“Safety” or “Safeing”
Sheri Suckling made some interesting points this morning in discussions on a couple of articles: How Do You Know If You Are Leading in Risk and Safety? and Doing a Risk Assessment which inspired this quick blog.
First some background. Safety seems to have bred a culture of absolutes. This culture denies error and human fallibility and inspires absolutist sayings and meaningless platitudes such as “Safety is No1 Priority” and “safety is a choice” (try not to cringe when watching this Dupont video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vGLUjXdgWo) . Silly sayings like “zero harm” and ‘all accidents are preventable’ are binary nonsense – if you don’t agree then you are branded as fatalistic or as someone who must want people to get hurt. The discourse of absolutes and perfectionism is that of total control and stifles empathy, creativity and human identity.
Further, Rob Sams says in “I DONT KNOW”:
In a culture of absolutes in safety, the “safety person” may consider himself to be in a position where an answer must be given in all situations, and by accepting the practice of accepting all the answer, this person is reinforced in believing he has all the answers.
Safety or Safeing?
Think about the word “safety” – is it an absolute term – is it a verb or a noun? It is definitely one of the most undefinable terms we can use (see What is Safety?). Sheri introduces the word “nominalisation” (the use of a word which is not a noun e.g. a verb, an adjective or an adverb, as a noun). Do you prefer to speak in teams of the active “Leading” or the static “Leadership” – Safety or Safeing?
as Sheri says in How Do You Know If You Are Leading in Risk and Safety?
Absolutes only work when one’s view of something is limited, and the quality of leadership is best measured by the quality of followership…..
In addition, as Rob Long hints at below, if we speak of ‘leadership’, we have nominalised it – i.e., treated it as if it was a static, fixed concept, when in fact we are really interested in the PROCESS of LEADING. Along similar lines, perhaps instead of talking about ‘safety’, we should be exploring the process of ‘safeing’?? What might change if we considered this ‘wicked question’ using words that highlight the actual dynamic and situational nature of safety matters?
On another article ( Doing a Risk Assessment) Sheri says:
Nominalisation is when we turn a process into a thing by using a noun instead of a verb. It’s a subtle shift of words, but it can be a significant unconscious shift of viewpoint. As much as any other effect, the process usually becomes perceived a disembodied and disowned fixed entity, when in fact it is an active, dynamic process.
Here are some common nominalisations – just a little brainstorm to demonstrate what I mean. What differences do you notice between the two forms?
– Communicating -> Communication
– Relating -> Relationship
– Marrying -> Marriage
– Leading -> Leadership
– Thinking -> Thought
– Procrastinating -> Procrastination
– Creating -> Creation
– Assessing -> Assessment
– Identifying -> Identification
– Perceiving -> Perception
– Certify -> Certification
– Accredit -> Accreditation
– Discuss -> Discussion
– Collaborate -> Collaboration
– View -> Viewpoint
– Demonstrate -> Demonstration
– Comply -> ComplianceWhat other nominalisations can you think of that might distort the way we view something? What happens when we talk in terms of ‘safety’ rather than the process of caring for people and supporting their well-being??
Do you have any thoughts? Please share them below