• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Safety Risk .net

Humanising Safety and Embracing Real Risk

  • Home
    • About
      • Privacy Policy
      • Contact
  • FREE
    • FREE SAFETY eBOOKS
    • Free Hotel and Resort Risk Management Checklist
    • FREE DOWNLOADS
    • TOP 50
    • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS
    • Find a Safety Consultant
    • Free Safety Program Documents
    • Psychology Of Safety
    • Safety Ideas That Work
    • HEALTH and SAFETY MANUALS
    • FREE SAFE WORK METHOD STATEMENT RESOURCES
    • Whats New In Safety
    • FUN SAFETY STUFF
    • Health and Safety Training
    • SAFETY COURSES
    • Safety Training Needs Analysis and Matrix
    • Top 20 Safety Books
    • This Toaster Is Hot
    • Free Covid-19 Toolbox Talks
    • Download Page – Please Be Patient With Larger Files…….
    • SAFETY IMAGES, Photos, Unsafe Pictures and Funny Fails
    • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
    • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • PSYCH. OF SAFETY & RISK
    • What is Psychological Safety at Work?
    • Safety Psychology Terminology
    • Some Basics on Social Psychology & Risk
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk – Prof Karl E. Weick
    • The Psychology of Leadership in Risk
    • Conducting a Psychology and Culture Safety Walk
    • The Psychology of Conversion – 20 Tips to get Started
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk And Safety
    • Psychology and safety
    • The Psychology of Safety
    • Hot Toaster
    • TALKING RISK VIDEOS
    • WHAT IS SAFETY
    • THE HOT TOASTER
    • THE ZERO HARM DEBATE
    • SEMIOTICS
    • LEADERSHIP
  • Robert Long
    • ALL POSTS
    • Learning Styles Matter
    • There is no HIERARCHY of Controls
    • Scaffolding, Readiness and ZPD in Learning
    • What Can Safety Learn From Playschool?
    • Presentation Tips for Safety People
    • Dialogue Do’s and Don’ts
    • It’s Only a Symbol
    • Ten Cautions About Safety Checklists
    • Zero is Unethical
    • First Report on Zero Survey
    • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it!
  • Slogans
    • Researchers Reveal the Top 10 Most Effective Safety Slogans Of All Time
    • When Slogans Don’t Work
    • CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
    • BEST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2022
    • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
    • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
    • Safety Acronyms
    • You know Where You Can Stick Your Safety Slogans
    • Sayings, Slogans, Aphorisms and the Discourse of Simple
    • Spanish Safety Slogans – Consignas de seguridad
    • Safety Slogans List
    • Road Safety Slogans 2022
    • How to write your own safety slogans
    • Why Are Safety Slogans Important
    • Safety Slogans Don’t Save Lives
    • 40 Free Safety Slogans For the Workplace
    • Safety Slogans for Work
  • Safety Culture
    • Safety Culture Silences
  • Psychological Safety
You are here: Home / Investigation / Investigating Events is NOT About ‘Brain Farts’

Investigating Events is NOT About ‘Brain Farts’

July 3, 2021 by Dr Rob Long 6 Comments

Investigating Events is NOT About ‘Brain Farts’

imageIn Australia, we have this saying to try to explain why someone does something that doesn’t make sense, we call it a ‘brain fart’. It is a way of people accepting that someone did something that didn’t make rational sense and was out of the ordinary. There is actually a game on sale at Big W by this name (https://www.bigw.com.au/product/brain-fart/p/55569/). If you like you can read what Science tries to do with ‘brain farts’ see here: https://www.livescience.com/33841-10-everyday-brain-farts.html). How fascinating that most of this ‘science’ discussion is metaphysical ie. No logical or rational connection is made between the phenomena of ‘brain farts’ and enactment. Most of what is discussed is simply about miss-perception and the way humans envision (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/envisioning-risk-seeing-vision-and-meaning-in-risk/). Still, a good read for an industry consumed by behaviourism and scientism.

Incidents and events are not about ‘brain farts’ and, carrying such bias into an investigation is dangerous. This is what often sets safety apart from disciplines that understand interpretation and bias. The beginning of and good investigation is owning one’s own ethic and bias. Apart from the SEEK program (https://cllr.com.au/product/seek-the-social-psyvhology-of-event-investigations-unit-2/ ), I know of no Investigations product on the market that considers an ethic of risk, worldviews or bias in its methodology. The crazy assumption of Safety is that ethics are objective (see AIHS BoK on Ethics), causality is objective (see AIHS BoK on Causality) and that investigations are objective (see example: https://www.ioshmagazine.com/2021/06/15/how-conduct-effective-accident-investigation-interview).

The beginning of any effective investigation doesn’t start with Technique, it starts with self-reflection. Understanding one’s own personality type, learning style and cognitive bias is the starting point well before any investigation takes place. The investigator needs to understand what they are taking to the investigation and either share it with another very different ‘type’ or come clean about such bias before venturing into an investigation. There is no evidence of this in this proposal in How to Conduct An Effective Accident Investigation . Indeed, there are so many significant flaws in this article it serves as a case example of how NOT to conduct an investigation.

So lets have a look at what this article says:

  1. This article starts off by declaring the purpose of the investigator is to discover the ‘truth’ of enactment. And whose ‘truth’ would that be? Then comes a classic confession ‘the interviewee might have something to hide’. No thought that the interviewer is hiding anything, no hiding of ethics, assumptions and bias, such is the mindlessness of this article. What an amazing purpose in the opening paragraph: ‘But, with a careful approach, the interviewer can still keep the upper hand’. OMG, what is this ‘upper hand’? Good old Safety, always in control. Anyone worth their salt in counselling will tell you that interviewing is NOT about control but about giving power to the other.
  2. Typical of Safety this article concentrates on the mechanics of the interview room. By mentioning comparison to ‘police’ it is clear that this article is NOT about interviewing by interrogation. Particularly when it states: ‘Have ready access to any documents you might need: training records, service schedules, emails’. Then states that the focus of the interview should be ‘flow’, not likely. The best interviewer takes nothing into the room except sophisticated skills in open questioning, iCue Listening and an attitude of ‘humble enquiry’. This article is completely Interviewer-centric.
  3. The next stage of this article takes on the old favourite, behaviourism. Now Safety plats the role of behaviourist body language expert, this is simply dangerous. Without extensive education and experience over many years, making judgments about body language if fraught with danger and mis-judgment.
  4. Then the article goes back to policing and uses the acronym of PEACE as some kind of formula for interviewing. What a disaster. The last place to seek effectiveness in incident investigation is policing discourse. No wonder Safety is so attracted to this model. Has someone committed a crime?
  5. The next discussion in the article on ‘liar psychology’ is again very dangerous. Where is the Psychology experience and qualifications of the author (https://www.managementandsafety.co.uk/about/)? Oh that’s right, the Safety discipline makes one expert across all disciplines! Advising people about detecting lies is again police-talk and most dangerous advice for anyone conducting an investigation. Safety people are neither psychologists nor lawyers and the best advice is to NOT make judgements in this area. The beginning of effective event interviewing is to NOT interrogate people.
  6. The section on open questioning might be helpful if it was about open questioning skills but it isn’t. So, back to bias and worldviews. If you want to know about effective questioning perhaps go here: https://safetyrisk.net/questioning-skills-and-investigations/ With Safety identified as Zero, there is little hope that Safety would even know where to start with investigations carrying such bias. Just imagine how the bias of 1% safer (https://safetyrisk.net/1-safer-than-what/) with all its emphasis on numerics would drive an open investigation? It wouldn’t.
  7. One of the sure fire giveaways of Safety incompetence is this language of ‘soft’ and hard’ skills and this article confirms this. There are no ‘soft’ and hard’ skills, this is simply pejorative language that privileges engineering over person-centrism. There are people skills and non-people skills. Framing interviewing in any other way simply demonstrates safety’s bias to interrogation and policing. I certainly wouldn’t be going to the – ‘soft’ skills found in IOSH’s competency framework. Indeed, the last place to find the skills you need in effective interviewing is from the safety industry. When your ideology is zero, then anything that follows will be brutalism. Even the language of ‘competencies’ is anathema to the psychology of effective interviewing.
  8. The last section of this article finally suggest seeking specialist help. At last! And this won’t be found from the Institute of Industrial Accident Investigators. Just have a look at the Dreamworld fiasco (https://safetyrisk.net/an-engineering-dreamworld/) if you want to see what this bias manifests in investigation methodology. Perhaps read what a lawyer says about the Dreamworld fiasco (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-disconnect-and-the-dreamworld-tragedy/). Nothing could be worse than carrying into an investigation the bias of engineering, safety and a mechanistic worldview. No wonder the author believes in the naïve notion of independence.
  9. Of course, the semiotic of the cognitive maze at the start of the article matches the discourse of the article. However, incidents and events are never about ‘brain farts’ or ‘wrong cognitive programming’. This is the bias of traditional safety. Nothing could be further from reality and demonstrates the individualist, behaviourist and mechanistic view of the article. It is this semiotic that ‘frames’ such discourse. A simple look at this article and it’s omission about ‘culture’ is stark.
  10. Finally, let’s think about all that is missing in a Safety approach to investigations. In SEEK we call this the investigation donut. These are all the things that Safety never considers or understands as relevant to investigation (https://safetyrisk.net/the-seek-investigations-donut/).

There is much you can do to become effective in investigations but just as this article indicates, it won’t be found from Safety. There are indeed, many other ways of thinking about risk that the Safety worldview (https://safetyrisk.net/making-the-world-fit-the-safety-worldview/ ). This would require movement into a Transdisciplinary approach (https://safetyrisk.net/transdisciplinary-thinking-in-risk-and-safety/ ; https://safetyrisk.net/the-value-of-transdisciplinary-inquiry-in-a-crisis/ ) and this is not evident anywhere in the safety industry to date.

  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
  • More about Rob
Dr Rob Long

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions
Dr Rob Long

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

  • Understanding Psychological Terminology - August 7, 2022
  • Poetics of the Self - August 7, 2022
  • Culture Silences in Safety – What Culture Isn’t - August 7, 2022
  • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it! - August 6, 2022
  • When Only More Guilt Will Do - August 6, 2022
Dr Rob Long
PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.

Please share our posts

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Investigation, Robert Long Tagged With: AIHS BoK on Ethics, SEEK

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. simon cassin says

    July 3, 2021 at 10:37 PM

    Hi Rob,

    Thank you for your interesting article, and the link to the SEEK outline. I think the SEEK approach appears to be a more relevant and person-countered approach to investigations.

    I have some clients who no longer use the term investigations when seeking to learn from accidents etc. I am finding the term review is becoming more common. (but still rare).

    One of the issues which I believe requires more consideration is the possibility of investigations contributing to the development of PTSD in those compelled to explain/re-live traumatic events. Do you believe we should learn more about this possible unintended outcome of investigations/reviews?

    Thanks

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      July 4, 2021 at 8:41 AM

      HI Simon, yes the language of ‘review’ is much better and considering that Safety is neither legal counsel or police it behooves the industry to develop a model that is humanising, intelligent, person-centric and learning-centric. The idea of learning teams in S2 is a good one although it is frustrating that so much is assumed about what learning means or what learning style/philosophy is being referred to. One thing Safety seems expert at is simplistic, binary and naive approaches to many things such as: ethics, tackling events that go wrong, understanding personhood and the meaning of culture. The language of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ is a real indicator to the privileging of engineering over other disciplines that Safety seems to know very little about.
      You are spot on with the effect of the investigator on PTSD. The ignorance of investigator bias and the myth of objectivity play a huge part in this. Typical of Safety, the focus is on the object (investigation) not the person. Again, Safety thinks very little of the trajectories of its language or interventions.
      In SEEK this is where we start, with self-awareness and ownership of bias, style and subjectivity. If it’s a critical event it is likely this won’t see the day in court for 4 years yet Safety thinks its a panic to relive the moment, with no skills at all in sensitivity to persons/clients. Most people who are traumatised by an event and then asked for evidence in the moment can easily get such testimony dismissed by a court as inadmissible and given under duress.
      Some of the basics in pastoral counselling should be included in OHS education but of course are not. and if your mantra is zero, you are the last person I would want to talk to.

      Reply
      • simon cassin says

        July 10, 2021 at 6:48 AM

        Thanks for the response Rob.

        Can we attend a SEEK course via Zoom etc?

        Reply
        • Rob long says

          July 10, 2021 at 10:32 AM

          Yes, details on the website link.

          Reply
  2. Admin says

    July 3, 2021 at 2:21 PM

    Thanks Rob – that IOSH article is really bad but a great example of the problem and typical of the harmful rubbish being promelgated by the peak bodies

    Reply
    • Rob long says

      July 3, 2021 at 5:54 PM

      Nothing like profound ignorance paraded as professional expertise. That’s safety.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Search and Discover More on this Site

Never miss a post - Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,463 other subscribers

VIRAL POST!!! HOW TO QUIT THE SAFETY INDUSTRY

NEW! Free Download

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

Recent Comments

  • Rob Long on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Wynand on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Brian Edwin Darlington on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Brian Edwin Darlington on Culture Silences in Safety – What Culture Isn’t
  • Rob Long on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Rob Long on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Brent Charlton on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Richard Brookes on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Rob Long on The Rhizome as a Learning Model for Risk
  • Ooker on The Rhizome as a Learning Model for Risk
  • Rob Long on Safety Doesn’t Need Military Language
  • Manjit Handa on Safety Doesn’t Need Military Language
  • Rob Long on Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism
  • Ricardo Montero on Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism
  • Admin on Culture Silences in Safety – Ritual
  • Anonymous on Culture Silences in Safety – Ritual
  • Rob Long on Cultural Silences in Safety – Power and Politics
  • Admin on Cultural Silences in Safety – Power and Politics
  • Rob Long on Doing Away With Health and Safety–Language and People
  • Rob Long on Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Footer

Top Posts & Pages. Sad that most are so dumb but this is what safety luves

  • BEST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2022
  • Free Safety Moments and Toolbox Talk Examples, Tips and Resources
  • Road Safety Slogans 2022
  • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
  • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS, CHECKISTS, REGISTERS, TEMPLATES and APPS
  • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • 15 Safety Precautions When Working With Electricity
  • Free Risk Assessment Template in Excel Format
  • What Is Safety?
  • IDEAS FOR SAFETY TOOL BOX TALKS, HARD HAT CHATS and SAFETY MOMENTS

Recent Posts

  • Understanding Psychological Terminology
  • Poetics of the Self
  • Culture Silences in Safety – What Culture Isn’t
  • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it!
  • When Only More Guilt Will Do
  • How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Keep Counting Every Time You Don’t Achieve Your Goal, That’s Professional
  • Safety and Non-Neuroscience
  • Paperwork and Usability in Tackling Risk
  • Safety as a Masculinist Activity
  • You Don’t Want a Compliance Culture
  • The Soul of Mental Health
  • Identity and Safety
  • Psychosocial Controls and Measures for Who?
  • Linguistics and Safety
  • Not a Profession’s Bootlace
  • Cultural Silences in Safety – Power and Politics
  • History and Safety
  • What is Psychosocial Safety
  • A Guide to Psychosocial Safety Skills
  • Doing Away With Health and Safety–Language and People
  • The New Enemy of Safety – The Unconscious
  • Tape Down Those Leads
  • More Safety Code to Disguise Behaviourism
  • Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism
  • Safety Culture–Hudson’s Model
  • Understanding Safety as an Archetype
  • The Purpose of Safety
  • Learning Styles Matter
  • Due Diligence and Holistic Ergonomics Workshops
  • Having FUN in Safety FUNdamentalism
  • 80% of Safety Practitioners Are Idiots
  • Risk Homeostasis Theory–Why Safety Initiatives Go Wrong
  • Culture Silences in Safety – Semiotics
  • Flooding is Dangerous, and I don’t Mean the Water….
  • Cultural Silences in Safety – Aesthetics
  • What Can Safety Learn From Playschool?
  • Risky Conversations, The Law, Social Psychology and Risk
  • Due Diligence Videos – 10000 downloads
  • Release the Safety Monster and Wreck a Good TV Show
  • Paper Safe
  • Safety Starts with Us
  • Investigations and Heuristics
  • Barry’s Latest Safety Innovation Discovery
  • The Human Race…
  • The ASSP Getting Complacency Completely Wrong
  • What in the (Risk & Safety) World is Imagination?
  • Understanding Safety Myths
  • Cultural Silences in Safety – Empathy
  • Culture Silences in Safety – Trajectories

FEATURED POSTS

Free Two Chapter Download and Book Competition

When the Target Drives the Method

Push or Pull – It’s Not Your Fault – It’s a Norman Door!

Actions in ‘Bad Faith’

Zero Accident Vision Non-Sense

Selective Harm for Rio Tinto

The Mythic Symbology of Safety

Embodiment, Risk and Safety

An Introduction to Semiotics and Risk

Promoting Dumb, Anxiety and Harm in the Name of Good

Culture Silences in Safety – Critical Thinking

Making Technicians Not Helpers

I DON’T KNOW

The Illusion Of Opposites

Can There be a Feminist Safety?

What’s Faith Got To Do With Safety

Don’t Hold the Hand Rail

I’m Concerned That We Can’t See The Safety Forest For The Safety Trees

Safety Should NOT Be About Safety

Just Tell Your Mind to Stop It

Safety Aphorisms and Platitudes

Real Risk, An New Icon for SafetyRisk and Competition

Social Sensemaking–New Book Release

What Are the Benefits Of Social Psychology of Risk?

Psychology and safety

Report on SPoR Convention 2018

Zero Vision but Purchase Insurance

The Attraction of Simple and Easy in Safety

A Question of Ethics

Safety as Ritual Performance

Understanding Psychological Terminology

Paralysis by Precaution

What Can Marx Say to Safety?

Risk Intelligence, Thinking and Decision Making

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF RISK – INTRODUCTION WORKSHOP

Zero as Morally Wicked

Who is the Enemy and What War is Safety Fighting?

An Ethical Psychology of Risk

When Slogans Don’t Work

First in Best Dressed for Indoctrination

More Posts from this Category

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,463 other subscribers

How we pay for the high cost of running of this site – try it for free on your site

What is Psychological Safety at Work?