The Evolving Landscape of Health and Safety: A Comparative Analysis of New View Safety and Traditional Approaches
The discourse surrounding workplace health and safety (H&S) has witnessed a significant evolution in recent years, marked by the emergence of what is often termed "New View Safety" challenging more established, "traditional" perspectives. This report addresses the central question of which of these viewpoints is currently considered to be more influential and, crucially, which approach ultimately delivers superior H&S results. By examining the foundational principles of both New View Safety, exemplified by the work of Sidney Dekker and Todd Conklin, and traditional safety, often associated with figures like Dominic Cooper, this analysis aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the ongoing dialogue within the field. The objective is to dissect the core arguments, compare the practical applications, evaluate the evidence supporting the effectiveness of each paradigm, and discuss the emerging trends that are shaping the future of safety management.
2. Defining Traditional Safety Views
Traditional safety management has historically been built upon a set of core principles centered on the identification, assessment, and control of hazards in the workplace 1. A cornerstone of this approach is the hierarchy of controls, which prioritizes hazard elimination and substitution, followed by engineering controls, administrative controls, and finally, personal protective equipment (PPE) as the last line of defense 4. This framework emphasizes the importance of establishing and adhering to rules, regulations, policies, and procedures as the primary means of ensuring a safe working environment 3.
Behavior-Based Safety (BBS) has often been a significant methodology within traditional safety. BBS focuses on observing workers' behaviors, providing feedback on safe and unsafe acts, and aiming to modify behavior through reinforcement and coaching 5. The underlying assumption is that by promoting safe behaviors and discouraging unsafe ones, the likelihood of accidents and injuries can be significantly reduced 5. Traditionally, the success of safety programs has been largely measured using lagging indicators, such as accident rates and injury statistics, which reflect past incidents 10.
Dominic Cooper has been a prominent figure in the development and promotion of traditional safety approaches, particularly in the areas of behavioral safety and safety culture 6. Cooper's model of reciprocal determinism posits that safety culture is shaped by the continuous interaction between individuals' thoughts and feelings about safety, their observable safety behaviors, and the situational elements of their work environment 17. This perspective suggests that by understanding and managing these interconnected elements, organizations can actively engineer a positive safety culture and improve safety outcomes 17.
Historically, traditional safety has operated under the fundamental belief that workplace accidents are largely preventable through the systematic elimination of hazards and the correction of unsafe behaviors exhibited by workers. This viewpoint reflects a deterministic approach where strict adherence to established rules and procedures is considered the most direct and effective pathway to achieving safety. Organizations following this model often invest heavily in developing comprehensive safety manuals, conducting regular safety audits to identify non-compliance, and implementing disciplinary actions for those who violate safety protocols 1. The emphasis is on creating a controlled environment where deviations from prescribed safe practices are minimized or eliminated, with the ultimate goal of achieving a workplace free from accidents.
Furthermore, the traditional reliance on lagging indicators as the primary metrics for safety performance may inadvertently foster a reactive approach to safety management. When the focus is primarily on the number and severity of past incidents, improvements are often driven by the need to address the causes of those specific events. This can sometimes lead to a situation where organizations are continuously playing catch-up, reacting to incidents after they have occurred, rather than proactively identifying and mitigating potential risks before they manifest as accidents. While the analysis of past incidents is undoubtedly valuable for learning and preventing recurrence, an overemphasis on lagging indicators might not provide a complete picture of the underlying system vulnerabilities or the presence of latent conditions that could lead to future incidents 10.
3. Understanding New View Safety
New View Safety represents a collection of evolving perspectives that challenge some of the fundamental assumptions of traditional safety management 18. This broader movement encompasses several related approaches, including Human and Organizational Performance (HOP), Safety Differently, Safety II, Resilience Engineering, and High-Reliability Organizations (HRO) 18. A central tenet of New View Safety is the recognition that humans are inherently fallible, and making errors is a normal part of working within complex systems 19. Instead of striving for the impossible goal of completely eradicating human error, the focus shifts towards understanding why errors occur and building systems that are more resilient to their consequences 19.
New View approaches place a strong emphasis on the expertise of frontline workers, recognizing that those closest to the work are often the most knowledgeable about the real-world hazards and complexities of their tasks 19. These workers are viewed not as the primary cause of problems, but as valuable problem solvers and a critical source of insights for improving safety and operational efficiency 19. From this perspective, safety is not simply the absence of accidents, but rather an emergent property that arises from the complex interactions of various organizational elements, including leadership, technology, processes, work practices, and culture 10.
In the event of an incident, New View Safety advocates for a focus on learning and improvement rather than assigning blame 19. The philosophy is that blame often stifles open reporting and hinders the ability to uncover the deeper systemic factors that contributed to the event 20. Furthermore, New View Safety, particularly through the lens of Safety II, emphasizes the importance of understanding what goes "right" in organizations, not just focusing on what goes "wrong" 19. By studying successful activities and outcomes, organizations can identify and reinforce the factors that contribute to safety and build overall system capacity 19. In an increasingly complex world, New View Safety stresses the need for constant curiosity and a commitment to continuous learning and adaptation 19. Understanding the gap between "work as imagined" (how procedures dictate work should be done) and "work as done" (how work is actually performed in practice) is also a key aspect of this perspective 18. Finally, building a culture of trust and psychological safety is considered foundational for the successful implementation of New View principles, as it encourages open communication and the reporting of errors and near misses without fear of reprisal 18.
Key figures like Sidney Dekker and Todd Conklin have been instrumental in shaping the New View Safety movement. Dekker's work has extensively explored the concept of human error, arguing that it is not a cause of failure but rather a symptom of deeper systemic issues within organizations 19. His research emphasizes the importance of understanding the context in which actions occur and moving away from simplistic attributions of blame to individuals 21. Todd Conklin has popularized the "five principles of human performance," which include the ideas that error is normal, blame fixes nothing, context drives behavior, learning is vital, and how organizations respond to failure matters significantly 21. These principles provide a practical framework for organizations looking to adopt a more human-centered approach to safety management 21.
New View Safety fundamentally alters the traditional safety paradigm by acknowledging the inherent fallibility of human beings and redirecting the primary focus from individual error prevention to the resilience and adaptability of organizational systems. This shift in perspective recognizes that safety in complex work environments is not solely determined by individual compliance with rules, but rather emerges from the intricate interplay of organizational design, leadership behaviors, and the practical realities of how work is executed by frontline personnel. By accepting that errors will occur, the emphasis moves towards creating robust systems that can tolerate and recover from these errors without catastrophic consequences.
Furthermore, the various approaches that fall under the umbrella of New View Safety, such as HOP, Safety Differently, and Safety II, are united by a common underlying philosophy. This shared perspective places a premium on the importance of continuous learning from both successes and failures, fostering organizational resilience in the face of variability and unexpected events, and actively engaging workers at all levels in the ongoing effort to improve safety. While each approach may have its own specific methodologies and areas of emphasis, they all converge on the central idea that a more profound understanding of human factors and organizational dynamics is essential for achieving significant and sustainable improvements in health and safety performance 18.
4. Core Differences and the Ongoing Debate
The contrast between traditional and New View Safety extends across several fundamental aspects of how safety is understood and managed. One key difference lies in the understanding of incident causation. Traditional safety often operates under the assumption that incidents have a single, identifiable root cause that can be eliminated to prevent future occurrences 10. In contrast, New View Safety posits that incidents are typically the result of multiple contributing factors interacting within a complex system, making the concept of a single "root cause" overly simplistic and potentially limiting to learning 10.
Another significant divergence is the perceived role of workers. Traditional safety has sometimes viewed workers as a primary source of safety problems, focusing on the need to correct unsafe behaviors 10. New View Safety, however, sees frontline workers as essential problem solvers and a valuable resource for understanding and improving safety due to their direct experience with the work 10. The focus of intervention also differs. Traditional approaches often target individual behavior and specific hazards through training, rules, and inspections 10. New View Safety emphasizes the need to understand and improve the broader organizational systems and the context in which work is performed 10.
The approach to failure is perhaps one of the most debated differences. While traditional safety can sometimes lead to a culture of blame and punishment following incidents, particularly when focusing on individual error, New View Safety strongly advocates for a culture of learning and improvement where the emphasis is on understanding why actions made sense at the time 19. The measurement of safety also differs, with traditional safety often relying heavily on lagging indicators like accident rates 10, while New View Safety emphasizes the importance of leading indicators and measures of system capacity and resilience 10. Finally, the very definition of safety is contested, with traditional safety often defining it as the absence of accidents, whereas New View Safety defines it as the presence of capacity and the ability of the system to function effectively under varying conditions 19.
The ongoing debate between these perspectives involves various points of contention. Proponents of New View Safety often criticize traditional safety, particularly BBS, for its tendency to blame workers for incidents, overlook the significant influence of systemic factors, and potentially hinder the reporting of near misses and minor incidents due to fear of punishment 42. Conversely, some traditional safety proponents, while perhaps acknowledging the importance of systems, may still emphasize the critical role of individual responsibility and adherence to safe work practices in preventing accidents 17. A point of discussion also revolves around whether approaches like HOP are genuinely novel or simply a rearticulation of well-established principles of good safety management 46. However, many within the New View movement argue that their approach builds upon and enhances traditional safety by offering a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of human factors and organizational dynamics, rather than seeking to entirely replace it 19.
To further illustrate these distinctions, the following table summarizes the key differences between Traditional and New View Safety across several important aspects:
Table 1: Comparison of Traditional and New View Safety
The debate between New View and traditional safety is not necessarily a rigid dichotomy, but rather represents a spectrum of approaches with varying degrees of emphasis on individual actions versus the broader organizational context. Many safety professionals and organizations are increasingly recognizing the limitations of purely behavior-centric or purely system-centric approaches and are exploring ways to integrate valuable elements from both perspectives to create more effective and adaptive safety management systems 7.
5. Effectiveness in Delivering H&S Results
Evaluating the effectiveness of traditional and New View Safety approaches in delivering tangible improvements in health and safety outcomes requires a careful examination of available evidence. Studies have explored the impact of Behavior-Based Safety (BBS), a key component of traditional safety, on workplace injuries. A meta-analysis of thirteen studies indicated a statistically significant reduction in accidents and injuries following the implementation of BBS interventions 9. However, the authors also noted limitations in the methodological quality of some studies, suggesting that these findings should be interpreted with caution 9. Other research suggests that while BBS may be effective in reducing recordable incident rates, its impact on more serious injuries and fatalities (SIFs) might be limited 44.
Conversely, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that the principles of New View Safety, particularly Human and Organizational Performance (HOP), can lead to positive safety outcomes. For instance, CHEP, a logistics company, reported a 30% improvement in their reportable injury frequency rate and a 64% reduction in injury severity rate after adopting HOP principles 48. A construction firm also reported a 30% reduction in fall-related incidents over a year by focusing on system improvements rather than penalizing workers for errors, aligning with HOP principles 49. These examples suggest that a system-oriented approach that emphasizes learning and employee engagement can be highly effective in improving safety metrics.
It has also been argued that traditional safety approaches may have reached a plateau in their effectiveness, particularly in addressing complex risks and preventing serious incidents 19. New View Safety, with its focus on understanding systemic vulnerabilities and building organizational resilience, offers a potential pathway to overcome these limitations 23. HOP, for example, is associated with potential benefits such as reduced incidents, increased efficiency, a stronger safety culture, and enhanced organizational adaptability 23. Its emphasis on proactive risk management and learning from both successes and failures can lead to a more dynamic and responsive safety system 49. Furthermore, the focus on employee engagement within New View approaches can foster a greater sense of ownership and responsibility for safety, potentially leading to improved reporting and participation in safety initiatives 25.
However, definitively proving the superiority of one approach over the other is challenging due to the inherent complexity of safety interventions in real-world organizational settings. The effectiveness of any safety management system is influenced by a multitude of factors, including the specific industry, organizational culture, leadership commitment, and the way in which the chosen approach is implemented 44. A poorly implemented BBS program, for example, could indeed be ineffective or even detrimental, potentially fostering a blame culture and discouraging reporting 44. Similarly, a superficial adoption of New View principles without a genuine commitment to learning and system improvement might not yield the anticipated benefits 53.
While traditional safety methods, particularly BBS, have demonstrated some success in lowering incident rates, the evidence increasingly suggests that a more comprehensive, system-focused approach, as advocated by New View Safety, may be necessary to achieve more significant and sustainable improvements, especially in tackling serious injuries and fatalities. The focus on understanding the underlying systemic factors that contribute to risk, rather than solely addressing individual behaviors, offers a more holistic and potentially more effective way to create truly safe and resilient organizations.
6. Criticisms and Limitations
Both traditional and New View Safety approaches have faced their share of criticisms and have inherent limitations. As discussed earlier, a significant criticism leveled against BBS, a key element of traditional safety, is its potential to overemphasize individual worker behavior, sometimes leading to a culture of blame and overlooking the critical role of organizational systems in shaping those behaviors 42. This focus on individual error can be counterproductive, potentially discouraging workers from reporting incidents or near misses for fear of reprisal, and failing to address the deeper systemic issues that may have contributed to the event 42.
New View Safety, while gaining traction, also faces certain limitations and criticisms. One common concern is the perceived lack of prescriptive guidance or detailed "how-to" manuals for implementation 18. Some organizations may find it challenging to translate the abstract principles of HOP or Safety Differently into concrete actions and processes within their specific context 18. There are also concerns that an overemphasis on system thinking might inadvertently lead to a neglect of fundamental hazard controls or a downplaying of individual responsibility in maintaining a safe work environment (though this is generally not the intent of New View proponents). Shifting deeply ingrained traditional safety mindsets and overcoming established bureaucratic structures within organizations can also be a significant hurdle in adopting New View approaches 33. Furthermore, some critics argue that HOP, in particular, lacks a clear and well-defined methodology, sometimes being perceived as simply a set of slogans rather than a robust framework for safety improvement 46.
Traditional safety, beyond the criticisms of BBS, also has its limitations. The strong emphasis on compliance with rules and regulations, while important for establishing a baseline of safety, may sometimes lead to a focus on meeting minimum requirements rather than striving for genuine and continuous safety improvement 27. The reliance on lagging indicators can provide a historical view of safety performance but may not be effective in predicting or preventing future incidents, particularly those involving complex, systemic risks 34. Moreover, a purely top-down, compliance-driven approach may not fully engage the workforce in safety initiatives, potentially missing out on valuable insights and opportunities for improvement that could come from those on the front lines 23.
A key point of contention in the debate is the criticism of BBS for potentially focusing too narrowly on individual worker behavior in isolation. This approach can sometimes lead to blaming individuals for accidents without adequately considering the systemic factors, such as inadequate training, flawed procedures, or organizational pressures, that may have influenced those behaviors. This is a central argument raised by proponents of New View Safety approaches like HOP, who emphasize the importance of understanding the context and the organizational systems that shape human performance 42.
While New View Safety strongly advocates for a shift away from blame towards learning and understanding, there can be practical difficulties in establishing a truly "just culture" that effectively balances learning with the necessary accountability. In situations involving gross negligence, willful violations of safety rules, or repeated unsafe behaviors despite adequate training and resources, organizations may still need to implement disciplinary measures to maintain safety standards and ensure accountability. The challenge lies in creating a culture where genuine errors are viewed as learning opportunities, while also addressing situations where individuals knowingly or recklessly put themselves or others at risk. The concept of a "restorative just culture" attempts to navigate this complex terrain by focusing on understanding the context of errors and finding ways to repair harm and improve the system, but its practical implementation requires careful consideration and a nuanced approach 18.
7. Trends and the Future of H&S Management
The field of health and safety management is continuously evolving, and several key trends are shaping its future direction. There is a growing interest in and adoption of Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) principles across various industries, indicating a shift towards a more system-oriented and human-centered approach to safety 34. This trend reflects a broader recognition of the limitations of solely relying on compliance-based strategies and the need to understand the complexities of human behavior within organizational systems 27.
Organizations are increasingly focusing on proactive risk management strategies and the use of leading indicators to predict and prevent incidents before they occur, rather than solely reacting to past events 41. Integrating safety considerations into core operational processes, rather than treating it as a separate function, is also gaining prominence 56. Furthermore, there is a strong emphasis on fostering a positive safety culture within organizations, recognizing that shared values, beliefs, and behaviors play a critical role in overall safety performance 13. The importance of psychological safety and the overall well-being of employees is also receiving increasing attention as integral components of a comprehensive health and safety program 28.
Technology is playing an increasingly significant role in safety management, with the adoption of risk management software, artificial intelligence (AI) for data analysis and predictive modeling, and robotics for performing hazardous tasks 41. These technological advancements offer new opportunities for enhancing safety data collection, analysis, and intervention strategies 41. Looking ahead, the future of H&S management likely involves a more integrated approach that strategically blends the strengths of both traditional methods, such as structured hazard identification and the implementation of robust control measures, with the principles of New View Safety, including systems thinking, a focus on learning from normal work, and the active engagement of the workforce in safety improvement efforts 49. A complete dismissal of either perspective may not be the most effective path forward.
The increasing adoption of New View Safety principles, particularly HOP, across various sectors signifies a growing understanding of the benefits of systems thinking, learning from the realities of work as done, and empowering employees to contribute to safety improvements. This shift suggests that organizations are recognizing the limitations of traditional top-down approaches and are seeking more effective ways to address complex risks and achieve sustained improvements in safety performance 34.
The trajectory of health and safety management points towards a future where a more nuanced and integrated approach will prevail. This evolution will likely involve leveraging the well-established frameworks and tools of traditional safety for hazard identification, risk assessment, and control, while simultaneously embracing the core tenets of New View Safety to foster a culture of learning, resilience, and proactive risk management. Organizations that can effectively synthesize these perspectives, valuing both the structure of traditional methods and the adaptability of New View principles, will be best positioned to create truly safe, efficient, and sustainable workplaces 49.
8. Conclusion
In addressing the question of whether New View Safety or traditional views are "winning" the argument in the field of H&S, it is evident that the landscape is evolving. While traditional safety, with its emphasis on hazard control and behavioral modification, has historically been the dominant paradigm, New View Safety, encompassing approaches like HOP, Safety Differently, and Safety II, is gaining significant traction and influence. This shift reflects a growing understanding of the complexities of human factors and organizational systems in ensuring workplace safety.
Regarding which approach delivers better H&S results, the evidence suggests that while traditional methods have contributed to significant improvements in safety over time, they may have reached a plateau in addressing more complex risks and preventing serious incidents. New View Safety, with its focus on systemic learning, resilience, and employee engagement, offers a promising path towards achieving further and more sustainable improvements in safety performance. Case studies and organizational experiences indicate the potential of these approaches to reduce incident rates and foster a stronger safety culture.
However, it is crucial to recognize that the effectiveness of any safety management philosophy is heavily dependent on its proper implementation, the commitment of leadership, and the specific context of the organization. A superficial adoption of New View principles or a poorly executed traditional program will likely fall short of its objectives. The future of health and safety management appears to be moving towards a more integrated approach, where the strengths of both traditional and New View perspectives are leveraged to create comprehensive and adaptive safety systems. Rather than a clear "winner," the field is witnessing an evolution in thinking, with a growing recognition that a holistic understanding of both human behavior and organizational systems is essential for creating truly safe and resilient workplaces.
References
1. Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs - OSHA, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3885.pdf
2. A safe workplace is sound business | Occupational Safety and Health Administration, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.osha.gov/safety-management
3. The Ultimate Guide to Safety Management Systems - Safesite, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://safesitehq.com/safety-management-systems/
4. Hazard Prevention and Control | Occupational Safety and Health Administration, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.osha.gov/safety-management/hazard-prevention
5. What is Safety? Safety Management Systems for Workplace & Food Quality - ASQ, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://asq.org/quality-resources/safety
6. Behavioral Safety: A Framework for Success, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.behavioural-safety.com/b-safe-management-solutions/behavioral-safety-a-framework-for-success
7. BBS & HOP = Predictive-Based Safety - Dxbsafe, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://dxbsafe.com/blog/post/bbs-and-hop-predictive-based-safety
8. Development trends of behavior-based safety theory - НОО Профессиональная наука, accessed on March 14, 2025, http://scipro.ru/article/17-10-2024
9. (PDF) Effectiveness of behaviour based safety interventions to reduce accidents and injuries in workplaces: Critical appraisal and meta-analysis - ResearchGate, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247512162_Effectiveness_of_behaviour_based_safety_interventions_to_reduce_accidents_and_injuries_in_workplaces_Critical_appraisal_and_meta-analysis
10. Safety Solutions, accessed on March 14, 2025, http://www.newviewofhealthandsafety.com/comparison
11. Dominic Cooper, Author at SHP - Health and Safety News, Legislation, PPE, CPD and Resources, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.shponline.co.uk/author/dom/
12. Dominic Cooper Ph.D. | ISHN, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.ishn.com/authors/2730-dominic-cooper
13. Safety Culture., accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.behavioural-safety.com/articles/safety_culture_understanding_a_difficult_concept.pdf
14. Improving Safety Culture: A Practical Guide: Cooper, Dominic - Amazon.com, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/Improving-Safety-Culture-Practical-Guide/dp/0471958212
15. Strategic Safety Culture Roadmap - Dominic Cooper, Lucas Finley - Google Books, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://books.google.com/books/about/Strategic_Safety_Culture_Roadmap.html?id=PURkngEACAAJ
16. B-Safe®, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.behavioural-safety.com/b-safe-management-solutions/our-approach/b-safe
17. The Safety Culture Concept with Dr Dominic Cooper, episode one - YouTube, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxWOcmJY83k
18. The New View - Safety Differently, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://safetydifferently.com/the-new-view/
19. What is New View Safety? | NewView Safety Coach, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.newviewsafetycoach.com.au/what-is-new-view-safety
20. A NEW VIEW OF SAFETY - Lewis Tree Service, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.lewisservices.com/assets/PDF-Downloads/A-New-View-of-Vegetation-Management-Safety-Lewis-Services.pdf
21. Safety Differently and The Principles of Human Performance | by Tom Connor | 10x Curiosity, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://medium.com/10x-curiosity/safety-differently-and-the-principles-of-human-performance-c7c14efb8c69
22. The five Principles of HOP | HOPLAB | Articles & Resources - Southpac International, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.southpacinternational.com/hop/the-five-principles-of-hop/
23. Embracing Human and Organizational Performance (HOP): Principles for a Safer and More Productive Environment - SafetyStratus, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.safetystratus.com/blog/embracing-human-and-organizational-performance-hop-principles-for-a-safer-and-more-productive-environment/
24. The Five Principles of Human and Organizational Performance | Cat | Caterpillar, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.cat.com/en_US/blog/five-principles-of-human-and-organizational-performance.html
25. Embracing Human and Organizational Performance (HOP): A Paradigm Shift to Address Safety and Workforce Challenges, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.maritimemagazines.com/marine-news/202405/embracing-human-and-organizational-performance/
26. Safety Differently | safetysynthesis.com, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://safetysynthesis.com/safetysynthesis-facets/safety-i-and-safety-ii/safety_differently
27. Perceptions on Workplace Safety – Traditional or New View Paradigm - Victoria University of Wellington, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/health/schools/school-of-health/worksafe-new-zealand-chair-in-health-and-safety/recent-publications/Perceptions-on-Workplace-Safety-Traditional-or-New-View-Jessica-Griffin.PDF
28. Article: New View Safety: Shifting Paradigms in Workplace Safety - Ringo: Unleash human potential from the shop-floor to the top-floor., accessed on March 14, 2025, https://ringoapp.com.au/article-new-view-safety-shifting-paradigms-in-workplace-safety/
29. List of books by author Sidney Dekker - ThriftBooks, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.thriftbooks.com/a/sidney-dekker/251144/
30. Safety Differently: Dekker, Sidney: 9781482241990 - Amazon.com, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/Safety-Differently-Sidney-Dekker/dp/1482241994
31. Patient Safety: A Human Factors Approach - 1st Edition - Sidney Dekker - Routledge, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.routledge.com/Patient-Safety-A-Human-Factors-Approach/Dekker/p/book/9781439852255
32. Foundations of Safety Science: A Century of Understanding Accidents and Disasters / Edition 1 by Sidney Dekker | 9781138481787 | Paperback | Barnes & Noble®, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/foundations-of-safety-science-sidney-dekker/1133053378
33. Do Safety Differently by Sidney Dekker | Goodreads, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/60396105-do-safety-differently
34. Embracing HOP: How 5 Principles Changed Safety - S&B, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.sbec.com/Insights/Embracing-HOP-How-Five-Principles-Changed-The-Way-We-Think-Of-Safety-/
35. Todd Conklin: books, biography, latest update - Amazon.com, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B00TATZUOI
36. The 5 Principles of Human Performance: A contemporary updateof the building blocks of Human Performance for the new view of safety - Amazon.com, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Human-Performance-contemporary-updateof/dp/1794639144
37. List of books by author Todd Conklin - ThriftBooks, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.thriftbooks.com/a/todd-conklin/1068911/
38. Practitioner Spotlight: Have you ever heard of Safety and HU Professional, Todd Conklin? - Human Performance Tools, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.humanperformancetools.com/human-performance-tools/safety-human-performance-conklin
39. Conklin - HOP Hub, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.hophub.org/conklin-bio
40. Difference between old and new view safety - YouTube, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPthWzrtuos
41. Safety Leadership: Last year's top safety trends are here to stay, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com/articles/24849-safety-leadership-last-years-top-safety-trends-are-here-to-stay
42. Is Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) a New Approach ..., accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.aubreydaniels.com/media-center/safety/articles/is-human-and-organizational-performance-hop-a-new-approach-to-safety
43. Dispelling the Myth that BBS and HOP Are Incompatible - Behavioral ..., accessed on March 14, 2025, https://behavioralsafetynow.com/program/general-sessions/dispelling-the-myth-that-bbs-and-hop-are-incompatible/
44. The BBS Dilemma Part 1 - Krause Bell Group, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://krausebellgroup.com/the-bbs-dilemma-part-1/
45. BBS and HOP - ProAct Safety, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://proactsafety.com/blog-posts/bbs-and-hop
46. HOP is Traditional Safety - SafetyRisk.net, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://safetyrisk.net/hop-is-traditional-safety/
47. Is New View Safety More Effective Than Traditional Approaches? -- Ep. 14 - YouTube, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0qum-kinCI
48. How CHEP have adopted HOP to improve work | HOPLAB | Article - Southpac International, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.southpacinternational.com/hop/how-chep-have-adopted-hop-to-improve-work/
49. The Role of Human Organizational Performance (HOP) in Modern Safety Programs, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://toddjeromejenkins.com/safety-management/hop/the-role-of-human-organizational-performance-hop-in-modern-safety-programs/
50. BBS & HOP = Predictive-Based Safety, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2018/12/01/BBS-HOP.aspx
51. What Is Human and Organizational Performance?, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.naspweb.com/blog/what-is-human-and-organizational-performance/
52. A Guide to Human and Organizational Performance | SafetyCulture, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://safetyculture.com/topics/safety-performance/human-and-organizational-performance/
53. A typical journey towards HOP | HOPLAB | Articles & Resources - Southpac International, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.southpacinternational.com/hop/what-is-a-typical-journey-towards-hop/
54. Importance of Health and Safety Culture in Your Organization, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://blog.vits.co/importance-of-health-and-safety-culture-in-your-organization
55. IMCA IN 1681: Human and Organisational Performance (HOP), accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.imca-int.com/resources/technical-library/human-and-organisational-performance/
56. Human and Organisational Performance (HOP) - Safemap International, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.safemap.com/en/human-and-organisational-performance-hop/
57. Safety Culture | Intuto, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.intuto.com/guides/safety-culture
58. Safety culture - Wikipedia, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_culture
59. Impact of Safety Culture on Safety Performance; Mediating Role of Psychosocial Hazard: An Integrated Modelling Approach - PubMed Central, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8394037/
60. Top 5 Health and Safety Trends for Field Service Businesses - Fluix, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://fluix.io/blog/health-and-safety-trends
61. Survey Reveals Wide Interest in Workplace Safety Technology, But Barriers to Adoption, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://riskandinsurance.com/survey-reveals-wide-interest-in-workplace-safety-technology-but-barriers-to-adoption/
62. Successful adoption of safety technology, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com/articles/26393-successful-adoption-of-safety-technology
63. What is BBS and HOP? - Lancaster Safety Consulting, accessed on March 14, 2025, https://www.lancastersafety.com/behavior-based-safety-human-organizational-performance/