Belief is so often shaped by what gets in first. This is how orthodoxy works in safety. Once the curriculum affirms what safety is, there is no need to know more. Boundaries are set, unquestioned values are anchored and knowledge is confirmed as true.
It’s the same with anchoring to slogans. The slogans that get in first become the first truth. Exchanging one set of slogans for a new set of slogans is just the same old safety. Nothing changes in method. Slogans become truth. And, the same cycle continues. There is no openness to the unknown, no open questioning or enquiry, no exploration of other disciplines and little interest in the world beyond safety. This is how we get ‘safety dudes’, ‘safety nerds’ and ‘safety dorks’, who proudly parade their ignorance.
The moment I see some list of post-nominals after someone’s name in safety, I know they stopped learning years ago. Each safety post-nominal is another nail in the coffin of learning. Each post-nominal is another mark of deeper indoctrination. This is amplified by an industry that doesn’t even know what learning is. Training is not learning; data is not learning and stasis is not learning. Building a fortress in safety is anti-learning.
Indeed, if safety is your frame on the world, you stopped learning years ago. I look at so many of the safety podcasts on the market and none of their interests are about learning. And, regardless of branding, it’s still all the same old stuff. Indeed, most of the podcasts on the market in safety are simply boundary protectors of what is deemed safe knowledge in safety. Forget the branding, look at the agenda, and it’s all still safety.
The enemy of learning is safety. Wanting to be safe; eliminates the will for play, discovery, failure and learning. There is no learning without risk and keeping knowledge ‘safe, ensures no learning.
Once you are secure in what you know, then confirmation bias sets in, confirmed by associations and clubs one belongs to in safety. It is in the best interests of safety clubs and associations that members don’t learn. Then one anchors to the gurus of the club, reads within the club and only listens to the priests of the club.
This is why groups like the AIHS publish a Body of Knowledge to make sure that knowledge is controlled and set to the parameters of the club. Indeed, this is how associations define what they think is their ‘profession’. The only problem is, to be professional requires an openness to learning, development and maturation in knowledge. Just look at any of the conferences set in safety regardless of titles like ‘innovation’ or ‘differently’ and, it’s just all the same old stuff, rebranded to entertain the next cycle in safety fads.
The last thing Safety wants is any challenge to its assumptions that define its reality. This is then set in concrete by its many symbols that affirm its myths. Linear causality must be true, I saw the swiss-cheese from Reason and the tube from Dekker. Injury rate data must be true, I saw the pyramid from Heinrich. Safety slogans must be true, they are repeated constantly by HOP. Don’t you know, safety is all about the stress of trying to predict ‘pre-accidents’.
All of this stuff shapes belief in safety and mitigates any possibility of learning.
Once the myths and rituals of safety have been locked in, everything is safe. Once one normalises nonsense language as true, nothing more needs to be known. And, anything outside those boundaries is unsafe. Then when you get an engineer with 7 post nominals after their name teaching culture and ethics, you know everything is ‘safe’. The most important thing is not challenging knowledge but rather keeping everything ‘safe’. That’s the safety cycle.
If you want to get off the treadmill, there is a positive, practical and constructive alternative. There are other ways of viewing the world and risk, than through the lens of safety. If this is of interest then you are welcome to download a free book (https://www.humandymensions.com/shop/) or explore an alternative way of tackling risk though a free introduction to SPoR (https://safetyrisk.net/introduction-to-the-social-psychology-of-risk-free-online-module/).
Prof. Robert Long
Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)
- Psychosocial Risk, An iCue Conversation - January 24, 2026
- Humanising Risk in the Workplace- A Video Conversation - January 23, 2026
- Following-Leading and ‘Meeting’ in the Hyphen - January 22, 2026
- Conversations about Following-Leading in Risk - January 20, 2026
- Leading-Following, Methods in Helping/Caring in Risk - January 17, 2026
Do you have any thoughts? Please share them below