How important should safety be? Should it be the No. 1 priority as stated in many company websites, on billboards and pasted on the backend of delivery vehicles? Should it be the reason we come to work each day, to ensure that everybody goes home safe? Should it be the top thing we talk about, pay attention to and spend our money on?
Some say yes. Some say, maybe not.
Safety is important, that is for sure and our lives depend on ensuring it is important enough. Over the past couple of decades, we may have let safety get out of balance. The way we think about and manage safety can be, at times, counterproductive.
For one thing, no matter what management says about safety, employees know that the No. 1 priority is to ensure the success of the business. Even at times, safety becomes the central focus and everyone understands over time their attention will shift back to production, the primary engine of performance.
We have seen many examples where this disconnect hurts the business and at the same time, reduces safety. This can happen when those responsible for production believe that safety is the sole responsibility of the safety manager and others with safety-focused titles. This division of labour between safety-focused individuals and those focused primarily on production can lead to serious breakdowns that impact both. While supporting a mid-size construction project at a refinery, I witnessed how deeply this disconnect over the place of safety can impact a project. When I arrived on the site, the project was in serious trouble; the owner and construction manager were at a standoff with each other. The sub-contractors and refinery management were caught in the crossfire.
When I interviewed their people, I heard statements like, “those people are trying to harm our company and its people.” Progress on the project had nearly stopped and it was about to have legal ramifications.
The dispute had crystallised around two teams. One team, mainly led by a safety consultant felt they were on the moral high ground and believed safety standards needed to be “world class.” The people in this team were passionate and righteous. They were diligent in their mission to locate every instance of non-compliance, working without integrity. Burnout among this group was very high.
The other team was led by an experienced site construction manager, who was savvy and smart but not a people person. This team had a few safety people in it but mainly consisted of other production supervisors and management. The people in this team were focused and manipulative, using threats and harassment to keep the other team under control. The safety team had the power to stop work and this triggered a chain of events that brought the project nearly to a halt. As the safety team began to use their power to stop work more frequently, the construction team began its counterattack by removing safety people from the project (firing them and hiring new ones) or by failing to report on incidents. These moves caused the safety team to elevate more violations to the project manager who began to believe that a major incident was about to occur and that the project should be shut down.
The normal reaction when looking at this situation that emerged is to take a side, agreeing with one of these team with their convincing points of view. This is precisely what most people on the project were doing, which fuelled the flames.
Rather than seeing one side as right and the other as wrong, we used a different approach. We assumed they were both partially right and partially wrong. We facilitated a dialogue between the teams that led to alignment on ways to manage the project both productively and safety. The hard work is in the details, each team had to give up some of their beliefs (especially about each other) and do more to contribute in each other’s successes.
The belief the safety team had to give up was that safety is the only thing and that perfect safety performance was the goal. This did not mean; however, they gave up their commitment to ensuring people don’t get hurt on the project. They also had to give up their belief that the construction managers Didn’t care about people or about safety.
The belief the construction team had to give up was that the HSE team was responsible for safety, that they were the eyes and ears of safety on the project. They also had to let go of their story that the safety team wanted to put them out of business. They needed to become more proactive, to make more requests for help, show up on the site as committed to both production and safety as partners.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.