Creating a Safety Culture

By David Beech, Health and Safety Advisor

A Brief History of?“Safety Culture”?

One of my many personal passions is the study of?Etymology, or, the origin of words. I always find that if you understand the history of a word, it allows you to capture its meaning and essence in a deeper way.

Through working in Safety and having a passion for ensuring people are safe, I've become interested in the journey of getting a safety culture right. So why not start by understanding the words themselves?

1. Safety?derives from the Latin?“Salvus”,?which means 'uninjured' or 'to be safe' from.
2. Culture?derives from the Latin?“Culturare”?which means 'to grow' or 'tend to'.

So?essentially, to have a safety culture, it must be grown and tended to.?I find this interesting. If you are to save employees form injury, then you must keep growing and tending to your measures to do so.?

You don’t just get a culture without growing and looking after it. This takes time and consistency.

History has shown three key phases since people started to express concern around safety.?

The?first phase?started between 1800s and 1900s. At this time, people began looking to safety as purely a technological issue. Safety only improved through innovation in improving the equipment throughout the industrial revolution. Safety during this period was dependent on the item, not the person - a very different mindset to today.

The building blocks of a safety culture did begin in this era, as product improvements began to consider safety more consistently. Closest inspecting tools and items to improve its safety is a sign that a culture was beginning to develop.

During the?second phase, which was mid 1900s, employers began to concentrate on safety through concentrating on employees’ skills. They tried to?employ?their employee’s skills, as opposed to an employee themselves. This was in the hopes of ultimately improving safety in the workplace. This is more evidence of a mentality-shift, aiming to bring in the safety skills instead of growing a safety culture internally. This method of operation is still in effect for some organisations today.

In 1980s, the?third phase?of safety began, taking a more academic and data-driven approach. Research was conducted into safety, leading to increased attention towards the management philosophy on safety issues. According to Stain (2009), this research formed what was considered the American Management theory, and developed into another theory called?Accident Cause Analysis, which assumes that accidents happen either because of human mistakes or failures of equipment.?

These theories motivate people to think about having a safety system, which should have a management system with specific responsibilities for all levels of employees, and safety planning to inspire and motivate safety in workplace.?

It was key in the review on the major disaster at Chernobyl, that a few senior management failings resulted in the event. This is where we can start to understand why good risk assessment and management must involve consultation with the workforce. With a culture of openness and transparency at all levels, this proves that a few can impact many and result in major disaster.?

At this stage, the word 'culture' starts to appear in the safety dictionary and as described by?Hale and Hovden, 'is the soul of the safety management system'. Without a culture, a safety system will not work.

The culture of the group is what drives success, and as?Maslow?explained, a workforce that feels safe and secure will be successful in business.?

What Happened at Chernobyl?

The Chernobyl accident in 1986 was the result of?a flawed reactor design that was operated with inadequately trained personnel. The resulting steam explosion and fires released at least 5% of the radioactive reactor core into the environment, with the deposition of radioactive materials lingering in many parts of Europe.

A low power test was being completed on Reactor 4 in preparation for a safety test, but no procedures were in place that informed the personnel of what to do if power did not restore. This, combined with a design flaw, resulted in the disaster. Personnel continued with the test even though the power was too low.?

During the test, several engineers voiced concerns, but senior leaders ignored these. The poor culture of safety and consultation could be deemed as the root cause of the accident.?

A good culture should always put?safety?first, and ensure all employees and leaders are accountable to maintain the growth and presence of the right culture. Maintaining a strong relationship requires consultation at every level in the business.?After all, one of the strongest leadership skills is the ability to listen.

---

David Beech is a Health & Safety professional under the National Examination Board of Occupational Health & Safety, with over 14 years’ experience.

With a military background, David began a career in Health and Safety, something he has always been passionate about.

Outside of work, David is a keen mountaineer and freediver, pushing himself to learn and keep his safety skills sharp. A previous member of North of Tyne Mountain Rescue team for 6 years, David is a safety expert with excellent knowledge on the subject.