HR PROFESSIONALS LISA OAKLEY
How can we truly embrace a safety culture? Lisa Oakley, Board Member and National Vice President of HRNZ, examines our perception of safety and how we can create a positive and empowering safety culture in our organisations.
T
he term ‘safety culture’ was first coined in 1986 by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which introduced the term to describe the thinking and behaviour of those responsible for the Chernobyl accident (International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group). In 1993, the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (ACSNI) Human Factors Study Group defined safety culture as “the product of individual and group values, attitudes, perceptions, competencies and patterns of behaviour that can determine the commitment to, and the style and proficiency of an organisation’s health and safety management system” (Health and Safety Commission). Put into plain English, this culture is made up of multiple factors including psychological – values, beliefs, attitudes; behavioural – methods regarding safety; and situational – policies, procedures and management systems. Although there is some subjectivity, safety maturity models are often applied to assess safety culture. Models suggest safety culture can 40
HUMAN RESOURCES
SUMMER 2019
be “pathological / no care” – where employees and employers blatantly disregard safety; or “reactive / blame” – where safety is only considered following an incident; or “calculative / planned” – where some systems are in place to manage hazards; or “proactive” – where there is a focus on safety improvement; and “generative”. This last category is the most advanced and dynamic culture, where safety systems are effective, and worker engagement is high. The changing nature of work in the 21st century and the introduction of new workplace health issues, such as mental health and bullying and harassment, provide an opportunity to consider alternative leadership styles to build a positive, generative health and safety culture.
Models suggest safety culture can be “pathological / no care”… “reactive / blame”… “calculative / planned” or “proactive”. Real culture change requires changing core beliefs, which is not simple to achieve and takes time. Edgar Schein, the well-known psychologist, has been instrumental in shaping our understanding of how change occurs in workplaces. Schein extended on a change model defined by Kurt Lewin, which has three steps: unfreeze, change, refreeze. Unfreezing is difficult because a stimulus activates a
change or a need to change the current state, which can cause anxiety or guilt. It is essential to maintain individual psychological safety so that people feel comfortable enough to learn rather than becoming defensive. Organisational culture change first requires change at the individual level. Studies show that transformational leadership inspires change and directly correlates with improved safety culture. David Sarkus explains, “The evolution of safety culture stems from the beliefs, values, behaviours and assumptions of executives, managers and supervisors. These beliefs and values are shared with others who interact and create the organisation’s safety culture”.
Studies show that transformational leadership inspires change and directly correlates with improved safety culture. To change a safety culture, organisations must first start by defining safety culture as a value within the organisation. Next, the organisation needs to require leaders to model this value, thinking about safety as a competitive advantage and organisational benefit, rather than merely a compliance cost. Such benefits include increased effectiveness of the health and safety management system, an increase in safe behaviours and a reduction in
