Introduction
In today’s
dynamic business environment, safety culture is a key element of effective OSH
management. It not only plays a vital role in protecting employees from
hazards, but also affects the operational efficiency and reputation of the
company. The history of the development of safety culture is interesting,
spanning milestones from the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group
(INSAG) definition in 1987 to contemporary maturity assessment models.
In this article,
I will explore the essence of safety culture, looking at both the historical
context and contemporary models to understand how organizations can build a
strong safety foundation by integrating it into their organizational culture.
History
In 1987, after
the Chernobyl accident, the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group (INSAG)
published a report in which it defined safety culture as:
"A set of values, attitudes and behaviors that
influence the way people in an organization perceive security and how they
respond to threats."
This definition
quickly gained popularity and is now widely used in the scientific literature
and in practice.
However, contrary
to popular belief, this is not the first use of this term.
The term
"safety culture" was first used in 1972 by British industrial
researcher William Haddon. In his article "The changing approach to the
epidemiology of highway injuries: The transition to a new safety
paradigm", Haddon writes about "safety culture" as follows:
"We need to develop a safety culture that
changes the way we think and act about safety. We need to change our
priorities, values and attitudes. We need to learn to see safety as a way of
life, not just as a program."
As a result of
high-profile accidents and incidents in the 1980s, including the aforementioned
Chernobyl disaster, the Challenger explosion, and the Bhopal chemical plant
accident, safety culture began to be increasingly seen as crucial to safety in
organizations. This led to the development of many safety culture models that
help organizations assess and improve their culture.
Definitions
Defining the
concept of safety culture is not easy. There are currently about 30 different
definitions in publications, confirming that it is a complex concept that is
not easy to define or measure.
One of the more
popular definitions was developed by the UK's Health and Safety Commission
(HSC):
Safety culture is the product of individual and
group values, attitudes, perceptions, competencies and behavioural patterns
that determine an organisation’s commitment to and management style of safety
and health.
Here are some
other definitions of safety culture:
International
Metalworkers' Federation (IMF):
"Safety culture is a collective way of
thinking, feeling and acting that shapes the way people in an organization
perceive and approach safety."
US National
Security Council (NSC):
"Safety culture is a set of values, attitudes
and behaviours that influence how people perceive and approach risk in the
workplace."
European Agency
for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA):
"Safety culture is a set of values, attitudes
and behaviours that influence the way people perceive and approach safety in an
organisation."
These definitions
are similar to those already given, but they emphasise different aspects of
safety culture. The IMF emphasises the collective nature of safety culture, the
NAS emphasises the influence of safety culture on risk perception, and EU-OSHA
emphasises the influence of safety culture on the way people perceive and
approach safety throughout the organisation.
Here is another
definition of safety culture that is a bit more descriptive:
“Safety culture is the level of safety each of us
maintains when we think no one is watching us”
This definition
emphasizes that safety culture is more than just following regulations and
procedures. It is a matter of attitudes and behaviors that shape how people
perceive safety, even when they are not being monitored.
I often use a
very simple definition of safety culture in training as:
Employee attitudes towards health and safety.
Safety culture and organizational culture
Some researchers
argue that there is no such concept as safety culture, there is only
organizational culture. Others claim that safety culture functions as a
personal construct and is a subculture of organizational culture.
I personally
agree with the latter and believe that organizational culture has a very large
impact on safety culture. For example:
●
If revenue is the most important
thing for an organization and is achievable at all costs, the organization will
make compromises in how it manages security.
●
Similarly, the culture of
customer-centricity and doing everything to please the customer can have dire
consequences if we take on a task for which we do not have the competence or
resources. This can turn into an accident.
It is worth
adding that organizational culture is additionally determined by national
culture. This results from the fact that members of an organization are also
members of a given community. They share common values, norms, and attitudes
that shape their behavior both at work and outside of it. Examples of the
influence of national culture on organizational culture include:
●
Attitude to Authority: In cultures
with a high degree of hierarchy, employees are more likely to submit to the
authority of management. An employee may accept a great deal of risk to please
his or her superior. In cultures with a low degree of hierarchy, employees are
more likely to question management decisions.
●
Attitude to time. In time-oriented
cultures, employees are more likely to adhere to deadlines, which can create
rushing and additional risk.
●
Attitude to risk. In risk-tolerant
cultures, employees are more willing to take risks and experiment. In
risk-intolerant cultures, employees are more willing to avoid risks and make
safe decisions.
The Impact of Safety Culture on Employee Behavior
It may be hard to
believe, but prehistory had a significant influence on how we behave today.
In prehistoric
times, humans lived in small, tightly knit groups in a world that was often
dangerous and unpredictable. In order to survive, these groups had to
cooperate. In order to cooperate, they had to develop and follow common rules.
Social norms developed that helped regulate the behavior of group members and
ensure that everyone worked together for the common good. People began to copy
each other's behaviors. People who behaved significantly differently could be
expelled from the community and sentenced to certain death. This is why we are
so keen to fit in and what other people think of us matters so much to us.
As we know from
the previous sections of the article, safety culture is a form of social norms
and determines how we behave in the context of safety in an organization.
Here are some
examples of how safety culture affects employee behavior:
●
In organizations with a strong
safety culture, employees know that safety is a priority and that their actions
matter. Therefore, they are more likely to follow safety policies and
procedures, even if they are inconvenient or require extra effort.
●
In organizations with a strong
safety culture, employees feel safe reporting potential threats. They know
their reports will be taken seriously and that the organization will take
action to resolve the issue.
●
In organizations with a strong
safety culture, employees are more likely to collaborate on improving safety.
They are willing to share information and ideas and help each other follow
safety rules – they are self-regulating.
Safety Culture and Climate Study
Safety culture
and safety climate are two terms that are often used interchangeably. However,
there are differences between them.
Safety culture is
a broader concept. It is a deeply rooted structure of values, beliefs,
attitudes and behaviors in an organization that defines the priority of safety
and its importance to the organization.
Safety climate is
a more specific concept that refers to employee perceptions of safety within an
organization, including safety culture.
Both safety
culture and safety climate can be examined.
The study of
safety culture is more complex than the study of safety climate. It requires
the analysis of many factors, such as:
●
the organization's values and
goals regarding safety,
●
organizational structure and
security policies,
●
ways of managing security,
●
employee safety behavior,
●
approach to safety among
management and employees.
The safety
climate survey provides information on how employees perceive safety in the
organization.
Both survey
methods can be used to identify areas that require improvement. A safety
culture survey can provide a more comprehensive picture of an organization’s
safety culture, while a safety climate survey can be more useful for taking
corrective and improvement actions.
Here are some
examples of methods that can be used to study safety culture and climate:
●
Surveys - Surveys are a common
method of measuring safety climate. They can be used to obtain information
about employee perceptions of safety in the organization and fundamental
issues.
●
Conversations - Conversations with
employees at every level of the organization can also provide valuable
information about their perceptions of safety. Conversations can provide a
deeper understanding of the culture than a survey.
●
Observations - observations of
employee behaviour can be helpful in understanding various health and safety
issues within an organisation and employee attitudes towards the rules.
●
Document analysis - Analysis of
organizational documents, such as security policies and procedures, can provide
information about the organization's approach to security.
The choice of the
appropriate method for examining safety culture depends on many factors, such
as:
●
purpose of the study,
●
size of the organization,
●
available resources.
The safety
climate is most often measured by conducting a survey and talking to employees,
often in the form of a focus group.
Safety culture maturity and development models
Security culture
maturity models are tools that help organizations assess their level of
security culture.
These models are
based on the assumption that safety culture can be developed and improved. This
development occurs through gradual progression through successive stages,
characterized by increasingly higher levels of maturity.
The most
well-known safety culture maturity models include:
Patrick
Hudson Model
One of my
favorite models identifies five stages of developing a safety culture:
●
Stage 1: Pathological - "Who
cares as long as we don't get caught." At this level, the company makes
little or no investment in improving safety behavior. At the pathological
stage, management believes that accidents are caused by stupidity, inattention,
or even intentionality on the part of employees.
●
Stage 2: Reactive Culture -
"Safety is important, we do a lot every time we have an accident." In
this case, the company tends to make safety improvements only after something
goes wrong. This can be a temporary stage for pathological organizations or it
can turn into a calculative stage where the organization implements safety
processes and systems.
●
Stage 3: Calculative Culture -
"We have systems in place to manage all risks." At this stage, the
company is paying attention to health and safety and has identified which
safety principles are important. However, it is still driven by self-interest.
●
Stage 4: Proactive Culture -
"We work on the problems we still find." Here, security is a high
priority for an organization that takes a proactive approach to security, works
to build security awareness, and continually implements improvements. Moving to
a proactive organization requires making the processes and systems that are
currently in place truly effective. Proactive organizations use their processes
and systems to anticipate security issues before they occur.
●
Stage 5: Generative Culture -
"Safety is the way we do business here." At this level, safety is
fully integrated into the organization's operational processes and fully
ingrained in employee behavior. In a generative culture, the organization's top
management still leads safety, but has created the potential for those who are
subject matter experts to also take responsibility and accept it.
HSE/HSL
Model
The HSC/HSE
(Health and Safety Executive/Health and Safety Laboratory) model was developed
in the United Kingdom.
This model
assumes that safety culture in an organization can develop in five stages:
●
Emerging - This is the initial
stage where security is seen as a secondary issue. The organization does not
have a clearly defined security policy, and actions in this area are taken in
an uncoordinated manner.
●
Management - at this stage, safety
becomes a more important aspect of the organization's functioning. Safety
management procedures and systems are developed to prevent accidents. However,
these activities are often implemented in an ineffective manner.
●
Involving - in this stage,
employees are more involved in safety activities. The organization creates a
culture in which safety is seen as a common goal for all employees. Employees
are consulted on the operation of the management system.
●
Cooperating - At this stage, there
is close cooperation between employees and management for safety. The
organization creates an environment in which employees feel safe and have the
ability to report threats.
●
Continuously improving - This is
the highest stage of safety culture development. The organization strives to
continuously improve its safety systems and procedures.
Bird/Dupoint
The Bird/Dupont
Safety Culture Model is a cultural model that was developed by Frank Bird and
William E. Dupont in the 1960s. The model is one of the most popular safety
culture models and is used in many different organizations around the world.
The DuPont Bird
Safety Culture Model is a model that classifies organizations based on their
approach to safety. The model is based on four levels:
●
Reactive - Organizations at this
level focus on responding to accident events. They do not have any effective
accident prevention systems and wait for something to happen before taking
action.
●
Dependent - Organizations at this
level focus on identifying and eliminating the causes of accidents. However,
their approach is often reactive, not preventive.
●
Independent - Organizations at
this level focus on preventing accidents by implementing systems and processes.
They have clear safety policies and procedures, and employees are responsible
for following them.
●
Interdependent - Organizations at
this level focus on creating a safety culture that engages all employees. They
have strong safety leadership and employees are involved in creating a safe
workplace.
Choosing the
right security culture maturity model depends on the specifics of the
organization and its needs. It is important that the model is adapted to the
culture of the organization and its capabilities.
Models for understanding safety culture
Safety culture
models are tools used to describe and understand the safety culture in an
organization. They are based on the assumption that safety culture is a complex
phenomenon that can be broken down into smaller, more understandable
components.
Safety culture
models vary in the number and types of factors they consider. Some models focus
on behavioral factors, such as employee attitudes and behaviors regarding
safety. Others also consider organizational factors, such as safety policies
and procedures, or safety management systems.
The most popular
safety culture models include:
Tony
Prion's Model
Tony Prion’s
safety culture model is a concept that was developed in the 1990s. Prion was a
professor of occupational safety at the University of Manchester. His model is
based on the belief that safety culture is a complex phenomenon that is shaped
by many factors, including the values, beliefs and behaviours of employees,
managers and other stakeholders.
The model
distinguishes six dimensions of safety culture.
●
Dimension 1: Management commitment
- Management commitment to safety is a key factor influencing the safety
culture within an organization.
●
Dimension 2: Policies and
procedures - Clear and consistent safety policies and procedures contribute to
shaping a positive safety culture.
●
Dimension 3: Communication -
effective safety communication is essential to building safety awareness among
employees.
●
Dimension 4: Training - Regular
safety training helps employees acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to
perform their jobs safely.
●
Dimension 5: Surveillance systems
- effective surveillance systems enable the identification and elimination of
threats.
●
Dimension 6: Incident Response -
Effectively responding to security incidents helps prevent them from recurring.
European
Civil Aviation Authority (EASA) model
The model
distinguishes four pillars of safety culture:
●
Fila 1: Leadership and management
commitment - the organization's leadership is responsible for creating and
promoting a culture of safety.
●
Fila 2: Involvement of all
employees - all employees are responsible for safety.
●
Fila 3: Systems and processes -
the organisation should have effective security management systems and
processes.
●
Fila 4: Learning and improvement -
the organization should strive to continuously improve its safety culture.
The
European Railway Agency ERA Safety Culture Model
An interesting
but quite complex model was developed by the European Railway Agency (ERA) in
2013. The ERA model includes 12 elements of safety culture, which are divided
into several categories.
National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Seven Element Model
The National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Seven Elements Model is a
safety culture model that was developed in the 1990s. NIOSH is a U.S.
government agency that deals with health and safety in the workplace.
The model
identifies seven key elements of safety culture:
●
Leadership - management commitment
to safety.
●
Inclusion - involvement of all
employees in safety.
●
Communication - open and honest
communication about safety.
●
Accountability - responsibility
for safety.
●
Learning - learning from mistakes
and making changes to improve safety.
●
Trust - trust between employees,
management and the organization.
Value
Based Security (VBS) Model
The model was
developed by Jim Reason, a British security expert.
VBS defines
safety as “the ability of an organization to prevent occupational accidents and
illnesses.” The model assumes that safety culture is shaped by the values that
an organization holds dear.
VBS highlights
values that are key to a strong safety culture:
●
Protection of human life and
health: An organization must respect the life and health of its employees.
●
Competence: The organization must
have competent employees who are able to safely perform their duties.
●
Learning: The organization must be
open to learning from mistakes and making changes to improve safety.
●
Justice: The organization must
treat its employees fairly, regardless of their status or position. Jim Reason
introduced the concept of Just Culture.
●
Participation: The organization
must encourage employee participation in safety programs.
What shapes the culture of safety in an organization
Developing a
safety culture is a long-term process that requires the involvement of all
employees of the organization, especially top management. However,
organizations that consciously take action in this area can significantly
increase the safety of their employees.
The models
presented earlier give us many clues about what shapes the safety culture and
what we should focus on in our actions. They can be reduced to the following
factors:
●
Leadership: Organizational
leadership is key to creating and promoting a positive safety culture.
●
Management system: Security
policies and procedures should be developed in partnership with employees and
be clear and consistent.
●
Building competencies: Employees
must be properly trained and educated on security, especially in dealing with
changing risks.
●
Communication: Communication about
safety must be open, honest and regular.
●
Learning from mistakes: An
organization should learn from mistakes and strive for continuous improvement.
Conclusions
In summary,
safety culture is a complex and multifaceted concept that can be divided into
different dimensions and elements. It is also a key factor influencing safety
in organizations.
Understanding
your own safety culture helps you identify areas for improvement and implement
effective actions to increase the maturity of your organization’s safety
culture.
However, the
effort is worth it because investing in the development of a safety culture
benefits both employees and the company by creating a work environment that
promotes health, safety and efficiency.
Bibliography
●
Haddon, W. Jr. (1972). The
changing approach to the epidemiology of highway injuries: The transition to a
new safety paradigm. Journal of Trauma, 12(3), 275-282.
●
Health and Safety Executive,
Culture https://www.hse.gov.uk/humanfactors/topics/culture.htm
●
European Union Agency for
Railway, Safety Culture Model https://www.era.europa.eu/domains/safety-management/safety-culture/safety-culture-model
●
Kerstan S. Cole, Susan M.
Stevens-Adams, & Caren A. Wenner, A Literature Review of Safety Culture,
2013 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1095959
●
Douglas A. Wiegmann and Terry L.
von Thaden, A review of safety culture theory and its potential application to
traffic safety, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242695085_A_review_of_safety_culture_theory_and_its_potential_application_to_traffic_safety
●
Cooper, D. (2000). Towards a model
of safety culture. Safety Science, No. 36, pp. 11-136. Retrieved from https://www.behavioural-safety.com
●
Prion, T. (2000). The safety
culture model. Safety Science, 34(1), 111-130
●
National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health. (2001). Creating a Safety and Health Culture: A
Leadership Challenge. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2001-129/
●
Reason, J. (1997). Managing the
Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate Publishing.