Are we getting Safety Right?: Must versus Recommend?

Like many Safety Professionals and Leaders, I am passionate about getting safety right and generating safety cultures that not only keep people safe but drives engagement and performance.  I am very fortunate to have had the privilege of working with a very broad and diverse client base and being able to observe differing approaches to safety and leadership, and the resulting impact.  I first started delivering Safety programs back in 2004, and 13 years later still working in organisations to get safety right. Unfortunately, I still observe organisations implementing processes, rules and interventions to improve safety that are counter-productive. 

For example, I have observed a number of organisations implement a rule that “everyone must hold the hand rail” when climbing up or down a flight of stairs, regardless of the number of steps.

While I absolutely agree with the idea of putting in place design solutions and stipulating a requirement / procedures and processes to prevent people getting hurt, I also believe that the rule in place needs to match the risk.  In other words, for a steep flight of stairs with 30 steps, holding the hand rail is a really good idea and appropriate to have a rule about holding the hand rail.  For a flight of stairs with a low gradient and just three steps, holding the hand rail is much less of a necessity, and more of a recommendation.

My observation and experience of organisations implementing ‘rules’ to keep people safe where the rule is an overly comprehensive solution, is as follows:

• People become resentful and cynical of the rules and procedures
• Leads to people following the rules just because they have to rather than because they need to
• People stop thinking and taking ownership over their own actions
• People then rationalise why they don’t need to follow the rule (leading to ‘Normalisation of Deviation’ – Sydney Dekker)

In the case of the rule “everyone must hold the hand rail when using stairs”, I have observed many times people not using the rail, particularly when there is a wide stair case and only one railing on the far side.  Is there a consequence?  Does anything happen if they don’t use the railing?  The unintended consequence here is that people learn that they can get away with not following the rules, and this leads to the deviation from the rule.

I believe that we need to make sure that we have the appropriate set of rules (depending on the risk) in place to keep people safe, but balance this with the need for people to also be able to make a judgement about what controls to put in place.

The Proposed Solution – Two Sets of Rules

Rather than having a set of rules, process and procedures that must be followed, I believe that we need to have two sets of rules.  Those rules and procedures that are ‘Must Do’s’ versus those rules and procedures that are ‘Recommended’ rules and procedures.

By separating the ‘MUSTS’ from the ‘RECOMMENDED’ we are essentially highlighting the safety critical behaviours as compared to the preferred safety behaviours.  The massive upside of ‘RECOMMENDED’ behaviours is that there is an expectation that the individual will make a decision as to whether or not they wish to put the control in place or not.

For example, my daughter wishes to go for a bike ride.  We have a rule that she MUST wear a bike helmet whenever she rides her bike and she MUST follow the road rules.  We RECOMMEND that she keep her hands on the handle bars, and we RECOMMEND that she keep her speed, particularly down hills, at a manageable speed.

So, what is the difference between a MUST and a RECOMMEND?

Must Rules:

• Safety critical
• Disciplinary consequences if not followed
• A requirement to proceed
• No negotiation or rationalisation
• Must be followed
• Clearly articulated expectations
• Measurable and observable

Recommend Rules:

• Non-safety critical but still keep us safe (physically, emotionally and environmentally)
• Coaching conversations if negative impact
• Provides opportunity for growth and development
• Stimulates thinking & ownership
• Generates innovative thinking
• Allows for differences in experience and competence

But, beware…

The MUST rules need to make logical sense and need to have a reasonable and logical argument supporting the rule.  When there is a rule that doesn’t make logical sense or is contradicted by another expectation, it leads to the same responses outlined above. 

For example, we ban the use of hands free mobile and have a rule where the driver has to pull to the side of the road, switch the vehicle off, and then answer the call, but yet we allow drivers on site to use a two-way radio to communicate with other drivers.  The driver operating the two-way not only takes a hand off the steering wheel, but in many cases has to lean down and change channels, and then still talk while driving.  This completely contradicts the logic and reason for banning talking on a mobile hands free while driving.  We have just set up our people and organisation up to rationalise un-safe behaviours.

We need to be conducting Rules Audits across organisations to evaluate the number of MUSTS versus RECOMMENDS and the logic and explanation for each rule.  It would be interesting to examine the results and the correlate the results with actual safety performance data.  My hypothesis is that organisations that have a few MUST rules that make absolute logical sense and are in no way contradicted in any way across the business will have a far better safety culture than the organisation that has a large number of MUST rules with contradicting logic.

So, what next?

If you are in an organisation where safety breaches and incidents are still occurring, then perhaps you might wish to consider doing the following:

1. Write a list of all the rules that you are aware of in the organisation / section that you are aware of; then evaluate each of the rules against the following:
   1. Is the rule a MUST or a RECOMMENDATION?
   2. Challenge the validity/logic of the rule and does it make logical sense i.e. Ask ‘why do we have this in place?’
   3. Assess whether-or-not there is any other rule or behaviour or expectation that currently either contradicts or undermines the rule.
2. Any rule that either lacks logic or validity, or is contradicted needs to be assessed and changed to reflect a better logic or eliminate contradictions.
3. Any rule that is inappropriately assigned either MUST or RECOMMENDED should be appropriately re-assigned.
4. Engage the key stakeholders / workforce and communicate the outcome of the process.
5. Equip the workforce with the permission and capability to question the validity of every rule with an expectation that every rule should have a clearly articulated explanation and reason for existence.

The goal…

The goal is to have every person in your organisation to be displaying a proactive and disciplined attitude to safety, consciously thinking about every task, and consciously choosing how to go about doing every task in an effective and safe manner. We want to have every person feeling empowered to deliver outstanding performance in a way that keeps every person physically, mentally and emotionally well.

Has your organisation got the right rules in place to support a sustainable and effective approach to safety in the workplace?

TLC Solutions Australia apply psychological principles to sustainable behavioural change.  If you and your organisation are looking for the next step in your safety journey, then contact us to arrange a discussion.

Gregory Bayne is one of the Directors of Total Leader and Coach Solutions Australia.  Greg works with senior and executive leaders assisting them to make shifts in the way they work, the way they think and the way they live their lives to become better leaders, colleagues and team members. Greg has a particular focus on assisting leaders create a culture or accountability and high performance. His expertise and knowledge is around building and developing a culture of accountability, leading high performing teams, and getting the most out of people to deliver the highest standards of work. We cultivate sustainable behavioural change in individuals, teams and organisations to drive a performance culture.

EQUIP | ENGAGE | EMPOWER | PERFORM

greg@tlcsolutions.com.au

www.tlcsolutions.com.au