Do investigations mostly fix what’s easy rather than what’s necessary?

Did you check out #5 of Safe AF? This explored whether investigations actually fix relevant issues, or whether they’re more a game of sociopolitical whack-a-mole.

For instance, investigations address what is easy–run a toolbox talk–rather than addressing more challenging, but important issues: lack of resourcing.

Or, investigations tend to fix the things people wanted to fix anyway, irrespective of the investigation.

Or, fix things that are acceptable or palatable for the organisation – like training workers instead of improving design.

If you find the pod useful then please help spread the word – share on LinkedIn, and subscribe, rate & review on Spotify/Apple.

Spotify:

https://creators.spotify.com/pod/show/ben0261/episodes/Ep-5-What-you-find-in-investigations-isnt-what-you-fix-e34la3c

Apple:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-5-what-you-find-in-investigations-isnt-what-you-fix/id1819811788?i=1000714514859

I’ve recorded another 21 episodes, and growing, including:
·        The zero harm paradox
·        How auditing fails to achieve substantive change
·        How investigations fail to evaluate barrier performance
·        The role of leadership + some critical research on leadership constructs
·        Agentive language and blame
·        Industrial myths of safety holding us back
·        The effects of ISO OHSMS 18001 on performance
·        Risk as feelings and not just rational analytics
·        Safety leadership walkarounds
·        The role of fatigue on performance
·        Rules and procedures and more!

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is buy-me-a-coffee-3.png

Shout me a coffee (one-off or monthly recurring)

Leave a comment