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

SafetyRisk.net

Humanising Safety and Embracing Real Risk

  • Home
    • About
      • Privacy Policy
      • Contact
  • FREE
    • Slogans
      • Researchers Reveal the Top 10 Most Effective Safety Slogans Of All Time
      • When Slogans Don’t Work
      • CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
      • BIGGEST COLLECTION of WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2023
      • 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 2023
      • 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
    • 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
  • Social Psychology Of Risk
    • What is Psychological Health and 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
  • Dr Long Posts
    • 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!
  • THEMES
    • Psychosocial Safety
    • Resiliencing
    • Risk Myths
    • Safety Myths
    • Safety Culture Silences
    • Safety Culture
    • Psychological Health and Safety
    • Zero Harm
    • Due Diligence
  • Free Learning
    • Introduction to SPoR – Free
    • FREE RISK and SAFETY EBOOKS
    • FREE ebook – Guidance for the beginning OHS professional
    • Free EBook – Effective Safety Management Systems
    • Free EBook – Lessons I Have Learnt
  • Psychosocial Safety
    • What is Psychosocial Safety
    • Psychological Safety
      • What is Psychological Health and Safety at Work?
      • Managing psychosocial hazards at work
      • Psychological Safety – has it become the next Maslow’s hammer?
      • What is Psychosocial Safety
      • Psychological Safety Slogans and Quotes
      • What is Psychological Safety?
      • Understanding Psychological Terminology
      • Psycho-Social and Socio-Psychological, What’s the Difference?
      • Build a Psychologically Safe Workplace by Taking Risks and Analysing Failures
      • It’s not weird – it’s a psychological safety initiative!
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)

  • Embodied Enactivity in Safety - September 21, 2023
  • The Meaning of Myth in Risk - September 20, 2023
  • Myth Making and Why it Matters to Safety - September 20, 2023
  • The Power of Safety Myths - September 18, 2023
  • What Do You Mean By Performance? - September 17, 2023
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 to Rob longCancel reply

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 7,511 other subscribers.

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Recent Comments

  • Matt Thorne on Myth Making and Why it Matters to Safety
  • Rob Long on What’s Funny About Safety?
  • Rob Long on Perfection is Safety Child’s Play
  • Rosa Carrillo on Hopkins-Dekker on Reason and Other Laughs
  • Brent Charlton on Perfection is Safety Child’s Play
  • Anonymous on What’s Funny About Safety?
  • Rob Long on Zero Hour part 6 Knowing Yourself
  • Rob Long on Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Rob Long on Book Launch – “Zero, The Great Safety Delusion” – Free Download
  • Rob long on Don’t Be Dumb Like Me, the Typical Safety Keynote
  • Anonymous on Don’t Be Dumb Like Me, the Typical Safety Keynote
  • Joseph D Zinobile on Book Launch – “Zero, The Great Safety Delusion” – Free Download
  • Jason Martell on Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Rob Long on Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Peter Collins on Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Rob Long on Zero Hour Part 4 – Zero and the Unconscious
  • Chiara on Zero Hour Part 4 – Zero and the Unconscious
  • Rob Long on Zero Hour Part 4 – Zero and the Unconscious
  • Yasmin Saunders on Zero Hour Part 4 – Zero and the Unconscious
  • Rob Long on Seven ‘Golden’ Rules for Zero and Yet No Ethic

RECOMMENDED READING

viral post – iso 45003 and what it cannot do

Introduction to SPOR – FREE!!

Psychosocial Safety and Mental Health Series

7 Golden Rules that are NOT Golden

Why Zero Vision Can Never Tackle Mental Health

If Psychosocial Health Matters, Stop Hot Desking

Effective Strategies in Mental Health at Work

CLLR Newsletter July 2023

Playing With Mental Health in Safety is Dangerous

STOP ‘BREAKING’ PEOPLE! The notion of Psychological Safety

Learning to Learn Socially

Not Just Another ‘Hazard’

Hazards Near Me

More Posts from this Category

NEW! Free Download

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

Footer

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

  • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
  • BIGGEST COLLECTION of WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2023
  • Free Safety Moments and Toolbox Talk Examples, Tips and Resources
  • Road Safety Slogans 2023
  • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS, CHECKISTS, REGISTERS, TEMPLATES and APPS
  • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
  • Safety Acronyms
  • Icebreakers and Games that Safety Trainers Play
  • What Is Safety?
  • Electronic Risk Score Calculator

Recent Posts

  • Embodied Enactivity in Safety
  • The Meaning of Myth in Risk
  • Myth Making and Why it Matters to Safety
  • Icebreakers and Games that Safety Trainers Play
  • The Power of Safety Myths
  • What Do You Mean By Performance?
  • Hopkins-Dekker on Reason and Other Laughs
  • Perfection is Safety Child’s Play
  • Podcast – Dr Rob Long With John Morlan and The Risk Matrix
  • What’s Funny About Safety?
  • Zero Hour part 6 Knowing Yourself
  • Free Videos, Podcasts and Books on Zero
  • Don’t Be Dumb Like Me, the Typical Safety Keynote
  • If You’re Happy in Safety, Clap Your Hands
  • Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Zero Hour Part 5 – Surfacing the Unconscious
  • Zero Hour Part 4 – Zero and the Unconscious
  • Auditing the 7 Golden Rules of Zero, A Miserable Fail
  • 7 Golden Rules that are NOT Golden
  • The Non-Golden Rules for Leadership in Zero
  • Seven ‘Golden’ Rules for Zero and Yet No Ethic
  • Why Zero Vision Can Never Tackle Mental Health
  • Is this Your Safety?
  • SPoR Workshops Canberra 18-21 September
  • The Dominance of Zero as the ‘Common Denominator’ of Safety
  • Zero Hour Episode 3
  • Goal Setting and Zero
  • Zero as a Worldview
  • If Psychosocial Health Matters, Stop Hot Desking
  • Book Launch – “Zero, The Great Safety Delusion” – Free Download
  • Breach of Faith and Psycho-Social Risk
  • Zero Harm is Never Zero Harm
  • Why Would You Want to be a Safety “Geek’ or Hero?
  • The Mental Illness of Identifying as Safety
  • Zero Hour – Zero as a place holder
  • Zero Hour – Zero as a Philosophy
  • CARING ABOUT PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY
  • Care is NOT a Factor and Yes, Your Model Matters
  • Care Ethics and the Ethics of Care, in Risk
  • FEAR AND CONTROL – Dialogue in a technological society
  • Of Course, Method Matters in Safety
  • Day 12 SPoR in Europe
  • Free Study Module Following-Leading in Risk August-September
  • Effective Strategies in Mental Health at Work
  • CLLR Newsletter July 2023
  • Playing With Mental Health in Safety is Dangerous
  • The Sacred and Profane, Rituals and Semiotics, A Lesson for Safety
  • Day 11 SPoR in Europe
  • STOP ‘BREAKING’ PEOPLE! The notion of Psychological Safety
  • Free “It Works” Download, Now Works

VIRAL POST!!! HOW TO QUIT THE SAFETY INDUSTRY

FEATURED POSTS

The Mystery of the Emotions

Beware the Cult of Denial

iCue Diagnostic, What is Your Risk iCue?

The Illusion Of Hazard Identification

Envisioning and Creativity in Safety

Framing Folly and Fantasy in Safety

Non-Conscious Safety

How to Do the Best Risk Assessment

Triarachic Thinking in SPoR

Not Much Like Safety…

Incommensurability and Discourse in Risk

The Psychic Effect of Safety

The Social Psychology of Risk Event Exploration (Investigation) Knowledge

The Human Safety Newsletter is Out

The Acts of God and Act of Humans

Understanding Safety Myths

Questioning Skills and Investigations

Perth and London SPoR Workshops

Am I stupid? I didn’t think of that…

A Culture of Care (and sackings…)

Sensemaking and ‘Hapori’ – Essential for Tackling Risk in New Zealand

Talking Risk Videos – Humanising Workers Compensation

Day 4 SPoR in Europe

Like a Rhizome Cowboy

The Domino Delusion in Safety

Safety Engagement with Workspace, Headspace and Groupspace

CLLR Christmas 2016 Newsletter and Competition

The Safety Control Delusion

Resilience and Safety

WHS Legislation is NOT about Safety it’s about Culture

The Paradox of Positivism for Safety

When Art Speaks to Harm

New Video Series on Safety

Semiotics and the Unconscious Messages We Send

The Tyranny of Absolutes

Safety Career Highlight

Risk and Safety as a Social Psychological Problem

SPoR – Positive, Constructive, Practical, Rational, Visual, Verbal, Social, Relational, Person-Centric, Respectful, Ethical and Real

Military Metaphors in Safety

Ten Secrets to Risk and Safety Motivation and Ownership

More Posts from this Category

VIRAL POST – The Risk Matrix Myth

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 7,511 other subscribers.

WHAT IS PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY?

What is Psychological Safety at Work?


WHAT IS PSYCHOSOCIAL SAFETY