Of course, culture cannot be ‘measured’ and any claim to do so is premised on ignorance and mythology of measurement. I wonder how one measures ritual, myth, symbols, heuristics, aesthetics, affordance and beliefs? But this is what Safety does best, preaches ignorance to the ignorant. No-one in this post had any expertise in culture, anthropology or semiosis. I wonder how you get innovation from presenting what you don’t know to people who know less?
The promotion for this event is classic safety, repeat the word ‘professional’ but make sure no-one has any expertise in professional ethics. Indeed, if you search the BCSP website it has no statement on ethics. Such is the scope of certifying credentials as if competence and expertise doesn’t matter.
This is the way of safety culture. Source expertise from within the safety bubble, preach traditional safety and then call it ‘innovation’, ‘differently’ or ‘professional’. This is how we end up with engineers calling themselves ‘mythologists’, ‘historians’, ‘thought leaders’, ‘heroes’, ‘ethicists’ and all stations to central. The reality is, the best pathway to learning is outside the bubble of safety.
Collected in this photo was also other discourse about ‘safety science’. There is no such thing as ‘safety science’.
What is really being spoken of is scientism, not an open enquiry into what is not known. Indeed, claiming to be a ‘safety scientist’ and spruiking measurement, certainty and safety mythology is just marketing. Without a Transdisciplinary approach to knowledge, it’s just more mono-circular back slapping that asks no questions, doesn’t seek enquiry, doesn’t debate and demonises those who question safety. For example, no-one person calling themselves a ‘safety scientist’ has asked one question about SPoR in 25 years. The key to real science is enquiry into what one doesn’t know. The key is engaging in critical thinking but such language appears nowhere in the Discourse of the BCSP.
Until Safety leaves its cosy little enclave, its delusions about ethics, its mono-disciplinary comfort and, engages in open discussion with what it doesn’t know, it will never be professional.
One thing is for sure, telling others that safety culture can be measured or that safety is a ‘science’ is simply dangerous and harmful. If you really want to know about culture perhaps start here: https://www.humandymensions.com/product/51-stories-in-culture/
If you want to learn about critical thinking, then you are welcome to attend the SPoR Convention in Canberra 15-19 Sept: https://spor.com.au/spor-convention-2025/
Frode Lund says
I have a hard time telling which is the sillier; our company’s Safety Culture Survey, or our Airline Risk Index Number. I should never have read your books. My life would have been filled with pink, blissful ignorance and comforting certainties.
Rob Long says
Thanks Frode. Yes, many who enter SPoR often start reform in their organisations or leave the industry. Then there are also many who are chasing propaganda and slogans doing traditional safety and enjoying making noise about innovation.
Rob Long says
and this: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/feb/03/the-situation-has-become-appalling-fake-scientific-papers-push-research-credibility-to-crisis-point
Maybe safety needs the latest version of AI that can’t spell: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/aug/08/openai-chatgpt-5-struggled-with-spelling-and-geography
Matt Thorne says
It still amazes me Rob, Culture is treated like a disease to be understood and the treated.
Where is this lauded control of Culture these Safety Scientists have managed?
Have the even defined what they think Culture is?
Rob long says
Why would there be a definition. Didn’t you know, the first rule is to not talk about it! The second rule is the same, thanks to Indiana, the master of myth.