There is no neutral or objective analysis, observation or evaluation of risk or safety.

All risk or safety analysis is affected by hundreds of factors that either mitigate the evaluation of risk or amplify it.

In SPoR, we deliver several programs that help people and organisations understand this. The first is our Advanced Hazard Id Workshop where we tackle some common risks and show how people interpret risk according to 18 basic influences. See Figure 1. Mitigating or Aggravating Risk Assessment.

Figure 1. Mitigating or Aggravating Risk Assessment.

Most people in safety don’t realise when they are using the useless risk matrix that many unconscious factors are operating that are never articulated in a risk assessment. These 18 factors above in the table are just the tip of the iceberg.

In the Advanced Hazard Id Workshop we often start with a simple exercise of doing a common risk assessment using a risk matrix then showing how these evaluations can be swayed easily by common unconscious factors that operate in all human decision making. We also demonstrate how the risk matrix itself creates a dangerous level of overconfidence that a risk is being managed. This overconfidence itself is a massive risk in any workplace.

Much of what happens in any risk assessment is hidden, emotional, historical, experiential, factored on ignorance, lack of education and limited by many safety myths. The variation in risk rating between people in the room is usually over 80%.

For example: we commonly overrate a risk if children are involved or if we can imagine multiple fatalities. We commonly underrate a risk if the effect of an event is delayed over years or not immediate. These are just two examples.

All risk assessment is even limited by something as simple of the ability to imagine. Indeed, most risk assessments are an imagination exercise yet, you won’t find anywhere in the safety world a discussion of the importance of imagination. Then when something unexpected happens everyone expresses amazement that they had no idea something like that could happen, that they didn’t see in the risk assessment. Foresight and prediction are not abilities fallible humans possess.

We also under-rate or over-rate risk according to many of the common social influences at work in groups and organisations. These influences are graphed at Figure 2. Social Influences of Risk

Figure 2. Social Influences of Risk

In addition, humans also amplify or attenuate risk according the 200 or more common heuristics we use to make decisions. See Figure 3. Cognitive Bias

Figure 3. Cognitive Bias

 Of course, all of this demonstrates that risk and safety analysis is a wicked problem.

The idea that risk or safety are simple or easy just cultivates a greater risk arrogance and safety blindness.

With hundreds and hundreds of unconscious factors at work in human decision making how can Safety speak nonsense like ‘all accidents are preventable’, ‘safety is a choice you make’ or ‘1% safer’?

The idea that the traditional risk matrix is of any value to risk assessment is pure nonsense and typical safety myth.

The truth is the common-coloured risk assessment contributes significantly to what Greg Smith calls ‘The Illusion of Safety’ (https://www.amazon.com.au/Proving-Safety-problems-management-tyranny-ebook/dp/B0CYNVZ7H7).

Greg and I cover much of this in our 2 day Due Diligence Program. You can see a video of part of that program for free here: https://vimeo.com/showcase/4883640

So, with all of these unconscious factors affecting risk what do you do?

Well, the first thing to do is dump simplistic language and ideas that risk assessment is simple. This in itself is one of the most dangerous dispositions to have in safety.

The second thing is to dump all the silly language and indoctrination held in safety myths about zero, counting and seeking perfection that simply creates ‘safety arrogance’.

The third thing, is to move towards a more mature understanding of risk that has a focus on persons that includes: helping, facilitating, care, conversation, empowering others, wisdom and conversation.

No paperwork process in safety helps in detecting any of the 500 most common unconscious factors that affect the evaluation of risk.

The fourth thing to do is to unlearn much of the safety mythology that floats around about risk and to safety and learn about human judgement and decision making NOT about fixing hazards!

The fifth thing to do, is to talk much less about ‘controlling hazards’ to ‘tackling risk’. This alone helps keep people focused on the unseen and the unimaginable at work in hidden factors and by-products created by the risk assessment.

It is unfortunate that many of the processes in safety such as the risk matrix are not just undefendable in court but, actually contribute nothing to the assessment of risk. Yet, they are still believed, such is the nature of safety myths.