Safety-II, What is it?

The preventive nature of OSH is one of the reasons as to why it is a hard sell. Our society is cultured to be reactive. This is because as human beings, it is easier to recognise the actions that favour reaction than those that are preventive in nature. We always see people being recognised for heroism in one form or another after a disaster, but it’s very difficult to recognise those individuals who put in measures to prevent said disasters. ?Consequently, when safety works it can be a very dull and is difficult to catch the attention of the masses. When people see nothing, they presume that nothing is happening and that nothing will continue to happen if they continue to act as before. With this in mind, safety practitioners promote disasters in their feeds to provoke emotion and carry home a message. In this era of positive vibes only, overly highlighting disasters can further alienate those we wish to address.

It is against this backdrop that I’ve always been keen to adopting a different approach to Safety management and that is how I came to learn about Safety-II. Before we delve into it, we first need to understand what Safety-I is.

The main focus of Safety-I is on strong rules, procedures, equipment, materials, etc. It is currently the most dominant system as it forms the foundation of safety practice. Accidents happen due to technical, organizational and personal (TOP) failures. Safety-I prevents accident through employing well tried and tested methods of root cause analysis, control of accident causes (hierarchy of controls) and measuring the outcomes of interventions.

However, the Safety-II paradigm analyses all possible outcomes: this includes normal performance, exceptionally good performance, near-misses, accidents and disasters. Safety-II is seen to be more wholesome in its approach where focus is shifted to normal performance and frequent events, which are easier to change and manage.

We can clearly see that the focus of Safety-I is largely on the accidents (actual or potential) at the tail end of the distribution.

A key principle behind Safety II is trust between management and the workforce. Rather than dictating what should be done and writing step-by-step instructions, Safety managers are advised to listen attentively to their employees, ask them questions, and appreciate the value of “adaptive behaviour” rather than rules and standards. (It is at this point that I refer you to my previous article on SOP Deviation)

Furthermore, Safety-II does not promote best practices, rather practice that is best at a certain time in a certain context. That is the best that could reasonably be done given the demand, resources and constraints. In the place of best practice we get the term; contextual practice – practice that fits the context.

However, adopting a Safety II approach does not mean discarding practices based on Safety-I assumptions. That is akin to throwing the baby out with the bath water.?Safety-II was not conceived as the successor to Safety-I which is why they were consciously designated “I and II”, as opposed to “1 and 2”. The intent is to convey progression rather than replacement. That said, we must re think the focus on TOP failure with respect to the systems and situations in which work is undertaken. It is very possible to do too much of a good thing. Safety rules are valuable but if a worker is overwhelmed by too many, danger in terms of confusion, distraction can emerge.?

Circling back to my initial point on highlighting disasters, it does not integrate well with everyday goal-oriented work. The Safety-II proposals are better aligned with business and operational goals that emphasise effectiveness. And effectiveness – doing the right things right – is surely the bottom line.

One thing is undeniable, the principles of Safety-II can only work in organisations in which the Safety-I principles have maxed out their effectiveness. In the spirit of continuous learning, I implore my fellow practitioners to get familiar with the Safety-II principles beyond this brief article, the works cited are a good start.

Is Safety-II really the future of safety management? Let’s pick up the conversation on the comment section below.

Works Cited

Kamer, L. (2022, August 1). Total employment in Kenya from 2015 to 2020, by sector. Retrieved from Statista: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1134332/total-employment-in-kenya/

Kronl?f, T. (2021, March 1). Safety-II and the misleading debate about right and wrong. Retrieved from Quentic: https://www.quentic.com/articles/safety-ii-occupational-safety/

Safety Paradigms. (n.d.). Retrieved from Gary Wong & Associates: https://gswong.com/applications/safety/safety-i/

Shorock, S. (2014, November 7). What Safety-II isn't. Retrieved from Safety Differently: https://safetydifferently.com/what-safety-ii-isnt/#comment-1140

Wong, G. (2014, November 15). WHEN THINKING OF SAFETY, THINK OF COFFEE AROMA. Retrieved from Gary Wong & Associates: https://gswong.com/when-thinking-of-safety-think-of-coffee-aroma/