Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Adrian Watson I found the following at http://www.nsms.us/pages/auditor.html and it raises interesting questions for each of us. What are your opinions? Are We Auditors or Autocrats? How well a safety manager is received in an organization may depend on whether he makes himself out to be an auditor or an autocrat. The direction he takes often is determined by his basic attitude toward his mission. The end result can make or break a productive loss-prevention program. The dictionary describes an autocrat as “an absolute sovereign; one who rules with undisputed sway in any company or relation.” Has not the safety field been filled with such species? What effect has this had down through the years on the attitude of managers toward “safety”? What supervisor, foreman or official-in-charge likes having someone, out of the chain of command, tell him how to run his operation? Yet, it has been the safety man—be he inspector or engineer—who has assumed the role of an independent or self-derived power, shouldering the burden of all employees; well being, and helping the line manager relinquish his inherent responsibility of accident prevention. Is it any wonder safety is not a fully supported household word? But, consider what Mr. Webster stated as his definition of an auditor. Simply expressed, an auditor is “a hearer or listener.’ The common vision of an auditor is one who snoops around trying to find mistakes. How true; yet how valuable to an organization sincerely interested in running an efficient and economical operation. The modern-day safety manager should be an auditor who determines where systems weaknesses exist and suggests remedial action. He should be an advisor to management, a confidant who is recognized as a vital link in the decision-making process. When safety managers assume the role of auditors and shed the cloak of autocrats, the profession will become recognized as a full members of the management team. Which are you? (This editorial appeared in the July, 1971 issue of FOCUS.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Sean Fraser
Exactly the point I have been trying to make in prior posts.
The image problem we face is due to a general perception of the "safety man" (or woman - but perhaps they won't want to struggle for recognition on THIS one ;-) ) is of the autocrat. The persistence of this seeming misconception can only be becuase it is being routinely reinforced in the workplace and public domains, otherwise it would wither and die as people were unable to relate to the image so readily.
My take on it is that although our current legislative framework is goal-setting, people have difficulty in understnading the concept and use time pressures as an excuse to demand absolutes, not abstracts. So we are often forced down a route of "and how exactly will that apply to us, and how soon can you get it done?" route rather than take the time for a considered opinion and relaxed approach to addressing legislative requirements. It is quicker and easier to tell them rather than consult and develop, despite our own misgivings.
However, I see ourselves as less auditor than educator - one who trains mentally and morally. An auditor is at the end of a process - we should be at the forefront, ensuring that safe thinking becomes second nature and hence intrinsic in the activities of all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Mc Nally
Adrian
I think this where the role of the safety professional actually comes in to play. I would advocate that the safety person should be in a position to identify where work practices etc need to be developed to ensure that the organisation is meeting its H&S obligations however to be able to ensure that these practices are understood and implemented effectively, he/she should be aware of how H&S interacts with the current management system in place. Therefore they need to be able to communicate. consult etc with a number of different people. When the practices are then introduced, there should be an effective auditing programme put in place to ensure that the practices are being implemented and maintained as intended. In this case, the safety professional should be aware of how to construct and carry out an auditing programme.
I don't belive that a safety professional can carry out his work effectively if they behaved in an autocratic manner but I do think that they should have a good knowledge of how to be an auditor
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By james mackie
Adrian,
What you are depends on how you go about your job as an individual. I know H&S managers who fit either of your bills.
The way you communicate and deal with situations in accordance with your management skills and experience will determine how you are perceived in your workplace. Your personality will also determine how you do business.
My ethos is to eduacate before disciplining staff but not to let constant offenders create a culture that is unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter Longworth
I think the main problem is the use of the term "Health and Safety Manager", which implies a person who has sole responsibility for managing health and safety in a particular organisation.
Surely it is the role of the designated "competent person" to encourage shared responsibility at all functions and levels within the organistion for health and safety, through the provision of sound, up to date information and advice. Auditing is just one tool that can be used to achieve this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
One of the companies I work for recently replaced a rigid, rules based safety manager (the sign on the door said Health, Safety and Regulations) by an ex maintenance manager who has good people and management skills but no H&S training. I'm in the process of helping him to develop into the job. In his office this morning he phoned a first-line supervisor and said "can we come along and talk about the new safety programme, talk about any problems or difficulties ?"
In the supervisor's office I said that what I really wanted to talk about was how well he was doing with the new programme.
I know that the problems, if any, will come out during the discussion but I don't want to start by saying I that expect to find problems.
Let's be positive, OK ? It's a FUN job and we are all proud of what we do. OK ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.