Safety Culture Excellence®

Many organizations, especially smaller sites, are making safety part of someone’s job title.  It may be HR/Safety, Plant Engineer/Safety, Environmental/Safety, Health/Safety or some other combination.  I seldom see “safety” listed first on such combined titles.  Is that intentional or do the words just sound better in that order?  In the majority of cases, it is the safety responsibility that is the “add-on” and the person assigned is another kind of professional and a part-time advocate of safety.

Having even a part-time safety point person can be better than having none; but there is a definite downside to this arrangement as well.  It can send the message that safety is not important enough to dedicate a professional to it.  It can also suggest that safety is not all that complex and a little attention is all that is needed.  Not everyone takes these kinds of inferences from such an arrangement, but it often happens.

The most common problem with such assignments is that safety is seriously subjugated to the other job because that is where the expertise and interest lies.  Safety is more or less a hobby that gets whatever extra time is available.  Communications from the safety person are less than expert and less than official. 

If your organization has such dual functions, carefully define the division of responsibilities, provide professional development for the safety function, calendar the first year’s safety activities and follow-up to see that they are accomplished, and periodically ask the personnel at the site how the safety function is going and how it could be improved.  Today’s economic reality calls on many individuals to wear multiple hats.  Just be sure one hat, doesn’t wind up in the closet.

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

It is important to define the desired capabilities of a culture instead of simply the desired characteristics.  What a culture “can do” is much more crucial than what it “is like.”  That said, some cultures become can-do cultures without internalizing safety as a part of what they can do.  Such cultures become “get it done at all costs” cultures.  The members of the culture become willing to give their bodies up for the team.  They put job completion ahead of all other priorities.

The history of a site can be a major influence in developing such a culture.  Sites that have experienced multiple downsizing or threats of closing tend to develop work groups that perform for survival.  The constant threat of being laid off or having your workplace closed tends to outweigh the threat of personal injury.  If managers and supervisors constantly use these threats to motivate or hurry workers, the perception that production trumps safety is constantly reinforced.

When companies downsize, reorganize or otherwise disrupt site cultures, they should anticipate and manage the safety aspects of the change.  Survival is an economic necessity, but poor safety can impact a site’s viability as much as ineffective or incomplete work.  Survival mode should include both surviving the economic challenges and the safety issues.  Again, it is not a dichotomy between production and safety, but addressing the need for safe production.

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

We have seen a trend in recent years for organizations to add safety staff at the corporate level rather than at the site level.  The basic idea is that these corporate staffers can be shared among sites who might not need them full time.  The idea is valid on the surface.  Shared resources could have higher levels of competence, could be more specialized, and could be paid more than the site budget could bear.  Having a floating pool of resource people also allows companies to send more help to sites when needed.

The downside of this practice is the disconnection between these corporate resource people and the sites.  Many view their job as exercising their field of expertise rather than addressing the needs of the site.   They tend to become subject-matter experts rather than support staff.  They also tend to function better with technical issues than with people issues.  All these tendencies can potentially make them less useful to the site.  When this reduced effectiveness is combined with the fact that their jobs might effectively eliminate site-specific jobs, this becomes a double blow to the site safety program.

The best ways to address these potential problems is to consider the relationship of corporate support staff with site mangers.  When corporate folks are assigned to the manager rather than a specific site issue, things tend to get done.  Effective managers tend to seek solutions rather than fixes.  They, if effective, will have deeper knowledge of the people issues at the site and include them in the solutions.  Managers that aim the expertise of corporate people at site issues in a more holistic manner, will make relationships more effective.

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

I recently attended a safety training session in which the three types of distracted driving were being taught and discussed.  I stood outside the door after the training and asked the departing trainees if they could name the three types of distractions.  Only one of ten could name two of the three, three more could name one and the rest could not remember any of the three.  If those being trained cannot remember the training on the way out of the classroom the chances of them adopting the safety practices and turning them into safety habits is virtually non-existent.

The principle is this, “If you don’t get it into workers’ heads, you won’t get it into their habits.”  Training that isn’t memorable or sticky is not effective training.  Safety training that does not utilize mnemonic devices, repetition and post-testing may meet legal requirements, but it won’t improve safety performance.  Even with such training techniques, too much training material can create overload rather than internalization of the materials. 

Remember the principle. Before taking workers away from work and putting them in classrooms or in front of computers, consider rethinking your training strategies to make the most effective use of the time and a greater return on investment.

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

The last several times I have asked clients what they are doing to make workers safer, they answered with a list of safety programs.  There is an underlying assumption that programs can shape people.  While training, meetings, onboarding and communication are definitely influences on behavioral choices, they are far from the only ones. 

I have witnessed situations in which such programs were doing mortal battle with the workplace, the culture, production pressure and other powerful daily factors which influenced workers to take risks.  The poor programs were outnumbered and overpowered.   These other influences were not being addressed in the safety efforts except through trying to strengthen the programs.

The recent emphasis and popularity of focusing on safety “culture” is, in part, an admission that people-to-people influences are important and must be addressed.  However, most organizations attempt to improve the safety culture by using what?  MORE PROGRAMS!  Again, this assumption that programs shape people and even the way people shape each other. 

Many organizations are attempting to program the seeds of culture while ignoring the climate and chemistry in which they want the seeds to grow.  Exactly the opposite approach is what most often brings success.  People respond to the environment in which they work which includes physical design, leadership, supervision style, respect for lifestyle issues, and being treated like an adult. 

For a brief moment, forget what your programs should be and focus on what your people should be.  What influences will make them feel good about becoming such a person and how can you create these influences in your organization? 

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

Are all accidents preventable?  The idealist says that, under the right circumstances and with early detection of risks and trends, they are.  The realist says that given probability, massive exposure to risks, human nature and imperfect performance a certain number of accidents are inevitable.  Which view is right and which is wrong? 

A pure idealist’s mentality implies that any rate of failure is unacceptable.  A pure realist’s mentality implies that it is ok to hurt workers since it is unavoidable.  Either of these extremes tends to produce philosophically flawed and, thus, ineffective safety programs.

The most effective safety effort is neither blind to the magnitude of the challenge nor resigned to accept some level of failure.  Likewise, the most effective safety effort is always intelligently adapting but never knee-jerk reacting.  Where the idealist would fail to adapt and the realist overreact, the effective safety professional continuously analyzes and improves the approach, always looking for the next better way to improve safety.  It is possible to dream the impossible dream without tilting with windmills.

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

When safety practice ignores the facts it’s no wonder why things don’t work well.  Research has shown and re-affirmed several facts that have escaped attention or reaction from common safety practices.  The following is only a short list of examples:

Fact:  People react emotionally before they react rationally.
Practice:  We try to convince people first with logic and then get them involved and bought in.

Fact:  People remember concrete facts better than abstract concepts.
Practice:  We generalize about safety and then (maybe) back up our generalization with specific examples.

Fact:  The messenger is often as important the message.
Practice:  We send out safety messages via email or ask whoever is available to deliver the message.

Fact:  Discovery learning is best.
Practice:  We tell everything rather than letting people extract lessons from stories.

As long as safety practices ignore the facts we can expect them to produce less than stellar results. What other facts do you see safety practices ignore?

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

I just heard another organizational leader claim that he had good safety programs and a good safety culture and couldn’t figure out why he still had accidents.  The two greatest problems with such leaders is already stated:  they don’t know why they have accidents and they are satisfied that something is good even when it does not produce results. 

These leaders are not entirely to blame.  They have been told by the “experts” that good safety programs and a good safety culture have certain characteristics.  If their programs and safety culture have these characteristics, they must be good ones.  The true measure of a safety program or culture is not what it is “like” but “what it can do and does.”  If you have too many accidents, your programs and culture are not doing what they should do.  If you don’t know why, you can’t lead your organization to better results.

This problem is simply an application of the age-old tendency to mistake activity for results.  This is why we have both process metrics and results metrics:  so we can see if we are working our plan and also see if our plan is working.   A culture that wants to prevent accidents is not automatically a culture that knows how to prevent accidents.  Work on your culture’s capabilities and not just its characteristics.

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.

Insightful conversation from dinner the other night. I was performing a safety culture assessment of an organization in the oil & gas business. While at a restaurant, a man at the next table asked me who I worked for as we were dressed alike. (I was wearing flame-resistant clothing due to the hazardous locations of the field interviews.) Me: “ProAct Safety and you?” Him: Not immediately answering but offering, “Safety’s a bunch of BS.” Me: “I’m... sorry to hear that, what line of work are you in?” Him: “I’m a Superintendent for…” (A known oilfield company, also a Superintendent is often the top local boss on construction and many oilfield projects.)

Me: “Oh yea, okay. So how did y’all do in safety last year?” Him: “Well our rate was …” (It was quite poor). Me: “That’s quite unfortunate, why do you think that is?” Him: “Who knows, probably if our leadership had a better attitude towards it.” Me: “So you are a Superintendent?” Him: “Yea.” Me, with an unfiltered response: “If you believe safety is a bunch of BS, what message do you think that sends to the guys you lead?” His facial expression was the only response I received.

Leaders must remember what they believe will influence their decisions and eventually be observable in their behaviors. If the leaders don’t lead with the desirable beliefs and behaviors, don’t expect the followers to follow. His unfortunate attitude (and possibly those of other leaders if he was correct) might not be the only contribution to their poor performance, but it is certainly a good place to start.

- Shawn M. Galloway

Shawn M. Galloway is the President of ProAct Safety and the coauthor of two books, his latest published Feb 2013 by Wiley is STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence. As an internationally recognized safety excellence expert, he has helped hundreds of organizations within every major industry to achieve and sustain excellence in performance and culture.  He has been listed in this year’s National Safety Council Top 40 Rising Stars, EHS Today Magazine’s 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS and ISHN Magazine’s POWER 101 – Leaders of the EHS World and again in the recent, elite list of Up and Coming Thought Leaders. In addition to the books, Shawn has authored over 300 podcasts, 100 articles and 80 videos on the subject of safety excellence in culture and performance.

The most ineffective safety coaching I have ever seen had some great ideas and techniques, but it was based on a bad premise.  That premise was that supervisors and leaders should coach the day-to-day performance of their workers in an evaluative manner.  They used some powerful interaction models and evaluative techniques, but in the end, it just seemed like the boss’s opinion vs. the worker’s opinion of performance.

The best safety coaching is based on targeted improvements rather than evaluation.  Targeting specific improvements (precautions to take or behaviors that contribute to culture) helps coaching in several ways: 

• It creates talking points that are friendly and logical (what we agreed to work on) and not subjective (what the boss does or doesn’t like)
• It creates a clear dichotomy of performance (you either took the targeted precaution or you did not) vs. the boss thinks you did well or poorly
• When targeted precautions are not taken, it fosters a discussion of why and why not rather than a judgment of performance
• It creates a communication atmosphere of adult talking to adult vs. adult overseeing child
• It creates the expectation that safety is about getting better not just staying the same