Thirst it is a method I have thought of, particularly in the early stages of my career. Shock tactics generally work for a period,like using severe eye injury pictures to encourage the wearing of glasses in industry. The Bradford fire is one such incident that is used on many training courses and I know the Lockerbie bombing was a video used for paramedics training videos a few years ago to prepare them for their future career. However caution must be taken before going down this route as to what the individuals taking the course/training may have experienced previously. An employee with the company I now work for was taking part in a forklift training course, part of which was a video showing the effects of not wearing a seat belt when driving which turned out to be quite graphic and the employee broke down and could no longer take part in the course as it evoked too many memories of his brother who had been killed in similar circumstances on a fork lift 2 years before. The main concern is whether the videos methods are ethically correct for public consumption, which I,m sure will draw many responses. The main aim of any training is to get the information provided to stick which can only be measured by either examination or observation of practices after the course A

IMHO, you must know your audience, their history and experiences, very well before going for the gore-fest approach. It can be counter-productive in some instances. The HSE's Asbestos video ('how are you today') is perhaps a good example. It tends to backfire as a training resource as many of those watching will have been too closely affected, and the emotions generated will greatly detract from any other messages you may hope to deliver on that same session. If it's too real, it will deeply affect some people. I recall people leaving the room when that video was shown, and they didn't (couldn't) come back in. Be careful - everyone has their own limits, life experiences and sensitivities. The motives and rationale of the block-busting film industry are not necessarily always transferable to the H&S training environment. There are some good video resources out there mind, which manage to demonstrate a serious incident in some detail, but avoiding the gore.

Rarely changes the "never happen to me " brigade. Usually severly and adversely impacts someone on an emotional level. Only ever changes behaviour in the short term. Can only be effective if the individual is allowed by the workplace culture or societal demands to actually change their behaviour or attitude when they get back to reality. Often heightens anxiety in those who already fear the illustrated consequences. I guess you can see I am not in favour. I see it at best as a rough and ready means to challenge perceptions/beliefs and change behaviour. It can have a place in some environments but not as a general workplace approach. p48

Hi Chris, I was not suggesting a meat cleaver be issued to lone workers if they get trapped. Just the aspect of true industrial accident gore told by the the injured party themselves. Putting the the injuries into perspective, might change the way people think about H&S in the work place after seeing and hearing what the individual has to say now about H&S, after the accident.

Hi Andy77, I understand caution should&must be used when the contents of H&S videos or live presentations may evoke memories of a family member or close work colleague who is present at the H&S training session. But where is a/the line to be drawn on preventing fatalities/injuries in the workplace. A very difficult decision for a H&S trainer to make, Yes, but he/she are only using past situations, highlighting what could & does happen when H&S procedures are ignored and unnecessary risks are taken in the work place. If either of these methods are used, but change the way people view and approach H&S in there daily tasks and reduce accidents & injuries. Surely this can only be benifical to both company & employee?? A pre warning to the attendees of the H&S session, the contents of the presentation/video some may find upsetting and if the trainer knows a family member close friend, a quite word as well. My opinion may read, no feelings or considerations for who may be present or for people with not so a strong stomach as others. But what is the priority, evoking memories or saving life's and preventing injuries?

Shock tactics has it's place, in certain circumstances. However I feel the best approach is to go further than the actual injury itself. Has anyone seen the 'Charlie Video'? It is a great video employed by many oil companies around the world. The video is a man who was seriously burnt with horrible consequences which are described only, but the main message was the effect it had on his life, how it caused so many problems with his family and mental state. It is a passionate and heartfelt presentation. I have been involved on many projects where this has been used and the outcome has been very positive.