• 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 RESOURCES
    • FREE SAFETY eBOOKS
    • 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
    • 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!
  • Quotes & 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
You are here: Home / Leadership / Perfectionism in Leadership Discourse Part 1

Perfectionism in Leadership Discourse Part 1

April 7, 2015 by Max Geyer 3 Comments

I’m excited and honoured to present Max Geyer’s paper from the recent Psychology of Risk Conference held in Sydney.

WARNING: the inbuilt message may disturb some people who are still holding onto the Zero Harm mantra.  For others it may provide some ammunition to help counter the binary argument “if you are not for Zero, then you must want to hurt people” .

Perfectionism in Leadership Discourse Part 1

 See Part 2 HERE

clip_image016There is a drive across Australian organisations to set as a goal and “mantra” Zero Harm. Indeed some State governments even espouse it as virtually government Work Health and Safety Policy. The concept and discourse of language such as Zero Harm by an organisation implies the ability to maintain total control of all loss; there would be: no incidents (hits or near hits), no injuries, no production losses, defects or waste; no harm to the environment and no damage to plant and equipment. Such an organisation could justifiably be defined to be a Perfect Organisation; it would be capable of espousing and practising “perfectionism”. In fact one could imagine that only a “perfect organisation” could actually deliver Zero Harm.

At the recent Psychology of Risk Conference held in Sydney, I delivered a presentation aimed at delving into the possibility that a perfect organisation could exist and then examined what the potential would be for that “perfect organisation” in terms of delivering on the absolutist mantra of Zero Harm.

What follows in this 2 Part Series is a logical process which examines whether, if an organisation was actually capable of practicing perfectionism, could it in fact deliver Zero Harm and hence see if Zero Harm is logically possible.

The American Psychological Association (APA) provides the following definitions for perfect, perfection and perfectionism:

· Perfect is ‘entirely without any flaws, defects, or shortcomings’;

· Perfection is ‘a perfect embodiment or example of something’; and

· Perfectionism is ‘a personal standard, attitude, or philosophy that demands perfection and rejects anything less’ (APA, 2014).

For the Perfect Organisation, the language and the practice of Zero Harm would mean that all flaws, defects, or shortcomings would be totally unacceptable. Such an organisation could not accept any person who was not perfect, or any practice which could produce harm; harm directly to a person in the form of workplace injuries or illnesses, or harm to the environment caused by damage or waste, or harm to the organisation by the production of defects, financial losses and/ or the organisation failing.

Most safety people and many others will have heard of the colloquially named ‘Nertney Wheel’. It is often used as a useful model to describe the structures required to support the usual activities of an organisation and I use it to provide a map and the grammar for our examination. A simplified version of the Nertney Wheel, demonstrated by Knowles (1998, p. 18) identifies five components: ‘Safe Production, Competent People, Fit for Purpose Equipment, Safe Work Procedures and Controlled Work Environment’ similar to the model here.

clip_image002

For the Perfect Organisation this model could be adapted as follows:

· Perfect People, employing;

· Totally Reliable and Useable Systems, using;

· Totally Reliable Equipment, in a;

· A Perfect Work Environment, to produce;

· Zero Harm Production.

Here in Part 1 we will look at “Perfect People” and following on in Part 2 will look in turn at “Totally Reliable and Useable Systems”; “Totally Reliable Equipment”; the “Perfect Work Environment” and then “Zero Harm Production”, so that we can see where the language of leadership, which espouses perfectionism, takes us.

So, addressing the Perfect People component first; in order for the organisation to deliver perfection, the Perfect Organisation would be populated by perfectionists. To do less than this would mean that the organisation would be capable of accepting less than perfection from its people and hence be exposed to the risk of a loss i.e. not zero harm.

It could be argued that to have an organisation, filled with perfectionists would be ideal as it could mean that the workforce would be highly motivated to only do their very best at all times, and to persevere where all others may give up in the face of difficulties and opposition. Indeed Roedell (1984, p. 128) claims:

In a positive form, perfectionism can provide the driving energy which leads to great achievement. The meticulous attention to detail, necessary for scientific investigation, the commitment which pushes composers to keep working until the music realises the glorious sounds playing in the imagination, and the persistence which keeps great artists at their easels until their creation matches their conception all result from perfectionism.

It would appear that an organisation filled with perfectionists could excel at everything, ultimately out performing all competition and be admired as the perfect business model.

However, Flett and Hewitt (2002, pp. 5-31) highlight a large number of studies performed by researchers which point out that there are many mental and physical health problems associated with perfectionism including: bipolar disorder, disillusionment, heartache, self-hatred, anxiety, depression, suicide, violence and eating disorders[1]. Further discussion, in following chapters (of Flett and Hewitt), includes the difficulties confronted by psychologists when treating perfectionists and the contention that the treatment of perfectionists is actually exacerbated by the condition itself. In discussion about his treatment of perfectionists, Ellis (2002, pp. 227-228) concludes:

… that compared with nonperfectionists, perfectionists have… a long-term habit of perfectionistic thinking, feeling, and behaving that resists short-term change. For these reasons, they frequently are difficult customers, who can use intensive, prolonged therapy.

Sorotzkin (cited in Flett and Hewitt 2002, p. 25) also explains that perfectionists hide their problems and cover their anxieties, conflicts or fears by striving to become perfect emotional specimens. Perfectionists hide their illness because that can’t be seen as ill as that would be them admitting and exposing that they were not perfect.

When leadership discourse objectifies risk and espouses the elimination of risk, we place increased pressure on people to work in a state of increasing cognitive dissonance[2]. People instinctively know that it is impossible to eliminate all risk. For a perfectionist, who is charged with the task of eliminating risk, the drive to be perfect, to deliver perfection and to meet their performance measures, can result in people working excessive hours, increasing fatigue levels and increasing the build up of stress, ultimately increasing the risk of mental health issues and a potential breakdown.

It follows that a perfectionist organisation would at some stage be required to treat this situation and to provide their perfectionists employees with medical or mental health assistance to deal with this health issue. The organisation would be obliged to ensure that their people were provided with suitable, potentially prolonged and difficult treatment and rehabilitation, which obviously would have to be recorded as at least Medically Treated Injuries, more likely Lost Time Incidents. By definition this would mean that, as the harm had been caused by the organisation insisting on perfection, it would fail as a Zero Harm organisation.

Logic again dictates three potential treatment outcomes, i.e. the person can: return to pre injury duties in their perfectionist state; be cured of their perfectionism; or, be not cured and remain incapacitated. Let’s look at how this may work.

Let’s assume firstly that the person responds positively to treatment; they are able to develop coping mechanisms and go back to work. They are back to their “old selves”. This should be good news but logically given that their old self included their perfectionism and perfectionist behaviours, their original illness “perfectionism” is re-established. This then sets up a scenario for a potential relapse and further harm.

Alternatively the person has their perfectionism cured; i.e. they become not perfect. This means that the person would be capable of making a mistake. By definition this would make them unsuitable for employment in the perfectionist organisation. They would have to be terminated. This would cause waste – wasted time and money employing a replacement.

The third alternative is that the treatment is ineffective; the person cannot be cured of their perfectionism; they would remain as a permanently disabled person.

It appears that if we have Perfect People practicing perfectionism, we are increasing the likelihood that we will eventually have an incident. The discourse of the leaders, who espouse the practice of perfectionism, becomes the source of harm to their people. It would appear that we cannot have a Zero Incident workplace even if we have perfect people.

In Part 2 (see here) will look in turn at “Totally Reliable and Useable Systems”; “Totally Reliable Equipment”; the “Perfect Work Environment” and “Zero Harm Production” with the aim of seeing if a perfect organisation can exist and support zero harm.

Author: Max Geyer

E-mail: max@viamaxconsulting.com

Web: www.viamaxconsulting.com

A Bibliography follows Part 2.


[1] Perfectionism is a noted characteristic of a number of personality disorders as described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM 5) and its companion Guide Selecting Effective Treatments : A Comprehensive, Systematic Guide to Treating Mental Disorders (4th Edition).

[2] Festinger (1957) tells us that:

… when inconsistency (dissonance) is experienced, individuals tend to become psychologically uncomfortable and are motivated to attempt to reduce this dissonance, as well as actively avoiding situations and information which are likely to increase it.

GO TO PART 2

  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
  • More about Max
Max Geyer

Max Geyer

Director at VIAMAX Consulting
Max Geyer

Latest posts by Max Geyer (see all)

  • WHS Legislation is NOT about Safety it’s about Culture - May 11, 2018
  • Due Diligence Is Not Just Ticking Boxes! - December 18, 2016
  • Corks on the quills of an Echidna = Safe–Really? - April 15, 2016
  • Do we really need “One More” safety brand? - March 17, 2016
  • Sensemaking and Signs - January 20, 2016
Max Geyer
Max is currently completing a Graduate Certificate in the Social Psychology of Risk; has a Graduate Certificate of Management (HR Management); Diplomas of Business – Auditing (OH&S, Environment & Quality); a Certificate in Coaching Skills; a Certificate in Emotional Intelligence Assessment & Coaching; a Certificate IV in Workplace Training & Assessment and a Certificate in Return to Work Coordination. With over 35 years experience at operational and management levels in industry, including the Pastoral Industry, General Industry, Mining Industry and Consulting; Max delights in bringing that experience and knowledge to his interactions with Viamax clients in order to help make a positive difference to their lives.

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: Leadership, Max Geyer, Zero Harm Tagged With: discourse, leadership, Zero Harm

Reader Interactions

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 7,434 other subscribers

NEW! Free Download

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

Recent Comments

  • Rob Long on Ritual Performance and Risk
  • Brent Charlton on Ritual Performance and Risk
  • Rob Long on Culture Silences in Safety – Socialitie
  • Joe Zinobile on Culture Silences in Safety – Socialitie
  • HASSAN MOHAMMED on Free Online Safety Training Courses
  • Rob Long on Safety Climate / Safety Leadership Survey
  • Ann on Safety Climate / Safety Leadership Survey
  • Rob on Near Miss or Near Hit
  • Robert Long on The Convenience of Complacency
  • patricia on Free Hotel and Resort Risk Management Checklist

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Recent Posts

  • CLLR Quarterly Newsletter–June 2022
  • Spot the Hazards – What is Wrong With These Safety Photos?
  • Culture Silences in Safety – Memes
  • Are you a Safety Crusader or a Safety Leader?
  • Ritual Performance and Risk
  • Asking Better Questions in Risk
  • The Toxic Language of ‘Performance’ and Risk
  • OHS Compliance Puts Lives in Danger
  • Talking About Teams
  • The Art of Active Listening in Risk

What is Psychological Safety at Work?

Footer

AUTHORS

  • Alan Quilley
    • Heinrich–Industrial Accident Prevention
    • The Problem With ZERO Goals and Results
  • Bernard Corden
    • After the goldrush
    • The Internationale
  • Bill Sims
    • Employee Engagement: Chocolate, Vanilla, or Strawberry?
    • Injury Hiding-How do you stop it?
  • Craig Clancy
    • Task Based vs Activity Based Safe Work Method Statements
    • Safety And Tender Submissions
  • Daniel Kirk
    • It’s easy being wise after the event.
    • A Positive Safety Story
  • Dave Whitefield
    • Safety is about…
    • Safety and Compliance
  • Dennis Millard
    • Are You Risk Intelligent?
    • Honey they get me! They get me at work!
  • Drewie
    • Downturn Doin’ Your Head In? Let’s Chat….
    • How was your break?
  • Gabrielle Carlton
    • All Care and No Care!
    • You Are Not Alone!
  • George Robotham
    • Risk assessment tips
    • How to Give an Unforgettable Safety Presentation
  • Goran Prvulovic
    • Safety Manager – an Ultimate Scapegoat
    • HSE Performance – Back to Basics
  • James Ellis
    • Psychological Core Stability for Wellbeing in Workers Comp
    • In search of plan B in workers’ recovery
  • James Parkinson
    • To laugh or not to laugh
    • People and Safety
  • John Toomey
    • In it for The Long Haul – Making the most of the FIFO Lifestyle
    • Who is Responsible for This?
  • Karl Cameron
    • Abby Normal Safety
    • The Right Thing
  • Ken Roberts
    • Safety Legislation Is Our Biggest Accident?
    • HSE Trip Down Memory Lane
  • Mark Perrett
    • Psychology of Persuasion: Top 5 influencing skills for getting what you want
  • Mark Taylor
    • Build a Psychologically Safe Workplace by Taking Risks and Analysing Failures
    • Enculturing Safety
  • Max Geyer
    • WHS Legislation is NOT about Safety it’s about Culture
    • Due Diligence Is Not Just Ticking Boxes!
  • Matt Thorne
    • Safety Culture–Hudson’s Model
    • Culture – Edgar Schein
  • Peter Ribbe
    • Is there “Common Sense” in safety?
    • Who wants to be a safety professional?
  • Phil LaDuke
    • Professional Conferences Are A Sleazy Con
    • Hey Idiots, You’re Worried About the Wrong Things
  • Admin
    • CLLR Quarterly Newsletter–June 2022
    • OHS Compliance Puts Lives in Danger
  • Dr Rob Long
    • Culture Silences in Safety – Memes
    • Ritual Performance and Risk
  • Rob Sams
    • Are you a Safety Crusader or a Safety Leader?
    • The Learning (and unlearning) that Revealed my Vocation
  • Barry Spud
    • Spot the Hazards – What is Wrong With These Safety Photos?
    • Things To Consider When Developing And Designing Your Company SWMS
  • Sheri Suckling
    • How Can I Get the Boss to Listen?
  • Simon Cassin
    • Safety values, ideas, behaviours and clothes
  • Safety Nerd
    • The Block isn’t portraying safety as it should be
    • Toolbox Talk Show–PPE
  • Wynand Serfontein
    • Why The Problem With Learning Is Unlearning
    • I DON’T KNOW
  • Zoe Koskinas
    • Why is fallibility so challenging in the workplace?

Most commented on

The Banned Objects Index – A New Development in Safety Culture

The Unconscious and the Soap Dispenser

Dumbs for Safety

The Real Barriers to Safety

Safety as Faith Healing

Who Said We Don’t Need Systems?

Why Safety Controls Don’t Always Work

How to use signs, symbols and text effectively in communicating about risk

Safety Should NOT Be About Safety

Why Personify Safety?

FEATURED POSTS

Sanctimonious Safety

safety myths

Understanding Safety Myths

cut finger

Confirmity in Conformity

Symbols Have Power

Who is the Enemy and What War is Safety Fighting?

Evidence, Proof and Paperwork in Safety

Target Trade-Offs and Numeric Goals

Why Resilience Cannot be Engineered

Expecting the Unexpected

People are not Rats–Moving Beyond Behaviour Based Safety

Tattoos, Taboos and The Risk of Permanence

Coronavirus and the Dunny Paper Effect

SAFETY MENTAL HEALTH

Mental Health, Risk and Safety – Part 2

‘Pause and Ponder’ – what we can learn from social psychology academics

The De-Ethicization of the Object in Safety

The Tyranny of Absolutes

Zero Vision but Purchase Insurance

Risk and Safety Matrices and the Psychology of Colour

The Shock of Homeostasis

What Can Halloween tell us About Safety?

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 7,434 other subscribers

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

Top Posts & Pages

  • BEST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2022
  • Free Safety Moments Examples, Tips and Resources
  • Culture Silences in Safety – Memes
  • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • 15 Safety Precautions When Working With Electricity
  • Road Safety Slogans 2022
  • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
  • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
  • IDEAS FOR SAFETY TOOL BOX TALKS, HARD HAT CHATS and SAFETY MOMENTS
  • Free Risk Assessment Template in Excel Format

 

How To Make Your Own Hand Sanitizer

 

 

How to Make your own Covid-19 Face Mask

 

Covid-19 Returning To Work Safety, Transitioning, Start Up And Re Entry Plans

 

How’s the Hot Desking Going Covid?

imageOne of the benefits of the Covid-19 epidemic is a total rethink about how we live and work (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-28/coronavirus-could-reshape-how-australians-work-forever/12097124 ).

Expertise by Regurgitation and Re-Badging

One of the fascinating things about the Coronavirus pandemic is watching Safety morph into epidemiology expertise. I would like a dollar for every flyer, presentation, podcast, powerpoint, checklist template, toolbox talk and poster set that had jumped into my inbox… Read the rest

The Stress of Stasis

One of the challenging things about the Coronavirus crisis is stasis. For those without work and confined to home, for those in self-isolation, it’s like life is frozen in time. ‘Stay at home’ is the mantra. The trouble is, in… Read the rest