When we think of visionaries, we think of imagination. The idea of envisioning (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/envisioning-risk-seeing-vision-and-meaning-in-risk/) requires imagination, creativity and innovation. All three require stepping outside the bounds of orthodoxy and non-conformance.
When we look at visionary artists, musicians and writers we see people not bothered by being harnessed by traditions, systems and procedures. Many are able to experiment, create and innovate without fear or being anchored to the expectations and constraints of orthodoxy.
We have written about the Imagination before:
- https://safetyrisk.net/foundations-of-perception-and-imagination-in-risk/
- https://safetyrisk.net/what-in-the-risk-safety-world-is-imagination/
- https://safetyrisk.net/the-imagination-and-curiosity-in-risk/
- https://safetyrisk.net/the-visionary-imagination-margaret-atwood/
- https://safetyrisk.net/the-visionary-imagination-and-marion-mahoney-griffin/
- https://safetyrisk.net/the-visionary-imagination-louisa-lawson/
It is interesting to see so called ‘innovation’ in safety, all about movement within the safety bubble. It’s fascinating to see Safety talk about innovation and yet not hear the word ‘imagination’ spoken. Just look at any safety program espousing innovation and look for the word, it’s not there.
When the ideology is zero and behaviourism is the worldview, there is no place for the Imagination.
There is nothing safe in the Imagination space.
If you are interested in the Imagination, you can see a video conversation between Dr Rob Long and Dr Nippin Anand here:
Last time Nippin was in Canberra we had a chat about the Imagination in my courtyard with the afternoon sun streaming through the pathway. A lovely setting to imagine about the Imagination.
The best way to test your imagination is to ask: what have you created that is ‘outside the box’? What have you discovered and created that looks beyond the confines of orthodox engineering-behaviourist safety? How does your method of innovation work? What does it do? How does your method go beyond the bounds of orthodox safety? How can you be innovative still working within the old secure safety worldview?
Chris Butler says
Really interesting to apply imagination to this domain! I ended up reading through the other posts you had on it too.
I’ve been getting up to speed on a practice called design fiction where we build diegetic prototypes from the future to help discuss issues of today. I wonder if this might be a practice that might aid the discussions of safety.
What would a safety protocol of the future be that might be good, bad, or middling? How might it help us understand the way we should do things today?
I’d be happy to talk about this practice a bit more if interested. Let me know!
Rob Long says
Yes, sounds interesting but this would all go back to a worldview that is prepared to risk, suspend agenda and imagine and Safety can’t do that. So, I doubt if Safety could embrace any idea like what you are talking about. More so, Safety doesn’t even want to talk to anyone that has any ideas outside of the compliance box. The industry is governed by zero ideology, fear and policing.