Making Sure There is No ‘Cultural Shift’ in Safety

In the latest instalment of Safety stating what is by what isn’t, we have this from NZ Worksafe  (https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/about-us/news-and-media/ecostore-commits-323k-to-cultural-shift-in-safety/).

When you read this article it becomes obvious, that this has nothing to do with culture.

Tweaking hazards with AI has nothing to do with culture.  Changing systems, behaviours or branding has little to do with culture. But, it sure is reassuring when you tell people you are undertaking a ‘culture shift’ after a severe accident. And, not just a ‘culture shift’ but a ‘holistic culture shift’.

The trouble is, all of this is just spin for more of the same.

This article is little more than propaganda from a regulator equating a level of spending to a commitment to safety. But, spending on technology has nothing to do with culture. This is just more of the ‘machine that goes bing’ delusion (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQPIdZvoV4g ).

There is no relationship in this article between the headline language and the actions of the enforceable undertaking. Changing any part or, all of a system doesn’t change culture. Systems are not culture and are at best 3% of what comprises culture.

What we have here is something Safety does so well. Talking about what is, by what isn’t. In this way if people can be conned by marketing, they will be convinced that something about culture will change in this organisation. It won’t. It’s no different than calling slogans ‘principles’ and the lemmings will follow.

The first thing if you want to effect culture change in an organisation is to start by understanding what culture is (https://safetyrisk.net/when-you-dont-know-what-culture-is-how-can-you-improve-it/ ). And this is done so poorly across the whole safety industry. Yes, we even have safety people writing about safety culture telling people the best thing to do is not talk about it.

Safety is not a discipline that has any expertise in culture. Safety knows nothing of Anthropology, Ethnography, Religious Studies, Cultural Studies, Ethics or Transdisciplinarity. Of course, if you read an expert in culture, they often start with a discussion of Religion. This happens nowhere in the safety industry. Similarly, you won’t read anywhere in safety about Semiotics, an essential discipline for understanding culture. Most of the stuff put out by Safety on culture is just about behaviourism, systems or managerialism. The AIHS Chapter on Organisational Culture (Chapter 10.2.2) is a classic example of branding something as ‘culture’ that omits the most significant aspects of culture.

If you do want to learn about culture in a positive, practical and constructive way you can start here: https://safetyrisk.net/safety-culture-3/ or here: https://safetyrisk.net/culture-cloud-tour-myths-symbols-semiotics-and-religion/

brhttps://safetyrisk.net/making-sure-there-is-no-cultural-shift-in-safety/
Prompt

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.