The Illusion of Safety: Why Culture, Not Incidents, Determines Risk

The prevailing view in safety management has long been that by reducing visible incidents—those reportable accidents and near-misses—we are inherently making workplaces safer. This belief is similar to the decades-long focus on beta-amyloid as the primary cause of Alzheimer’s disease.

For years, the accumulation of beta-amyloid plaques in the brain was seen as the culprit, and countless efforts were directed at reducing these plaques. Yet, despite this intense focus, the disease continued to ravage lives, leading scientists to question whether they were looking in the wrong place all along.

Just as the scientific community now considers the possibility that an immune system defect, rather than beta-amyloid, might be the true cause of Alzheimer’s, we must reconsider our approach to safety.

The relentless focus on incident reports and visible safety metrics might be masking the real issues. The truth, as it turns out, might lie deeper—within the very culture of an organization, much like the immune system's role in the brain.

The Beta-Amyloid of Safety: Incident Reporting

For years, incident reporting has been the bedrock of safety management, much like beta-amyloid plaques were in Alzheimer’s research. The logic seemed unassailable: fewer incidents meant safer workplaces, just as fewer plaques were thought to mean healthier brains. However, this view ignores the more complex reality. In both cases, the symptoms (incidents or plaques) were mistaken for the root cause of the problem. As a result, despite rigorous efforts to reduce incidents, serious accidents continue to occur, and safety performance often plateaus.

The analogy to beta-amyloid helps us understand that the focus on incidents may be similarly misplaced. We have become so fixated on these surface-level indicators that we overlook the deeper, more insidious factors that truly drive safety performance.

The Immune System Revelation: Safety Culture

The breakthrough in Alzheimer’s research came when scientists began to look beyond beta-amyloid to the brain’s immune system, revealing a much more complex interaction at play. In a similar vein, the real revelation in workplace safety lies not in the number of reported incidents but in the health of the safety culture.

Safety culture is the organizational equivalent of the brain’s immune system. It’s the unseen force that shapes how safety is perceived, prioritized, and managed across all levels of the organization. A strong safety culture acts as a defense mechanism, proactively identifying and mitigating risks before they can manifest as incidents. Conversely, a weak safety culture, much like a malfunctioning immune system, allows hazards to go unnoticed and unmanaged, leading to catastrophic failures.

The Misdiagnosis of Safety: Culture as the Core Issue

Organizations that focus solely on reducing incidents are akin to doctors treating Alzheimer’s patients by targeting plaques while ignoring the underlying immune dysfunction. These organizations are treating the symptoms rather than the disease. Incident reduction alone does not address the systemic issues that allow risks to persist and grow unnoticed.

A dysfunctional safety culture can create an environment where underreporting is rampant, where workers are afraid to speak up, and where safety procedures exist only on paper. This is why organizations with low incident rates can still experience severe accidents—they are misdiagnosing the problem. The true measure of safety lies not in the absence of incidents but in the presence of a resilient, proactive culture that continuously seeks to improve.

Reframing Safety: From Incident Metrics to Cultural Health

To truly revolutionize safety management, we need to shift our focus from the visible “plaques” of incidents to the cultural “immune system” that governs safety behavior. This means:

1. Assessing Cultural Health: Just as Alzheimer’s research is now focusing on immune system health, safety management should focus on assessing and improving safety culture. Tools and methodologies that measure cultural indicators—such as trust, communication, and leadership commitment—are essential.

2. Proactive Risk Management: A healthy safety culture is proactive, much like a functioning immune system. It identifies risks early, engages workers at all levels, and fosters an environment where safety is an intrinsic value, not just a metric to be achieved.

3. Systemic Learning and Adaptation: Instead of viewing incidents as isolated events, organizations should see them as symptoms of deeper cultural issues. This requires a shift towards systemic learning and continual improvement, where every incident is an opportunity to strengthen the safety culture.

Key takeaway: The Future of Safety Management

Just as the understanding of Alzheimer’s disease is shifting towards a more nuanced view of the brain’s immune system, the future of safety management lies in understanding and nurturing safety culture. The focus must move away from simply counting incidents and towards fostering a resilient, proactive culture that can anticipate and adapt to risks.

By recognizing that the current view of safety—like the beta-amyloid hypothesis—is not fully effective, we can begin to make the necessary changes. Safety culture is not just a part of the solution; it is the core, the revelation that can truly transform how we manage safety, ensuring that organizations are not just incident-free but genuinely safe.

Follow me on LinkedIn for more related articles Eskild Lund S?rensen