Teams Approach towards Safety

Does your organization practice a team approach towards Safety or do they just pay it lip service? Does your top management integrate safety into its management teams or is safety still viewed as a side and support function; not worthy of inclusion till there is an exception? To put an finer point on it, does your safety manager sit in on the management team meetings, participates and advises on planning and development overall business strategies or are they only brought in on an ad-hoc basis, if at all?  If not, why do you think that is?  

The Team Approach to safety is just as applicable to management, if not more than to workers. Yes, workers are still responsible for their actions, efforts, and attitudes towards safety and the team approach is not only highly effective wit h workers but in many places legally encouraged, particularly via Consultation and Participation efforts. Yet, that is where many organizations leave it, with some feeling that this meets the definition of legal and/or best practice requirements. [HHmmm… eyebrows raised!?!?] 

In many cases, it seems far easier for management and supervision to give directions and monitor rather than to live and breathe it first. Don’t get caught up in the old school ‘Hierarchical Management’ set ups, because a majority of today’s larger corporations are not only effectively decentralized but many run off of a ‘Matrix Management structure’.  The Team Approach to any management style is critical in these matrix environments; being able to be flexible, assist on many levels and across many functions regardless of one’s role.  Even the ISO 45001 standard’s methods have picked up on this by encompassing Leadership (including both Leaders and Top Management – notice there is a difference but involves both) as a major component to be compliant.

Safety has become an integral part of business globally, particularly in the economically developed countries. To submit a proposal on a government or even commercial project organizations must not only agree to comply with detailed safety requirements but now must be able to show years of evidence in self-managed safety just to complete a tender. Contractor Management programs at all levels require the submission of basic safety information from insurances to evidence of safety management systems all the way up to requiring accreditations or certifications in safety prior to even being looked at for consideration.

Yet many organizations don’t complete safety background checks on their suppliers… quality and due diligence is deemed just too 'whatever'.  And back to the script, many organizations still do not consider safety as a major function within an organization, but a support function, much less realizing safety must be integrated into all levels of management and decision making. Safety is viewed by some as a tool; there if you need it, but not necessary in all activities. It is really an interesting point of view, especially when there is an incident and it is too late to wonder why or how this could have been prevented… I have literally been told by clients that they would worry about the consequences when and if they get caught. I have been forwarded messages from organizations where management expresses ‘in writing’ that safety is ‘not a priority’. There was definitely no team approach there. While I respect their honesty, the trust in their own knowledge and abilities were sorely misplaced.

Integration of safety into the everyday culture of an organization can be tiresome and difficult. The first step, considered by most, in building effective safety management systems is management commitment. The leaders of the organization must be committed to seeing the workers in their facilities safe at work. And if Commitment is the first step, then Conviction and Resolve must be the second. Management must have the determination and belief in safety if they are to remain committed. Yet it is reasonable to understand management will not always be in arms reach of all actions. Management must then ensure there are others in the organization who will champion safe working environments – Safety Leaders.  An unbiased team approach to safety is not a stand-alone procedure, but a fully integrated process for empowering workers to take charge of safety. 

All organizational business and undertakings must be motivated towards an objective or target.  Finding the right objectives and motivating others to achieve them effectively is challenging.  EBIT is but only one of those. Production and Safety must not be viewed as separate but must go hand in hand, but that is for another discussion. I have seen far too many establishments seek only ‘compliance’ – minimum compliance at that - as their end goal; thinking compliance equals liabilities met or even worse, a safe environment. Then this situation leaves many employers alarmed and upset when their workers are still being injured; particularly when someone has attempted to tie their bonus to unachievable safety results. The truth is, you can be entirely compliant and still have injuries. We must shift our targets from merely compliance to more structured Team approaches to safety.

When your workers begin to answer the question of ‘who oversees safety here’ by saying “we” rather than ‘them’ you will notice a change in the cultures and attitudes of the organization.  When managers put safety on the list of all agendas and invite safety experts to be on their regular management teams, you will notice a change in cultures and attitudes the organization. If the weight of safety falls – even if only perceived as to fall – on one or a minute few, Safety Management will fail or at the very least will be inadequate. When this approach begins to fail, or cracks of inadequacy begin to show, it is quick and easy to point the finger at the perceived culprit in lieu of pointing at the person in the mirror. It is at this point, that something else needs to happen to take the place of the failing system, to stabilize the cracks and gaps. It is at this point that one should see that a Team Approach to Safety is better. 

Think of teams as a ‘Navy Seal Unit’. A small group of highly capable individuals each able to lead the mission, yet each holding a secondary function specializing as subject matter experts (i.e. Captain, Lieutenant, Medic, Transport, ordinance & demolition, etc.). If one falls, the other knows the other’s role and picks up the torch, each carrying the additional load with the conviction of seeing the objective through.  A Teams approach towards safety requires highly capable individuals (i.e. a leader with authority, leaders with authority of divisions, subject matter experts, and in some cases group representatives). The hierarchical aspect exists, yet the matrix management envelops the team. Each role is important, important enough to have on this streamlined team, yet also important enough that when absent the rest are trained enough to pick up the loads. 

But if a role is important enough to have in the first place, why would a team purposely leave out an effective member and expect the others to pick up the load when the SME is available, willing, and able? Some focus on the secondary functions and forget that others are still highly capable individuals with more to give than just a specialize view and as such cripple a management team before it even has a chance to thrive. Don’t think of safety as a support function, a side function. Integrate safety into all that you do from the top down, from the bottom up… leave no stone unturned. Have commitment to safety. Have conviction and resolve to see it through! Work as a Team United, not a Team Divided.