I'd like to hear what you think it involves.

It sounds the sort of question NEBOSH would ask.

Arron

No, but I'm intrigued as to what this 'behavioural-based' safety culture change will bring to the table. Apart form Kieran's erudite offering it appears no one else is the wiser either. Do tell us more?

Ray

Graham, how I have missed your long and boring posts during the last week or so. No offence, of course.

On a more serious note, you write 'a change from stick to carrot', are sure you have not got that the wrong way round? It is my understanding that behavioural safety can (not always) focus on individuals and transfer of blame. Personally, I do not like focusing on any particular concept because good health and safety relies on many inputs...and if I hear the words BEHAVIOURAL SAFETY again I'm gonna reach for my gun!

In my view the key to the 'behaviour' approach is the top man/woman/people because if the top person/team etc. in a company leads properly its achieveable if not then nothing will change

I have worked on multi billion pound jobs where the top person lead strongly by example and things were easy and v-versa where a very low cost situation with few people involved was very poorly lead with the usual problems being in place

best of luck - if your top person is with you and can manage properly things should go OK

It all depends on what you mean.
Adopting a behavioural- based safety culture, should mean changing the way people think about H&S and no longer assuming it is a bolt-on or ‘something the safety people do’. Instead it should be part of any and every process going on in the organisation. People should not just be looking at the easiest/cheapest way of doing a job but making sure that it is the safest way of doing the job, without someone from Health and Safety checking up on them. For this to work you need a lot of employee buy-in but also support from managers, who cannot turn around and say, ‘Yeah, I know you should be doing it that way but this way is cheaper’.
A lot organisation have adopted something they call a behavioural- based safety culture but what their version involves is passing the buck down to the employees and saying accidents are your fault so it’s upto you to prevent them. They often end up focusing on preventing time lost indents and then forget about the big stuff examples.

This was covered in a recent seminar under the heading "Compliance or Conformity?" (with conformity being the behavioural aspect / safety culture etc.).

There are a hundreds of different definitions and interpretations for both, the way I would compare the 2:

A compliance environment is one where:
- operatives do the right thing when they know they are being watched;
- operatives do the right thing when they know that if they don't they'll get in trouble;
- non compliance occurs when the above 2 situations do not (or are not believed to) exist

A conformity environment is one where:
- operatives do the right thing because they think it is the right thing to do
- operatives follow procedures because they believe in them and understand why they have been developed
- procedures are followed even when operatives are not being watching
- procedures are followed without requiring the fear of repercussions

And...Thanks Jake, I do know something of it after all, just didn't know what it was called (Red faced..again)

I don't think you can change from a compliance based safety culture to a behavioural based safety culture - you need to strike a balance between the two, it is not an either/or situation.

BBS is great, but you need to have a robust safety culture in order to introduce it. BBS needs to be backed by strong policies, strong leadership and an understanding amongst your workforce of why we do H&S. Once this is established as a management structure you can then bring in BBS.

BBS forces employees to examine their own behaviour. To re-look at their perceptions and their understanding. When I recently ran a course we used a lot of psychological tricks to make the audience understand how their perspective changes with the external information for example: we made them agree with statements like "I always wear safety glasses when using rotating machinery" which they all immediately agreed to and then "I wear safety glasses when mowing the lawn" which obviously they didn't all agree to; or "I am a law abiding person" followed by "I always drive within the speed limit".

BBS has a very important role to play in H&S but it should go hand in hand with a robust management system that supports compliance because at the end of the day, you have to comply with the Law. It's neither carrot nor stick, it is the right tool for the right environment, sometimes this might be stick, but sometimes carrot will work better.

Clairel

Scientific methods of enquiry are very, very, very slowly entering the domain of occupational safety and health simply because those who invest the time, energy and other resources prove them to be productive. There is considerable documentary evidence of this in relation to 'behavioural safety'.

While you are free to exercise your choice to disregard such developments, that doesn't in any way discredit their value and merit.

Those who insisted the earth is flat adoped the same approach as the one you advocate; maybe they and you are right in your own ways.

Regrettably, the occupationaly safety and health profession risks discrediting itself to the extent that members collectively close their minds to statistical and behavioural evidence of the effectiveness of applications of science to human behaviour. If psychological science was merely about 'useless terminology' as you claim, it would hardly have become one of the most rapidly growing disciplines at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels in the leading British universities over the past 15 years.

This penchant to compartmentalise certain aspects of health and safety really annoys me too. First, someone is always trying to re-invent the wheel by giving something a fancy title in order to make it sound special. There are also many in industry who have a vested interest in ensuring that some new fad is sold as the next best thing to sliced bread. However, the principles of health and safety are fairly simple - I prefer to keep it that way, so that everyone understands their roles and responsibilities.

Yes Claire, most of the time. In fact, when I speak with other practitioners I normally find we are like minded. So I do wonder who on Earth keeps inventing superficial initiatives which add no value to this industry? Answers on a post card please.

It is a pity that somehow, in whatever form the psychological aspects of safety are bundled, there appears to be criticism based on perceptions.

Behavioural Based Safety (BBS) has never been considered at the only aspect ( or smoking gun) that gives magic results. It is one of the tools and, a useful one for organisations that have attained a reasonably mature "safety culture" level.

Secondly, it will never succeed as a tool if the management uses it to “blame” employees. When implemented properly, it can be a very good tool.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/hu...ics/behaviouralintor.htm

Last week we had a 'tool-box-talk on safe systems of work regarding testing live circuits within control panels.

At the meeting given by one of the electrical managers,we sat talking about safety when testing live at 230 and 400v.

I made a few points, one being that people with no electrical qualifications and formal training whatsoever should NOT be allowed to work/test, on or close to, live electrical circuits (Low voltage - 230/400v)

Imagine my dismay this afternoon when I noticed one of my colleges doing exactly that. The workshop manager had told him to carry out the work.

This action was not a mistake, it was intentional.

All the people involved were at the meeting. The other electrical staff were looking on but saying nothing other than 'someone should say something.

I'll be giving Behavioural Based Safety a fair hearing

Everyone Ray. If necessary from a stand point of dancing the boardroom table top. The safety culture is non-existent at the moment and will be an up-hill struggle.

Zimmy

At the risk of melting everyone’s brains with psychology research you could do worse than google/wiki the experiments of Stanley Milgram and the later Stanford University Prison experiment by Philip Zimbardo. Philip Zimbardo is in his late 70's now but was part of a team that had access to the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

These experiments looked at how with a set of very simple cues and the artiface of authority you could get anyone( and in many cases 100% of the volunteers) off the street to electrocute co-volunteers with 415 volts. The volunteers didn't know that the person in the next room was an actor as they screamed and begged for mercy and finally fell silent while they continued to follow instructions and shock the presumably unconscious or dead volunteer. He did this over a number of years with thousands of volunteers I believe, so the results are significant.

Zimbardo's experiments in a simulated prison filled with college student volunteers who were randomly allocated to either be a guard or a prisoner. The volunteers were tested to show they had no underlying psychological disease or trauma before the experiment started. The experiment was due to run 14days but within 6 days it had to be abandoned. The students who were made guards were abusing the student prisoners to the extent that two prisoners had suffered mental breakdowns. The student guards had put student prisoners in solitary confinement, made them clean toilets with toothbrushes and forced them to simulate sexual acts to degrade the fake prisoners...all within the first 48hrs. Zimbardo admitted himself that he should have stopped the experiment sooner but was fascinated and did not. One of his associates on seeing the initial results confronted him and he admitted it was at that point he called it to a halt. He had looked into the abyss himself and did not turn back when he should even with his experience and practice.

People are far stranger than I ever imagined. On the other hand this probably sounds like any Wednesday night to anyone who attended Eaton.

Zimbardo's parting shot was this. Bad apples are rare but there tends to be an abundance of bad barrels and bad barrel makers. In other words the system and operational hierarchy causes the choices for all but the most morally courageous of us.

As for BBS it is no more than a "growbag" for kickstarting a culture where people train their gobs to form the word wait at the expense of the immediately pleasing word OK. Not necessarily a bad thing but you could do it yourself without any faffing about with initiatives and big spends.

I hope that proves to you all how clever I am and how well I can cut and paste.

Kind regards

Jeff

May I suggest that you first need to agree that line with the workshop manager.

Have to agree with Claire and Ray start adding what is considered fancy labeling and most stop, because you are then trying to sell it to the workforce, who either don't unedrstand, and won't ask in case they look stupid or have switched off because they think that you think you are better than them.

I don't think it relates well to others, but call it what you like.

I was planning decorating in the house the other month and recieved an e-mail from my wife who was keen to 'timebox' all events and activities, still haven't done the job, didn't know what she meant and was to affraid to ask

Notes:

To redkenat #34

The manager in question has nothing but contempt for H&S as is a South African with no idea about the Brit way of doing things let along legislation. I need to drag him along by the ears.

Ray at #31

'Don't forget to be diplomatic and sell health and safety - don't want to upset anyone do we. LOL!' Ray, Diplomatic is my middle name...ok...I fibbed! :-)