It is often amusing to observe the Archetype of Technique (Ellul) surface and fade away as old and new fads are adopted and disappear. This seems to satisfy the mysterious quest for efficiency and certainty by people in business and organisations, only to discover that there is nothing ‘different’. Fads and slogans have no substance and so are not ‘different’. Unless there is a fundamental change in methodology and method, there is no ‘differently’. That is, the quest for Technique remains the same, just the window-dressing has changed.

I read a fascinating piece recently in Medium that documents the rise and fall of ‘agile’, ‘the elusive elixir’.

The strange thing I have observed over the last 10 years of this populist idea is that ‘agile’ usually delivers organisations and systems that are less agile. Just like the fad of ‘lean’. When I see the brands of ‘agile’ and ‘lean’ I have observed an increase in paperwork, systems and policing. The gap between the spin and reality is enormous. It is so amusing to watch ‘lean’ safety quadruple in paperwork thereby, increasing the amount of ‘goop’ that will be used against you in court should something go wrong:

3. PAPERWORK from Human Dymensions on Vimeo.

As this article observes, every new fad leads to an inrush of demand for ‘coaches’ and ‘masters’, the new ‘high priests’ of the new fad. And, where there is a demand for a slice of the pie, in rush the new experts, professors of bluff. This creates new staff positions that swell the size of the organisation and with it, complementary forms and systems to manage change.

A long time ago Max Weber (1864-1920) introduced the idea of the ‘Institutionalisation of the Charisma’ (https://www.anthro.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/anthro/documents/media/jaso18_1_1987_26_48.pdf). I have written about this dynamic before: https://safetyrisk.net/double-speak-in-managing-risk-and-safety/

We see this cycle in all fads and slogan wielding trends.

After a while it doesn’t take long for the Archetype of Technique (Ellul) to take over. Technique has an energy to itself and is best understood anthropomorphically. The author states:

‘Hiring, especially niche skills, has always been tricky. In their eagerness to join the agile bandwagon, many companies have prioritized style over substance, blinded by the agile industrial complex’s flashy marketing of fly-by-the-night certifications. There are so many of them. It’s indeed a circus.’

We see the same dynamic at work in the risk and safety world.

Rather than tackle the basics of fallibility and risk, there is always a new con or silver bullet being promoted through slick marketing promising the same old Archetype of Technique that is just more marketing, slogans and spin. This is often why fads doesn’t last long and so a new fad evolves which is why we observe transitions from S2 to Safety Differently to New View to HOP. While all of these use the word ‘philosophy’ none is articulated. While all of these use the word ‘ethic’ none is articulated. Without a methodology there will be no method. We saw the same trend with the development of ‘human factors’ safety. ‘Human factors safety’ is not about humans but rather humans as a factor in a system, just more Technique. Whilst the word ‘innovation’ is used, its just more traditional safety with added window dressing. It doesn’t take long till the fad ends and everything returns back to traditional methods, security in what one knows.

The article on the demise of ‘agile’ captures well the cycle. As the author observes, in the end there is no transformation, no movement. And, without movement, there is no learning. So, we now observe organisations that started with the charisma of ‘agile’ jettisoning coaches and masters. The ceremonies of scrum cease and the rituals of agile disappear.

As the author observes:

‘Given the strong perception developing in the C-suite that agile roles are good to have and noncritical, they are the first ones to be axed when cost control measures are introduced.’

In the end the con of the fad, the promise of certainty and the quest for Technique are confronted by the realities of fallibility (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/fallibility-risk-living-uncertainty/). And so, on to the next fad because the daunting work of innovating a new methodology is too hard. Much easier to return to the systems we know and create a new brand, and so the cycle returns.

Nothing is more attractive to risk and safety than the comfort of what is known, its myths of certainty and the fear of change. This is the industry that is silent on fallibility and noisy on ‘controls’, ‘hazards’, ‘counting injury rates’ and being ‘professional’. Any talk of ‘innovation’ remains confined within this language. Often, innovation is confused for entertainment. Slogans are confused for substance.

But don’t wait long and a new trend will arise, making the same promises of ‘differently’ as before, just with new marketing. This is where the vital skills of discernment (https://safetyrisk.net/the-need-for-discernment-in-risk-and-safety/ ), discourse analysis and critical thinking are needed, you know, those essential skills in no safety qualification.

In SPoR, we have a very clearly articulated methodology and methods (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/spor-and-semiotics/) that work (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/it-works-a-new-approach-to-risk-and-safety-book-for-free-download/). In the 20 years that SPoR has been about it has held together tightly because of its foundation in a very clearly articulated methodology. There is no ‘wizz bang’ in SPoR but lots of hard work in unlearning and new learning in tackling risk.

If you are up for a journey in learning then you can start by downloading any one of the free books or videos available (https://www.humandymensions.com/shop/; https://vimeo.com/cllr).

Or if you are seeking a constructive and positive approach face-to-face in tackling risk, perhaps register for the SPoR Convention taking place in a few weeks (https://spor.com.au/canberra-convention/) in Canberra.