Saturating Safety

• By Robert Pater
• Oct 15, 2024

You likely know that making changes can get quick positive results at times — but those gains don’t always last. Frustrating to those leaders who’d believed they’d (finally!) found a solution to a vexing problem. Moving from having high hopes (perhaps even some measure of elation) followed by soon-ebbing results or even crashing disappointment.

Hawthorne Effect, anyone? You know, named after a Western Electric plant in Hawthorne, Illinois, where seemingly minor changes that management implemented – perplexedly, both increasing and lowering lighting in work areas — all resulted in quick improvements in productivity. Unfortunately, these results were temporary, as they were more reflections of workers believing the modifications signaled management’s attention to — and perhaps, concern for — them. It was a kind of placebo effect that, like a sugar pill, wasn’t the actual medication likely needed to cure any major problems, just a respite fueled by heightened expectations and hopes.

Despite this, do you, like me, continue to receive, see or hear plaintive calls for a “final solution?” Such as crafting the perfect policies and procedures that will “prevent all injuries,” a low-cost tool that will “eliminate” hand problems, or a lock-out-tag-out approach that will guarantee full compliance or zero transgressions to the slew of surface treatments promising to eliminate all slips and trips, and much more?

Working with larger companies globally for longer than three decades, we know, no surprise, that actual, substantial change has to include many stirred-in-together ingredients: the correct planning, supportive procedures and structures, committed leadership, initial buy-in on multiple levels, best technique and methods, followed through with ongoing attention and corrective modifications. This isn’t as pie-in-the-sky as it might seem; this recipe can be put together relatively quickly and effectively.

While many of these aspects are part and parcel of much Safety change, one element I’ve frequently seen lacking is “saturation,” developing and nurturing a base of proponents that goes well beyond just initial “buy-in.” In other words, not just front-end interest is needed, but rather where the “load” is structured to be carried forward. Continuance is needed for success, in the same way that even the most ardent and sweat-producing workout can’t produce a health return comparable to shorter but more regular exercise sessions. In essence, I’m advocating going well beyond a “silver bullet” approach to safety. It’s one where safety components are woven into ongoing, daily operations and organizational culture.

This is why we’ve found it critical to structurally build in sustaining internal support and proponents for those dedicated to reducing common ongoing injuries such as strains/sprains or slips/trips/falls. I think it unlikely that a quick, one-and-done approach will actually make sizable improvements in injuries that either have cumulative and multi-factor contributors or, perhaps more importantly, attempt to change life-long habits. (You get the idea.)

A highly successful system incorporates two essentials: First, significantly upgrading individual skills/mindset/motivation. Real change in upgrading personal actions (i.e., the long-term, habitual ways of doing tasks, such as lifting, pushing, pulling, carrying, using tools, climbing, walking on uneven or slippery surfaces, and transiting stairs) requires experiencing, individual discovery and trying out new methods, practice, and adjusting to weave these ways into real work and home life. The second is embedding cultural support for lasting improvements. This means the kind of support that engages and energizes, beyond generic or only semi-interactive delivery that doesn’t allow the kind of hands-on discovery that applies to people’s actual tasks and lives. 

In our close to four decades of global work, we’ve found that one tried-and-proven way to accomplish this is to select, train and then support a “critical mass”, a cadre of on-site internal “Instructor-Catalysts” to in turn first train/provide initial exposure to new strategies/methods/techniques, then coach (often informally) to reinforce practical applications of these methods. 

The downside: Some organizations may find it challenging to release the required saturation of people to be trained and then provide the above three functions needed. So, here’s another alternative designed to provide sufficient saturation or coverage: combine training “initial instructors” with on-site reinforcement agents who have less training and knowledge than the instructors but are more ongoingly available. These agents work hand-in-hand with the instructors to infuse “bottom-up” or ”boots-on-the-ground” reminders and support.

If you think about it, this is similar to how medical support is delivered to many people. Where a relatively few highly trained physicians or specialists are supported by a cadre of more available medical assistants, nurses and others to answer questions, help and support those experiencing less-than-optimal health.

But whatever you do, however you approach change, keep in mind that saturation is still critical for making and sustaining significant safety improvements. So be sure to find ways to incorporate mechanisms to make sure you go beyond well-intentioned but sporadic reminders or interventions — especially when seeking to actually positively impact longstanding/persistent injuries.

This article originally appeared in the October 2024 issue of Occupational Health & Safety.