just ask any of these safety presenters or writers on culture what they know of religion, myth, ritual, semiosis, customs, cult-ure or faith-belief and you will find out quickly they know very little about culture.
None of these presenters or writers about culture in safety start with Anthropology or Religion, they start with safety. This is a sure recipe to ensure all that follows is ignorance.
Unfortunately, this is the industry consumed with itself and zero and doesn’t know how dumb it is.
This is the industry whose global mantra is zero!
One of the reasons why the safety industry is so religious is because it knows nothing about its own religiosity. It doesn’t even know when its discourse is religious or its semiotics are religious.
- This is how we end up with an industry that comprehends harm and injury as ‘evil’.
- This is how we end up with an industry than never speaks about fallibility.
- This is why we end up with inquisitions about minor injuries.
- This is why we end up with so much zealotry in safety.
The first rule about culture is to not start with safety. Any focus on safety as a foundation corrupts anything that follows.
I think Dekker was right, safety has become a priesthood (https://safetydifferently.com/the-safety-profession-can-be-like-a-priesthood/). And the High Priest is a Behaviourist. This is why Safety is so cult-ic.
Just ask the safety presenter or writer on culture about their studies and experience or if have they read any of these:
- Barry, J., (1999). Art, Culture and the Semiotics of Meaning. St Martin’s Press. New York.
- Bourdieu, P., (1997). Culture and Power. University of Chicago Press. New York.
- Eschin, S., and Gurung, A., (2009). Culture and Mental Health, Sociocultural Influences, Theory and Practice. Wiley-Blackwell. London.
- Jourdan, C., and Tuite, K., (eds.). (2006) Language, Culture and Society. London.
- Lotman, J., (2013) The Unpredictable Workings of Culture. TLU Press. Tallinn.
- Mclaren, P., (1995). Critical Pedagogy and Predatory Culture. London.
- Mulhern, F., (2000). Culture/Metaculture. London.
- Oswell, D., (2006). Culture and Society. London.
- Shore, B., (1996) Culture in Mind, Cognition, Culture, and the Problem of Meaning. Oxford University Press.
- Story, J., (2021). Cultural Theory and Popular Culture, An Introduction. (ninth edition). Routledge. London.
You know already that the answer is going to be no.
Perhaps ask a safety presenter or writer in culture about their experience with First Nations people and Anthropology.
These questions could go on and on but they don’t seem to matter to safety.
Perhaps the best place to start if you want to know about culture is the list above NOT a safety source.
If you want to be religious about safety then go for it, but don’t tell me that safety is a secular activity. Such a claim is denied by all the evidence.
If you don’t want to be religious about safety then the first thing one has to reject is the god of safety, Zero!
Dr Rob Long
Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)
- Safety sexism and misogyny looking for a scapegoat - October 11, 2024
- Framing and Priming Investigations, The Manawanui Tragedy - October 10, 2024
- HOP is Traditional Safety - October 9, 2024
- Defining Safety by the Absence of Accidents, Injury and Harm - October 9, 2024
- Visual and Verbal Mapping of Risk in SPoR - October 7, 2024
Prasanna Kumar Pujapanda says
Most of the words used above is difficult to understand for most of the readers with limited vocabulary.Please make it simple,sp that people can understand better, follow the author’s and implement it in their workplace.
Rob Long says
The pictures tell the story. There is plenty of simple and clear material published by SPoR that helps you implement a better approach to risk in the workplace that this religious stuff.