• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

SafetyRisk.net

Humanising Safety and Embracing Real Risk

  • Home
    • About
      • Privacy Policy
      • Contact
  • FREE
    • Slogans
      • Researchers Reveal the Top 10 Most Effective Safety Slogans Of All Time
      • When Slogans Don’t Work
      • CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
      • BIGGEST COLLECTION of WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2023
      • 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 2023
      • 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
    • FREE SAFETY eBOOKS
    • Free Hotel and Resort Risk Management Checklist
    • 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
  • Social Psychology Of Risk
    • What is Psychological Health and Safety at Work?
    • 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
  • Dr Long Posts
    • 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!
  • THEMES
    • Psychosocial Safety
    • Resiliencing
    • Risk Myths
    • Safety Myths
    • Safety Culture Silences
    • Safety Culture
    • Psychological Health and Safety
    • Zero Harm
    • Due Diligence
  • Free Learning
    • Introduction to SPoR – Free
    • FREE RISK and SAFETY EBOOKS
    • FREE ebook – Guidance for the beginning OHS professional
    • Free EBook – Effective Safety Management Systems
    • Free EBook – Lessons I Have Learnt
  • Psychosocial Safety
    • What is Psychosocial Safety
    • Psychological Safety
      • What is Psychological Health and Safety at Work?
      • Managing psychosocial hazards at work
      • Psychological Safety – has it become the next Maslow’s hammer?
      • What is Psychosocial Safety
      • Psychological Safety Slogans and Quotes
      • What is Psychological Safety?
      • Understanding Psychological Terminology
      • Psycho-Social and Socio-Psychological, What’s the Difference?
      • Build a Psychologically Safe Workplace by Taking Risks and Analysing Failures
      • It’s not weird – it’s a psychological safety initiative!
You are here: Home / CLLR / The Paradox of “Lifesaving Rules”

The Paradox of “Lifesaving Rules”

March 13, 2019 by Admin 10 Comments

The Paradox of “Lifesaving Rules”

Guest Post by Danny Fay

As part of my assignment in Unit 5 of the Diploma in Social Psychology of Risk, I am evaluating the paradox of “Lifesaving Rules” against the five principles of collective mindfulness as developed by Professor Karl Weick.

imageCollective mindfulness is an acceptance of equivocality; understanding that all possible outcomes cannot be known and that the environment is continually changing. This creates a mindset of active wariness and attentiveness through continual questioning and revision of previously held assumptions, plans, and expectations.

Weick’s philosophy of organising shows how mining industries inadvertently inhibit their capacity to understand and manage risk through tightly coupled systems (rules), based on what is known and not what is imagined or unforeseen. Whereas loosely coupled systems can provide the conditions of adaptability, flexibility and stability.

The ability to manage the unexpected is mindful management; no matter what you do, there is always a trade-off or by-product. Understanding that all possible outcomes cannot be known and that the environment is continually changing creates a mindset of entertaining doubt and attentiveness through continual inquiry.

Mine sites develop precautionary norms that are set out as “Lifesaving Rules”.  These culturally accepted principles about the industry and its risks are established as non-negotiable with regards to choosing to follow the rules; breaches often result in a disciplinary outcome.  This suggests a belief that organising by creating “Lifesaving Rules” amounts to certainty and order.

As I am learning through Social Psychology of High Reliability Organising there is ambiguity around this certainty creating a paradox.  The trade-off for micromanaging through rigid rules and procedures, in order to manage risk, only increases susceptibility to failure and decreases capacity to understand and manage risk.

There is also a discourse in the language of ‘Lifesaving Rules’.  This is the hero-myth in traditional leadership and management theory and the delusion of safety, where there is a belief that you can control what is feared. However; in the words of Rob Long, you cannot predict it, cannot control it, and definitely cannot measure it.

Using the 5 principles of Collective Mindfulness developed by Carl Weick I will critique “Lifesaving Rules” and demonstrate how they cannot reduce equivocality or manage risk.

Weick has identified 3 common principals that make up the category of anticipation. Anticipation involves identifying and halting weak signals of failure before they are able to become damaging events.

The First principal Preoccupation with failure is an attitude that allows small failures to be identified and managed before they become larger, damaging failures. These failures are not seen as isolated events, rather as a sign that something may be wrong with the entire system and could result in widespread consequences.

“Lifesaving Rules” discourage reporting near misses, as the outcome is often blame and punishment which restricts learning opportunities. The rules are only focused on catastrophic or fatal risks and preclude small failures.

The capacity to anticipate unexpected problems involves identifying and halting weak signals of failure before they are able to become damaging events. This is not the prevention of the unexpected, but the ability to act immediately in the initial stages of an unexpected occurrence when there is only a hint that something might be wrong.

Creating a culture able to learn from itself, allows small failures to be noticed, as they are a learning opportunity that allows people to make more informed decisions in the future.

The Second principal Reluctance to simplify is to see the world as complex, unstable, unknowable and unpredictable. It takes a complex system to make sense of a complex environment. Organisations that are reluctant to simplify take nothing for granted, question their assumptions, and introduce complexity and create differing worldviews during decision-making events allowing for a richer and more varied picture of the situation, the potential outcomes and consequences.

Following the rules does not consider ongoing mindfulness of the workforce, as they direct workers to follow simple rules for them to be safe.

As sharing of information is by nature social, having conversations before the work starts where scepticism and differing worldviews are encouraged allows for a richer and more varied picture of the situation and potential outcomes.

 

The Third principal Sensitive to Operations is being attentive to where the work gets done. Face-to face communication between management and operators allows for the rich and timely exchange of key information and also builds the trust that is required to develop a comprehensive ‘big picture’ of the operation.

Lifesaving Rules” do not promote situational awareness as they inhibit people from speaking up and questioning, as well as structurally making it harder to lead with a big fence around them.  As an artefact, “Lifesaving Rules” symbolise a lack of sensitivity to operations by being authoritative to follow the rules and not question. Focusing on authoritarian approaches to safety are tools for power and control, which devalues dialogue, trust and respect.

To build trust managers should practice “Humble Inquiry’ to understand the nuances of operations, and help neutralise threats to sensitivity.

Weick has identified 2 common principals that make up the category of containment. Containment focuses on how a damaging event is handled after it has occurred and improvising workarounds to keep functioning.

The Fourth principal Resilience is about bouncing back from unexpected change, absorbing and learning from the changes and moving forward.

The rigidly of “Lifesaving Rules” confines the trajectory and reduces flexibility of the people dealing with an unexpected event. You cannot manage the unexpected through prediction alone and you cannot be resilient in a tightly coupled system based on rules.

Improvisation plays a large role in maintaining an organisations capacity for resilience. When people have an expanded repertoire of highly developed skills and experiences, they are able to recombine them into novel combinations to apply to unexpected events.

The Fifth principal Deference to Expertise is a social rather than individual concept. Experience and hierarchical rank in an organisation does not necessarily equal expertise. In an organisation that defers to expertise, the hierarchy is loosened, allowing employees in the best position to tackle the problem and make the required decision.

Through studying Carl Weick’s book on Managing the Unexpected and seeing (understanding) that expertise is relational, creating “Lifesaving Rules” based on decisions already made, are not relational. They have no respect to diversity or experience of the workforce conducting the work or dealing with a damaging event. This precludes using local expertise to improvise workarounds by deferring to authorities rather than experts.

By reducing the reliance on rigid and static systems and creating a flexible decision structure, lets decision-making migrate to the people who have the most expertise to deal with the problems.

In conclusion, looking through the lens of this research, it is my view that “Lifesaving Rules” cannot manage the unexpected, as it is overly simplistic to believe people will stop doing something life threatening because there is a rule in place.  Each new story of a catastrophic or fatal incident on a mine site confirms this view.   When organisations fail to practice collective mindfulness, they are unable to understand and manage risk and will be prone to catastrophic unexpected events.

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: CLLR, Slips Trips and Falls Tagged With: 10 commandments, collective mindfulness, karl weick, lifesaving rules, paradox

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Rob Long says

    March 14, 2019 at 5:49 PM

    Wynand, I don’t like the language of ‘drift’ as it conjures up some unconscious sense of loss against some conscious sense of gain, much prefer the language of ’emergence’ and ‘enactment’.

    Reply
  2. Wynand says

    March 14, 2019 at 4:46 PM

    Thanks Rob, I like your idea of contrasting safety as “having made it” to “being a journey” (implied in the comment). I think I get a bit of better understanding the concepts, although it remains difficult to articulate to someone else. I understand that you are saying there should be a constant focus towards “drifting towards safer” without the implication of some that this should relate to “always be in the moment” and “constant awareness”. (If I may “drift” off topic a bit – advocates of “always be aware” are never able to complete the sentence with “of…”. This means the outcome is always “you should have been aware of xyz, without taking into account all the things you were aware of at the point in case.)

    Reply
  3. bernardcorden says

    March 14, 2019 at 7:31 AM

    Dear James,

    It was not a statement it was a question posed by the late Anthony Burgess FRSL and literary critic for The Spectator, The Guardian and The Observer and author of A Clockwork Orange, a book that is well worth reading, along with Brave New World, Animal Farm, 1984, Catcher in the Rye, anything by Ernest Hemingway. I would also recommend reading The Two Cultures by CP Snow, the former president of The Royal Society.

    Reply
  4. Rob Long says

    March 14, 2019 at 6:38 AM

    Interesting Wynand, the idea of ‘weak signals’ is not the language of Heinrich and associates but seems a way of devotees of brutalism justifying the assumptions of the pyramid. Similarly, the idea of ‘drifting to failure’ assumes some sense of having ‘made it’ to somewhere. I just get astounded at the language of this sector and how it drives a discourse focused on systems, objects, hazards, policing and regulation and so rarely talks about fallible humans and how we should ‘tackle’ risk.

    Reply
  5. Rob Long says

    March 14, 2019 at 6:32 AM

    A good overview Danny. Many bring in policies and language without really considering the discourse and associated trade offs. Then, a few years down the track wonder why they have a brutalising culture that cycles back into the very things they want to manage. Usually there is some catastrophe and they do it all over again after sackings etc. Then some bright spark comes up with a new policy or another form of zero and the lemmings follow.

    Reply
  6. JamesM says

    March 14, 2019 at 3:52 AM

    Hi Bernard, That is a sweeping statement that sounds good at first … but is it really valid? For example it implies that you think that its better for someone to choose rape or murder (evil) rather than to have ordinary decency imposed on them. What trajectory does such a statement lead to?

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      March 14, 2019 at 7:00 AM

      James, the assumptions of the statement suppose that the value of freedom/choice overrides all. I find it somewhat similar to the provocation by Luther to ‘sin all the more so that grace will abound’. I think the context of Clockwork Orange is important. Within a dystopian world like Handmaids Tale what is often articulated as ‘good’ is at the expense of humanising people. I think T.S Elliot does it well, but any of the authors that prophecy about dystopias do this. Subversion becomes the only rebellion when the state has become authorised terrorism (eg. Nazis). This was also the message of Orwell (who I know Bernard follows). When Power corrupts absolutely, it is often the artists and poets that speak truth to such power.

      Somewhere along the line we need to understand some fundamentals of ethics. eg. Can we coerce another in safety for their own ‘good’ and remain moral? When can bullying another in the name of ‘saving lives’ be justified? It has now come to this in safety that injury is associated with a choice to be unsafe. That’s the outcome of the silly mantra ‘safety is a choice you make’. I think Safety doesn’t do very well in understanding the politics of power and the power of politics. and so if ‘all accidents are preventable’ and the goal is ‘zero’, how much more can I justify cruelty to others in the name of ‘good’. All forms of eugenics follow such a discourse.

      I think in the context of A Clockwork Orange where humans have been made machines the statement make sense. I can think of countless acts of imperialism in history where terror was administered in the name of ‘good’. Indeed, most acts of colonization of indigenous peoples was undertaken in the name of a religious ‘good’ of ‘saving lives’ while the merchants raped and plundered the ‘goods’ of the country.

      Where does this leave us? I think Safety has a long way to go before it understands its own ethic or develops some sense of its own politik. That’s certainly not going to happen under the current regime of regulation as naturally ‘good’ and a closed curriculum that deifies dumb down.

      Reply
  7. bernardcorden says

    March 13, 2019 at 9:33 PM

    This relates to the difference between operational risk or material risk and general risk. Most safety crusaders become embroiled in pettifogging and hard hat safety, which is exacerbated by accident theory and the black box psychology of behaviour based safety.

    Meanwhile, weak signals pertaining to process safety and operational or material risks are ignored at the expense of implementing disciplinary action for not maintaining three points of contact on a stairwell or walking through the office without the lid on a cup of coffee, viz Deepwater Horizon.

    Reply
  8. Wynand says

    March 13, 2019 at 4:46 PM

    I have a question about the concept of “weak signals”. What is the difference between “weak signals” and the bottom line of the Heinrich pyramid? The quest for Zero started with an effort to identify weak signals, and lead to a culture of absolutes. The theory became “catch all the small incidents to prevent the large ones”. One of the problems with this view is the focus on the “trivial many” vs. the “critical few”. How then do you focus on weak signals, yet avoid the trap of spending all your energy on the “trivial many”? (This would also relate to the concept of “drift to failure”. How do you differentiate between drifting to failure and day to day “normal” issues that only needs minimal attention?

    Reply
  9. Bernard Corden says

    March 13, 2019 at 1:09 PM

    Is it better for a man to have chosen evil than to have good imposed upon him? – Anthony Burgess (A Clockwork Orange)

    https://aclockworkorangevhseng12h.weebly.com/is-it-better-for-an-individual-to-have-chosen-evil-than-to-have-good-imposed-upon-him/category/all

    Reply

Do you have any thoughts? Please share them belowCancel reply

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 7,509 other subscribers.

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Recent Comments

  • ISHIKAPATELaa on The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • ISHIKAPATELaa on The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • Rob Long on Validating, Endorsing and Supporting Zero
  • Rob Long on The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • Rob Long on The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • Matthew Thorne on Validating, Endorsing and Supporting Zero
  • rosa a carrillo on The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • Matthew Thorne on The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • Rob Long on Hopkins-Dekker on Reason and Other Laughs
  • Matt Thorne on Myth Making and Why it Matters to Safety
  • Rob Long on What’s Funny About Safety?
  • Rob Long on Perfection is Safety Child’s Play
  • Rosa Carrillo on Hopkins-Dekker on Reason and Other Laughs
  • Brent Charlton on Perfection is Safety Child’s Play
  • Anonymous on What’s Funny About Safety?
  • Rob Long on Zero Hour part 6 Knowing Yourself
  • Rob Long on Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Rob Long on Book Launch – “Zero, The Great Safety Delusion” – Free Download
  • Rob long on Don’t Be Dumb Like Me, the Typical Safety Keynote
  • Anonymous on Don’t Be Dumb Like Me, the Typical Safety Keynote

RECOMMENDED READING

viral post – iso 45003 and what it cannot do

Introduction to SPOR – FREE!!

Psychosocial Safety and Mental Health Series

If You Can’t Manage Fallibility, You’ll Never Tackle Psychosocial Health

Embodiment, Myth and Psychosocial Risk

7 Golden Rules that are NOT Golden

Why Zero Vision Can Never Tackle Mental Health

If Psychosocial Health Matters, Stop Hot Desking

Effective Strategies in Mental Health at Work

CLLR Newsletter July 2023

Playing With Mental Health in Safety is Dangerous

STOP ‘BREAKING’ PEOPLE! The notion of Psychological Safety

Learning to Learn Socially

More Posts from this Category

NEW! Free Download

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

Footer

Top Posts & Pages. Sad that most are so dumb but this is what safety luves

  • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
  • BIGGEST COLLECTION of WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2023
  • Free Safety Moments and Toolbox Talk Examples, Tips and Resources
  • Validating, Endorsing and Supporting Zero
  • The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • Safety as Zero, The Perfect Event
  • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS, CHECKISTS, REGISTERS, TEMPLATES and APPS
  • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
  • Free Risk Assessment Template in Excel Format
  • Icebreakers and Games that Safety Trainers Play

Recent Posts

  • Safety as Zero, The Perfect Event
  • Validating, Endorsing and Supporting Zero
  • The Global ‘Zero Event’, This is Safety
  • If You Can’t Manage Fallibility, You’ll Never Tackle Psychosocial Health
  • Embodiment, Myth and Psychosocial Risk
  • Embodied Enactivity in Safety
  • The Meaning of Myth in Risk
  • Myth Making and Why it Matters to Safety
  • Icebreakers and Games that Safety Trainers Play
  • The Power of Safety Myths
  • What Do You Mean By Performance?
  • Hopkins-Dekker on Reason and Other Laughs
  • Perfection is Safety Child’s Play
  • Podcast – Dr Rob Long With John Morlan and The Risk Matrix
  • What’s Funny About Safety?
  • Zero Hour part 6 Knowing Yourself
  • Free Videos, Podcasts and Books on Zero
  • Don’t Be Dumb Like Me, the Typical Safety Keynote
  • If You’re Happy in Safety, Clap Your Hands
  • Safety Cops and Safety’s Adoration of Power
  • Zero Hour Part 5 – Surfacing the Unconscious
  • Zero Hour Part 4 – Zero and the Unconscious
  • Auditing the 7 Golden Rules of Zero, A Miserable Fail
  • 7 Golden Rules that are NOT Golden
  • The Non-Golden Rules for Leadership in Zero
  • Seven ‘Golden’ Rules for Zero and Yet No Ethic
  • Why Zero Vision Can Never Tackle Mental Health
  • Is this Your Safety?
  • SPoR Workshops Canberra 18-21 September
  • The Dominance of Zero as the ‘Common Denominator’ of Safety
  • Zero Hour Episode 3
  • Goal Setting and Zero
  • Zero as a Worldview
  • If Psychosocial Health Matters, Stop Hot Desking
  • Book Launch – “Zero, The Great Safety Delusion” – Free Download
  • Breach of Faith and Psycho-Social Risk
  • Zero Harm is Never Zero Harm
  • Why Would You Want to be a Safety “Geek’ or Hero?
  • The Mental Illness of Identifying as Safety
  • Zero Hour – Zero as a place holder
  • Zero Hour – Zero as a Philosophy
  • CARING ABOUT PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY
  • Care is NOT a Factor and Yes, Your Model Matters
  • Care Ethics and the Ethics of Care, in Risk
  • FEAR AND CONTROL – Dialogue in a technological society
  • Of Course, Method Matters in Safety
  • Day 12 SPoR in Europe
  • Free Study Module Following-Leading in Risk August-September
  • Effective Strategies in Mental Health at Work
  • CLLR Newsletter July 2023

VIRAL POST!!! HOW TO QUIT THE SAFETY INDUSTRY

FEATURED POSTS

Risk Boldly

Surfacing – Making the Unconscious Conscious

Work-Life and Risk, Feminine Perspectives

Holistic Well Being in Risk Differently

Conducting a Psychology and Culture Safety Walk

Celebrating 1000 Blogs on Risk

Conforming and Questioning in Safety

How was your break?

Meeting is NOT About Technique

Thinking About Harm

Free “It Works” Download, Now Works

How Effective Are Your Conversations About Risk?

The Art of the Open Question

Safety Isn’t Sexy, and it Shouldn’t Be!

The Illusion Of Opposites

Social Psychology of Risk Two Day Workshop

How I Feel About Risk

Abby Normal Safety

What Are the Benefits Of Social Psychology of Risk?

Safety for Luddites

The Mythic Symbology of Safety

Safety as a Knowledge Culture

Day 7 & 8 SPoR in Europe

Rhythms, Musicophilia and Safety

Hind-sight, Risk Savvy and the Unexpected

Is Complacency Evil?

King of the World – Why is Sociopathy and Psychopathy so prevalent ‘at the top’?

Breaking the Safety Code

Semiotics, Semiology and Safety Sense

Challenges and Opportunities for Learning in a Crisis

Safety Holistically a Case for Change

WHS Legislation is NOT about Safety it’s about Culture

The Challenges for Organisations in Dealing with Mental Health

Something Different To Safety

Gestures in Risk Management – A Podcast

The Conundrum in Discerning Risk

Day 4 SPoR in Europe

Safety Investigation – Whodunit?

A Small Change and ‘Y’ it Matters?

Understanding Safety as an Archetype

More Posts from this Category

VIRAL POST – The Risk Matrix Myth

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 7,509 other subscribers.

WHAT IS PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY?

What is Psychological Safety at Work?


WHAT IS PSYCHOSOCIAL SAFETY