• 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 / Ethics / The Purpose of Routines, Habits and Heuristics – Checking Your Gut!

The Purpose of Routines, Habits and Heuristics – Checking Your Gut!

February 10, 2020 by Dr Rob Long 27 Comments

imageIt’s such a funny (peculiar) situation. As fallible people we develop routines, habits and heuristics in order to make life and living efficient and yet there is so little discussion in the safety world about the importance of understanding implicit knowledge. The worldviews of engineering and regulation so typically resourced in a review on safety, have next to no expertise in the area, hence the idea of routines, habits and heuristics (implicit knowledge) are never discussed or understood in the industry. The Brady Review is a classic example of this (https://safetyrisk.net/brady-review-nothing-new-no-way-forward/ ).

When we develop routines, habits and heuristics, they disappear from consciousness. That is the purpose of implicit knowledge, to help fallible humans be efficient – unconsciously. The purpose of routines, habits and heuristics is to stop thinking! If humans had to process everything cognitively on a minute by minute basis, we would get about one task done per day. When we make knowledge tacit/implicit (https://infed.org/mobi/michael-polanyi-and-tacit-knowledge/ ) we cease to know that our unconscious is ‘thinking’ for us in a certain way or why it is ‘thinking’ in such a way. Most of the day humans perform multiple tasks, complex tasks and intricate tasks with precision because of tacit knowledge. Everything goes well, when everything remains steady. Most often things go pear shaped when we act in routine, habit and heuristics and the context is changed, when turbulence in culture emerges.

Familiarity, insulates humans in tacit knowing from perceiving things. We don’t see anything or any activity as a neutral object, all knowing is ‘enculturated’ and learned. We learn from a very young age before we can talk or read text, how to interpret facial expressions and interpret contexts and act on them implicitly. By the age of five we know when the full gamut of emotions and feelings and how to respond to them instantly, in a fraction of a second. This is often the key to protection, safety and fight or flight activity. Everything goes well, when everything remains steady and when we act in routine, habit and heuristics and the context changes, when turbulence in culture emerges, things go pear-shaped.

How strange in safety, that by experience we develop everything to become implicit, then when something goes wrong we punish people for not thinking! This is what happens when you put an engineering and regulatory construct of cognition on humans. This is what a mechanistic anthropology creates, punishing and blaming people for the very human system we enact in implicit knowledge to be efficient. No wonder the sector has so little idea about ethical professional conduct! (https://safetyrisk.net/the-aihs-bok-and-ethics-check-your-gut/). If 95% of what all humans do is enacted by routine, habit and heuristics, why is implicit/tacit knowing a critical part of the WHS curriculum or the AIHS Body of Knowledge?

One of the most astounding assertions in the AIHS BoK on Ethics was the notion that safety people were innately ethical and that ethical decision making could be made by ‘checking your gut’. The absolute epitome of Deontological ethics.

So here we have Ethics, the very ‘soul of professionalism’ (BoK on Ethics p.1) hinging on implicit/tacit knowledge but we never learn about it in the BoK or the WHS curriculum.

  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
  • More about Rob
Dr Rob Long

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions
Dr Rob Long

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

  • The Nonsense of ‘Safety Awareness’ - October 1, 2023
  • When You Don’t Know, Just Make S4*t Up - September 30, 2023
  • Zero is Founded on Deceit and Lies - September 29, 2023
  • Have You Had a Drink of SafeTea? - September 27, 2023
  • The Blessings of Fallibility - September 27, 2023
Dr Rob Long
PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.

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: Ethics, Robert Long Tagged With: heuristics

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Bernard Corden says

    February 14, 2020 at 8:03 AM

    Rules and models destroy genius and art – William Hazlitt

    Reply
  2. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    Thanks to Dr Rob Long I find the works of Robert Sternberg, Guy Claxton, Jacques Ellul, Michael Polanyi, Thomas Kuhn, Paul Ricoeur and Mary Douglas far more fascinating and enlightening than anything by James Reason but you rarely find them referenced in safety publications, code of ethics or the WHS curriculum.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:33 PM

      Bernard, the idea that one views life through the discipline of safety is a major problem for the sector. The enclosed worldview and narrowness of research is problematic, hence an inability to engage in a transdisciplinary approach to anything. The latest BoK Chapter on Ethics is a classic example. It’s very much the case of epistemological resistance that is politicized so that learning doesn’t occur.

      Reply
  3. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    We know more than we can say – Michael Polanyi (ChOHSP)

    Reply
  4. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    I was recently re-watching Alan Bleasdale’s GBH and there is a fascinating confrontational scene between Michael Murray (an extreme socialist councillor played by Robert Lindsay) and Jim Nelson (a labour moderate and teacher at a special school played by Michael Palin)

    It finishes with Jim Nelson admonishing Michael Murray and says……..”Don’t just read one book, read ’em all”

    Reply
  5. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    Please excuse my fallibility the above post should read…… “The brain does not make decisions, it merely hosts conversations”

    Reply
  6. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    The ethical decision making process in the AIHS BoK Ethics and Professional Practice (Figure 4, Page 49) could easily have been lifted from an Ikea instruction manual for assembling a bedside cabinet.

    It is rather like a clunky mechanistic event tree logic diagram littered with binary and/or gates and the Skinner black box psychology disguises that the brain does make decisions, it merely hosts conversations (Guy Claxton). Life rarely resembles an assets and liabilities statement from an accounts ledger detailing inputs and outputs. It is far more messy, uncertain and complicated.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

      Bernard, if you are going to invest in something like ‘check your gut’ as a decision making process and then state that safety people are innately ethical, you need much more than this AIHS BoK Chapter offers. More head in the sand safety.

      Reply
  7. Susan Zivcec says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

    Hello Dr Long. What an interesting starting point for a discussion! I wonder if you include human factors and the study of cognitive biases in the realm of “engineering anthropology”?
    It’s certainly a worthy discussion… the factors which come to bear on the decision making, listening and decision making of both safety professionals and leaders in organisations. Perhaps I lack a deep education in this space, but I suspect you are starting to build a case against the likes of Reason, Weick ( the engineering antrhopologists). I have my own view on how these maps of meaning can be enhanced….. but I am not sure I understand yours. Is there somewhere you elaborate further on your views?

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:29 PM

      Hi Susan, thanks for your questions.
      I wouldn’t put the idea of anthropology in the same sense as engineering, both disciplines are most oppositional to each other. Neither would I put human factors in the same boat, most human factors stuff is surprisingly not about humans but rather a study of systems. As for cognitive biases they form a small part of understanding the human unconscious.
      As for Reason yes, I don’t have much time for his work. Weick is very different as a social psychologist and I wouldn’t put either theories near each other. Karl could never be described as an engineering anthropologist.
      I have written and presented extensively on the social psychology of risk including a number of free online downloads, resources, blogs, podcasts, videos etc. happy to discuss further.

      Reply
      • Susan Zivcec says

        February 13, 2020 at 6:43 PM

        Hmm.. I find it interesting that you don’t have time for Reason. In his book Human Error ( 1990) he discusses some of the same concerns you raise in your article. He studies cognitive underspecifications and error forms ( heuristics, cognitive biases) and error risk. What is it about his work as a pioneer in this space that you don’t like?

        And yes.. I was being a little cheeky calling Weick and Reason “engineering anthropologists”… I was simply playing with words to describe the study of human beings interacting with each other in organisation and interfacing with machine. Let’s be honest… understanding heuristics and cognitive biases is hugely important in safety in design ( engineering) considerations.

        So, having been in the space a long time, and having read the odd book…. I know your work. What fascinates me … is the loss of nuianced understanding of those who came before. I mean, some of this work that is supposed to be ” new” … is simply an extension of an old conversation.

        Anyway, curious about why Reason’s book on Human Error (1990) Which discusses the cognitive underspecifications and error forms ( heuristics and cognitive biases) is not worth your time.

        Reply
        • Rob Long says

          February 13, 2020 at 6:49 PM

          Susan, I think yes, his work was foundational but there are other worldviews and ways of seeing risk of which he is unaware, also his work has set up some poor traditions/models that have been normalised that are not helpful. Perhaps the most unhelpful construct is the swiss cheese model of causality. Yes, heuristics are important but these are just a small consideration on the way to understanding the nature of the human unconscious and the collective unconscious. Similarly, the rationalist, cognitvist, positivist tradition is only one way of considering how people live in the world.
          I have read Reason extensively and he has drained plenty of my time but unfortunately he frames his understanding of psychology through safety. Safety is NOT my lens of how I see the world.
          It is interesting that people are satisfied with Reason’s descriptions of ‘human error’ and ‘error classifications’ and then that’s enough. There is so much more that requires understanding and most of his constructs about human error don’t explain much, particularly as there is so little discussion of fallibility, mortality, and vulnerability as a human disposition.
          Similarly, I am concerned about how he defines ‘violations’ and how he anchors these to rationality and cognition. Similarly, his idea of resilience, not how I would define it.
          Reason’s logic and focus is how we end up with such nonsense as ‘safety is a choice you make’ and ‘all accidents are preventable’. He defines violations as deliberative acts whereas the evidence shows that a very high number of things that go wrong do not involve choice or deliberation. Similarly, his idea that unsafe acts arise from ‘wayward mental processes’ puts the framework of decision making in a binary framework, and humans don’t make decisions in this kind of fast and slow way (neither do I find Kahnemann’s model helpful).
          Reason’s constructs are a perfect set up for blame and simplistic rationality. I don’t understand anthropology in such a way as Reason indeed, many of the matters I consider critical in human decision making and social psychology are simply not discussed in any of his work.
          I think you might know ‘of’ my work, but without relationship and engagement in what I do, your couldn’t really know my work. So much of what I do is enacted after significant change in worldview and in many ways unlearning the unquestioned norms of safety.
          Unfortunately, there is no space in such a forum to explain much, so this may have to to.
          Thanks for your enquiry.
          Rob

          Reply
          • Susan Zivcec says

            February 13, 2020 at 7:52 PM

            hmm… perhaps you underestimate my perspective. Whilst I am a safety professional, I take an anthropological view on this… like yourself… and am not one to blindly accept the chant. Nay, why else would I be engaging here? I have read widely in other disciplines. I am interested in your take on Reason’s human variability paradigm… and as for your reference to thinking fast and slow… I don’t think Reason intends to oversimplify the decision process- he clearly recognises the complex interplay of cultural and unconscious drivers. It would be fair to say that these were not his area of focus. It would equally be fair to say that he was looking for models useful and applicable in organisations to improve safety outcomes. My perspective is rather broader- I am by nature fascinated with resilience. I am by history and experience fascinated by trauma and trauma recovery. So, I do have a certain deeper understanding of the workings of the mind-body and interpersonal spaces. Perhaps you could see my questioning as an invitation to engage.

          • Susan Zivcec says

            February 13, 2020 at 9:49 PM

            OH and I would also add that there has been a great deal of misrepresentation of a range of key concepts from Reason.. including the Swiss Cheese Model.. which has somehow been ripped away from the rest of the Organisational Accident Model it was part of … so many over-simplifications … yes…. so much damage done

          • Rob long says

            February 13, 2020 at 10:49 PM

            No space here to really discuss these things.

          • Rob Long says

            February 14, 2020 at 7:20 AM

            Perhaps here is not the place for extensive apologetics and extended comment re worldviews and yes I see you have a consciousness for the mind-body problem. No, I am not underestimating your perspective, just responding to your questions and language. Unfortunately, the ‘chant’ and mantra of zero is indicative of its religious adherence in the sector. Unfortunately with little knowledge of theology, the sector has no idea how religious they have made safety. When Cardinal and life saving rules don’t work they then need a new mythic symbol to cope with their fixation on injury.

            In Reason’s work The Human Contribution he comes to his closest in stepping away from the fixation on safety but still then works through a very clumsy apologetic for the swiss cheese. The text throughout remains binary and mechanistic. I understand what he tries to do but there is so much omitted from his discussion, next to no discussion of the unconscious or the body-mind problem or embodiment. Still very cognitvist, rationalist and positivist, its what the sector loves. His focus in his human variation paradigm remains binary (person or systems approach) and on a deficit view of humanity. He continues with the discourse of unsafe acts and violations thus showing his assumptions about human decision making. Indeed, so much of his language is pejorative in explaining the human unconscious that he must have taken a leaf out of some text by Freud and eaten it.

            I think the reason why Safety so adores Reason so much is the attraction of simplicity and binary thinking. I find his language of heroics annoying and his idea of resilience, like most in safety is quite foreign to my understanding.

            Anyway, if you want to exchange more maybe email might be better then here.

  8. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 11:08 AM

    I was recently re-watching Alan Bleasdale’s GBH and there is a fascinating confrontational scene between Michael Murray (an extreme socialist councillor played by Robert Lindsay) and Jim Nelson (a labour moderate and teacher at a special school played by Michael Palin)

    It finishes with Jim Nelson admonishing Michael Murray and says……..”Don’t just read one book, read ’em all”

    Reply
  9. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 9:52 AM

    Thanks to Dr Rob Long I find the works of Robert Sternberg, Guy Claxton, Jacques Ellul, Michael Polanyi, Thomas Kuhn, Paul Ricoeur and Mary Douglas far more fascinating and enlightening than anything by James Reason but you rarely find them referenced in safety publications, code of ethics or the WHS curriculum.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 10:39 AM

      Bernard, the idea that one views life through the discipline of safety is a major problem for the sector. The enclosed worldview and narrowness of research is problematic, hence an inability to engage in a transdisciplinary approach to anything. The latest BoK Chapter on Ethics is a classic example. It’s very much the case of epistemological resistance that is politicized so that learning doesn’t occur.

      Reply
  10. bernardcorden says

    February 11, 2020 at 6:07 AM

    Please excuse my fallibility the above post should read…… “The brain does not make decisions, it merely hosts conversations”

    Reply
  11. bernardcorden says

    February 11, 2020 at 6:03 AM

    The ethical decision making process in the AIHS BoK Ethics and Professional Practice (Figure 4, Page 49) could easily have been lifted from an Ikea instruction manual for assembling a bedside cabinet.

    It is rather like a clunky mechanistic event tree logic diagram littered with binary and/or gates and the Skinner black box psychology disguises that the brain does make decisions, it merely hosts conversations (Guy Claxton). Life rarely resembles an assets and liabilities statement from an accounts ledger detailing inputs and outputs. It is far more messy, uncertain and complicated.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 11, 2020 at 6:22 AM

      Bernard, if you are going to invest in something like ‘check your gut’ as a decision making process and then state that safety people are innately ethical, you need much more than this AIHS BoK Chapter offers. More head in the sand safety.

      Reply
  12. bernardcorden says

    February 10, 2020 at 8:22 PM

    We know more than we can say – Michael Polanyi (ChOHSP)

    Reply
  13. Susan Zivcec says

    February 10, 2020 at 7:42 PM

    Hello Dr Long. What an interesting starting point for a discussion! I wonder if you include human factors and the study of cognitive biases in the realm of “engineering anthropology”?
    It’s certainly a worthy discussion… the factors which come to bear on the decision making, listening and decision making of both safety professionals and leaders in organisations. Perhaps I lack a deep education in this space, but I suspect you are starting to build a case against the likes of Reason, Weick ( the engineering antrhopologists). I have my own view on how these maps of meaning can be enhanced….. but I am not sure I understand yours. Is there somewhere you elaborate further on your views?

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 10, 2020 at 8:59 PM

      Hi Susan, thanks for your questions.
      I wouldn’t put the idea of anthropology in the same sense as engineering, both disciplines are most oppositional to each other. Neither would I put human factors in the same boat, most human factors stuff is surprisingly not about humans but rather a study of systems. As for cognitive biases they form a small part of understanding the human unconscious.
      As for Reason yes, I don’t have much time for his work. Weick is very different as a social psychologist and I wouldn’t put either theories near each other. Karl could never be described as an engineering anthropologist.
      I have written and presented extensively on the social psychology of risk including a number of free online downloads, resources, blogs, podcasts, videos etc. happy to discuss further.

      Reply
      • Susan Zivcec says

        February 13, 2020 at 6:51 AM

        Hmm.. I find it interesting that you don’t have time for Reason. In his book Human Error ( 1990) he discusses some of the same concerns you raise in your article. He studies cognitive underspecifications and error forms ( heuristics, cognitive biases) and error risk. What is it about his work as a pioneer in this space that you don’t like?

        And yes.. I was being a little cheeky calling Weick and Reason “engineering anthropologists”… I was simply playing with words to describe the study of human beings interacting with each other in organisation and interfacing with machine. Let’s be honest… understanding heuristics and cognitive biases is hugely important in safety in design ( engineering) considerations.

        So, having been in the space a long time, and having read the odd book…. I know your work. What fascinates me … is the loss of nuianced understanding of those who came before. I mean, some of this work that is supposed to be ” new” … is simply an extension of an old conversation.

        Anyway, curious about why Reason’s book on Human Error (1990) Which discusses the cognitive underspecifications and error forms ( heuristics and cognitive biases) is not worth your time.

        Reply
        • Rob Long says

          February 13, 2020 at 9:13 AM

          Susan, I think yes, his work was foundational but there are other worldviews and ways of seeing risk of which he is unaware, also his work has set up some poor traditions/models that have been normalised that are not helpful. Perhaps the most unhelpful construct is the swiss cheese model of causality. Yes, heuristics are important but these are just a small consideration on the way to understanding the nature of the human unconscious and the collective unconscious. Similarly, the rationalist, cognitvist, positivist tradition is only one way of considering how people live in the world.
          I have read Reason extensively and he has drained plenty of my time but unfortunately he frames his understanding of psychology through safety. Safety is NOT my lens of how I see the world.
          It is interesting that people are satisfied with Reason’s descriptions of ‘human error’ and ‘error classifications’ and then that’s enough. There is so much more that requires understanding and most of his constructs about human error don’t explain much, particularly as there is so little discussion of fallibility, mortality, and vulnerability as a human disposition.
          Similarly, I am concerned about how he defines ‘violations’ and how he anchors these to rationality and cognition. Similarly, his idea of resilience, not how I would define it.
          Reason’s logic and focus is how we end up with such nonsense as ‘safety is a choice you make’ and ‘all accidents are preventable’. He defines violations as deliberative acts whereas the evidence shows that a very high number of things that go wrong do not involve choice or deliberation. Similarly, his idea that unsafe acts arise from ‘wayward mental processes’ puts the framework of decision making in a binary framework, and humans don’t make decisions in this kind of fast and slow way (neither do I find Kahnemann’s model helpful).
          Reason’s constructs are a perfect set up for blame and simplistic rationality. I don’t understand anthropology in such a way as Reason indeed, many of the matters I consider critical in human decision making and social psychology are simply not discussed in any of his work.
          I think you might know ‘of’ my work, but without relationship and engagement in what I do, your couldn’t really know my work. So much of what I do is enacted after significant change in worldview and in many ways unlearning the unquestioned norms of safety.
          Unfortunately, there is no space in such a forum to explain much, so this may have to to.
          Thanks for your enquiry.
          Rob

          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

  • Rob Long on The Blessings of Fallibility
  • Simon Cassin on The Blessings of Fallibility
  • 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

Have You Had a Drink of SafeTea?

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

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

  • The Nonsense of ‘Safety Awareness’
  • 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
  • When You Don’t Know, Just Make S4*t Up
  • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS, CHECKISTS, REGISTERS, TEMPLATES and APPS
  • Free Risk Assessment Template in Excel Format
  • Road Safety Slogans 2023
  • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
  • Safety Acronyms

Recent Posts

  • The Nonsense of ‘Safety Awareness’
  • When You Don’t Know, Just Make S4*t Up
  • The Critical Outcome is to Improve Safety
  • Zero is Founded on Deceit and Lies
  • Have You Had a Drink of SafeTea?
  • The Blessings of Fallibility
  • 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

VIRAL POST!!! HOW TO QUIT THE SAFETY INDUSTRY

FEATURED POSTS

The Moment of Decision in Safety

Zero ‘Arm

Reflections of a ‘Doer’

Ethics, Morality and an Ethic of Risk

Anchoring, Framing and Priming Risk

You Have No Idea What Goes on in the ‘Real World of Safety’

How is the unconscious in communication critical for understanding and managing risk?

Themes and Concepts in Risk – Requests

Not Much Like Safety…

Triarachic Thinking in SPoR

Abduction in Risk and Safety

Safety Justifies Anything and Everything

Flooding is Dangerous, and I don’t Mean the Water….

I Just Don’t Know

When ‘Hearts and Minds’ are not ‘Hearts and Minds’

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

iCue Education Pack to Enable Learning in the SPoR Approach to Risk

What Does Your Risk and Safety Icon Say?

I DON’T KNOW

Visual Learning and Envisioning Risk

Reflection Makes Sense

The Sully Effect

Utopian Language and the Quest for Perfection in Safety

No Evidence for the Religion of Zero

Are You on The Safety Teat?

The Attraction of Simple and Easy in Safety

Perth and London SPoR Workshops

WHS Research Symposium 2019

Risky Conversations, The Law, Social Psychology and Risk

Right Then Children, Sit Up Straight and Take Some Safety

The Measurement Mindset in Safety???

Wisdom, Discernment and an Ethic of Safety

Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk – Prof Karl E. Weick

Safe Work Australia Continues to Perpetuate Safety Mythology

Traditional Safety

People Skills Are Not Soft Skills

Certificate, Diploma and Masters Studies in SPoR

I’m Not Playing Any More

Safety as Ritual Performance

Be Alert, Safety Needs More Lerts

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