Understanding Human Behaviors-An Essential Element to Workplace Safety

Brian Larue, Regional Environment Health Safety Manager, Blattner Company

What is Psychosocial Safety?

Psychosocial safety uses elements of psychology and sociology  to better understand and manage the human dimensions of  safety. Psychological attitudes influence how people feel about their place within the group or team; it is a place where they can speak up, offer ideas, and ask questions without fear of being punished or embarrassed.

Perceptions of psychological safety are strongly related to learning behaviors, such as information sharing, asking for help, and experimenting, as well as employee satisfaction.

Things that may help to cultivate psychological safety include support from your colleagues and a clear understanding of your job responsibilities. Psychological safety may help to create an environment conducive to learning and is strongly associated with role clarity and peer support.

Compliance versus Behavior Based Safety

This is a good time to mention a little about the enforcement side. It has made a difference. A significant drop in workplace fatalities occurred in the wake of OSHA and MSHA. However, there is only so much enforcement can do - as fatality numbers stagnate, it is important to incorporate more behavioral and psychological elements into our approach.  

Figure 1

 ‘2 Factor’ Safety Process

The enforcement bubble is self-explanatory. The psychological bubble requires a little bit of discussion:

• Science – explaining the ‘how and why
• Education – best practices, hazard identification
 

• Sales – selling employees on intrinsic worth
• Behavior – setting the example, recognizing the positive
•Communication – clear understanding of roles, receptive to feedback

Our Thinking Toward Normalized Deviations  

In safety, we consider normalized deviations to be those behaviors that, although considered unsafe, become part of the culture because there has never been a negative consequence. Such deviations are not confined to company culture; individuals, particularly leaders, can fall prey to a normalized mentality when production and schedule serve as primary motivators. Because the means justify the means, leaders may overlook unsafe behaviors or conditions in the mistaken belief nothing has ever happened before. 

Culture of Risk Tolerance and Acceptance

As adults, employees will make the choice themselves whether a hazard exists and establish personal parameters on their acceptable levels of risk. For example, linemen or steel erectors understand the inherent risk associated with their primary work tasks (live lines, working at heights). Therefore, they work within established protocols (clearances, fall protection plans) and rarely deviate. In teaching new employees, they meticulously insist on adherence to these procedures, understanding that there are few second chances in getting it wrong.  

“Knowing one’s employees as human beings first is an essential element toward any serious effort for establishing a behavior-based safety program”

However, once back on the ground, operating a loader or manually handling material appears risk-free. I have worked on transmission and distribution projects that (fortunately)  experienced zero incidents associated with energized work; these  same projects did suffer significant injuries performing ‘routine’ or ‘low-risk’ activities. Why did this happen? No one wanted to get hurt; they just let their guard down the minute they finished the ‘dangerous work’ and were simply cleaning up or moving equipment on the ground.   

Assumptions about Messaging

Making assumptions about what someone is trying to say or will say can be a dangerous mistake at work. 

Making assumptions about what message someone is trying to convey can be affected by mood, distractions, time pressure, etc.

Poor word choices or long-winded messages can lead to confusion. Poor communication, gossip, rumor, or assumptionmaking create downstream problems. For example:

A CEO asks his senior leadership for ideas to improve productivity. Senior management misinterprets the nature of the question, assuming the CEO means productivity needs to increase. By the time this simple question has been dissected and countless assumptions made filters through the ranks, the front-line supervisors feel their jobs are at risk. In response, they ramp up production schedules without proper planning. This downstream effect leads to shortcuts and unnecessary risks.

The Need for Acceptance Can Be Dangerous

Many employees want to belong to their department or crew. Feeling part of a team is important, and thus, a willingness to prove oneself or go along with things is common among those at this stage.   

If these basic needs are not met, employee engagement in safety programs will be lower. Empowerment is feeling commitment, ownership, and self-motivation. This comes about when available resources, proper training, and opportunities are available to accomplish a task.  

In the context of acceptance, supervisors must be alert for potentially hazardous behaviors or conditions created by newer employees. New employees are less apt to feel empowered to speak up or tell a supervisor they lack experience in operating new . They are most likely to enter a dangerous area or unsafe environment because they do not want to disappoint.  

Conclusion

Knowing one’s employees as human beings first is an essential element in any serious effort to establish a behavior-based safety program. Remember that each person’s view of the  world and their place in it influences decisions that lead to  terrible consequences. Leaders do not need to be practicing psychologists to do this well. It simply takes a redirected focus, away from the endless processes and procedures that engulf many safety programs and a greater emphasis on the people side of things.