So safety culture. A phrase that appears to creep into almost any discussion on safety these days - the question is do we actually know very well what it means or has it turn into a rainbow statement with little real value or meaning.

The idea or Organisational Cultures within psychology has a long history and evidence shows the "culture" will always exist at work - there can be variations on that culture, but we can pick out strong consistent themes in most successful companies. Now for many companies the culture differs and how people view the world differs dependent on status. Just how many companies struggle along with management believing one thing and those at the sharp end having somewhat different views.

There are several definitions of Culture - however in a way I've always liked the simplicity of "the way we do things here". In a manner that summarises everything we have to know - successful companies generally have broadly shared views on how things are done within a company underpinned by a shared belief. Most likely the best modern examples being Google and Apple - both have strong messages, brand identity and company values are largely shared through the entire company.

Taking it one step further we also know that "belief" and behaviour are linked - a solid culture requiring both align so the belief in the culture in turn is shown by behaviours good company's way of doing things.

Historically there is a belief that should you changed belief it could subsequently change behaviour - effectively train your staff and they'll suddenly believe in the company message and then they will behave in the "required" manner. Pity it's not really true.

We can say for certain that no one can exist when their beliefs don't match making use of their behaviour - something always gives. The issue with attempting to train belief and values is apart from they are usually deeper rooted than training will ever reach is that even though the course works and the learners adopt a number of the message in the classroom the real world interferes - pressure to provide results, peer group pressure, other sources like the press or contradictory messages within the company will rapidly wipe out any gains you did achieve.

A method been shown to be more effective is to your investment push concept - (change belief and behaviour will observe) and think about the notion of pulling behaviour forward and dragging belief kicking and screaming behind.

In some ways that is almost time for old fashioned values - strong supervision was always about controlling behaviours. However there are other monitoring tools that work - be it productivity wall charts with clear targets, response time targets in call centres or time for the initial message safety performance inspections.

When groups are monitored and ranked on real measurable outcomes more often than not people react by wanting to improve - add bonus payments in and boy do they react.

Now many older schemes based themselves around individual targets -which works for sales - but one interesting factor is that when groups are measured and ranked all together the stronger (or arguably more compliant) members of the group will exert peer pressure on their colleagues to conform and thus enhance the score (and rewards) for the group as a whole.

When "Safety Culture" was first mooted back the 1990's it had been based around similar concepts:

You will need a strong group of shared beliefs regarding safe working
It is possible to monitor behaviour with regards to indicators of safety - do people wear PPE, do people use guards, do people tidy up as required, do people follow rules.
If you can monitor it - it is possible to score it and therefore it is possible to set targets
If set targets and publicly display performance you'll drive behaviour
In the event that you drive behaviour to where you need it peoples beliefs must follow (it's either share the belief, quit or go mad - and most people take the first option).

Now it works - exactly like using targets to operate a vehicle sales or productivity - it is possible to change behaviour and thus beliefs with regards safety - so effectively you have a concept of safety culture and a way of defining that culture within an organisation. There are some big buts though:

The company will need to have all the basics of workplace safety set up first - there has to be adequate training to accomplish the work safely, the workplace must be safe, equipment should be safe and jobs should be designed to be achieved safely.
The company needs good safeness performance in place and effectively managed.
Senior management and down through line managers must share the vision and make sure they remain on message at all times. Shouting safety is important once a month at team meetings and spending the next 4 weeks screaming profit at all costs tends to be a mixed message and safety is viewed as an afterthought - and the monthly message is ignored as lip service.

So safety culture can in effect be accepted as a sub band of the business's overall culture - and it can be manipulated by carrot and stick methods with regards behaviour at work and thus beliefs will follow and in time behaviours will become automatic and new staff will begin to adopt that belief to squeeze in and conform.

The other aspect safety culture programmes were made to "fix" is the idea of safety violations. A violation is when we knowingly do things wrong - speeding on a motorway is the common everyday example (you don't mistakenly drive at 80mph for 100 miles). Violations occur for various reasons but often they will have positive intentions - save time, increase productivity, fit in with the peer group - or exist due to the fact the rules are all but impossible to check out in real life. But even in this sphere you need the basics right - you will need rules that could be followed, you need rules that match other demands on the staff/company and you also all have to agree the values aimed for.

Brilliant. Ah but...
This is where it started to fail. Like so a lot of things "safety culture" became a buzzword and incredibly quickly became devalued to the point of becoming near meaningless. In many cases "safety culture" is quoted out of context - in the same way bad it's quoted being an entirely positive concept. Ask people to explain what their safety culture is today and a string of verbage with little substance follows -or scarily we forget 40 years research in psychology and stress that safety culture is attained by training.

Another side that's become apparent in recent times and drawn criticism from Unions especially is that it's used to step back in time. Safety culture and management of that culture came about to help companies with strong safety performance take it to another level - but without the basics of safe workplaces and strong management most of us knew it was doomed.

Unfortunately that message appears to have gotten lost - suddenly combined with the meaningless mantra of safety is everyone's business (no really... wow... erm but who's actually responsible?) safety culture is frequently used to pretend safety is purely down to the shop floor and move responsibility away from management (well move around in peoples minds if not reality). It's an easy sell unfortunately - we'd all like safety to be someone else's problem.

In which a company has problems with safety performance the first question needs to be the old faithfuls of:

Have you actually got an insurance plan and risk assessments that define how a job ought to be done?
Are those rules actually achievable or are they pious and unachievable in the real world
May be the workplace safe, is equipment safe, perhaps you have trained people to do their jobs and can you supervise them?
Do management buy into safety as a confident thing and actively manage safety?
Can you actually measure and monitor safety?

All to often companies are leaping into safety culture programmes based purely on "safety is everyone's business" and hoping that in doing this they shift the legal burdens. It doesn't even achieve that aside from actually change the reality.

So before hanging out and money on safety culture programmes:

Don't think safety culture means a completely positive thing - it is the values people place on safety at work. Rubbish everywhere, poor working practices still denote a safety culture - it's just not the culture you need.
Don't believe that safety culture programmes will fix the basics - the basics come first and can prevent any organisational change in belief or behaviour.
Make sure your systems are realistic and achievable.
Make sure management buy into safety as a confident thing and agree the behaviours you want to mould.
Think that telling everyone safety is everyone's business changes the way the courts view safety responsibility and it'll be embarrassing when a claim comes in.
Safety is everyone's business is really a meaningless statement. It's true but does not have any value - safety is managements problem in the eyes of the law and all cultures have leaders - if management don't share the same aims they want imposing on the shop floor then you're attracting two directions and will fail.
Get those right and you'll have a chance. But have issues with the old fashioned boring items of safety or think you're moving responsibility from management to the shop floor then you'll fail.


Now I know I seem very negative - I'm not - I just see something losing all value once we fail to understand what the word means and turn to programmes that promise to provide "improvements" with no idea of the foundations that are required.

If you are considering a safety culture programme ask the questions above - and when speaking with consultants and advisors see who discusses whats already in place. But Visit this website should be obtain the basics right as well as your culture will largely follow anyway - but once you've the got the fundamentals right cultural change programmes will let you take the ultimate steps to better safety.