The Human Dynamics of Injury Prevention: Three New E-Words for Occupational Safety

Over the past several decades, the basic protocol for reducing workplace injuries can be summarized with three E-words: Engineering, education and enforcement. In other words, to keep people safe, organizations need to:

1. Design the safest equipment, environmental settings and protective devices.

2. Educate people regarding the use of the engineering interventions.

3. Use discipline to enforce compliance with recommended safe-work practices.

These three E-words dramatically have reduced injury severity in the workplace, at home and on the road. However, many corporate safety professionals have claimed their organization's safety performance has reached a plateau. While their overall safety record vastly is better than it once was, continuous improvement is elusive. A frantic search for ways to take safety to the next level has not paid off. The old “three-E” paradigm will not get us there. A certain percentage of people keep falling through the cracks.

THREE NEW E-WORDS

With this article, I am advocating the addition of three new E-words: Empowerment, empathy and emotion. Of course, tradition should not be abandoned. We need to maintain a focus on engineering, education and enforcement strategies.

But to get beyond current plateaus and reach an injury-free work culture, we must pay more attention to the human dynamics of injury prevention. These three new E-words suggest specific principles and directions for action.

EMPOWERMENT

For you to feel empowered — which is feeling commitment, ownership and self-motivation — you need to answer “yes” to the following questions: 1) Can you do it? 2) Will it work? 3) Is it worth it?

The first two questions are relatively easy to address. A “yes” answer to the first question means you have the proper training, resources and opportunity to accomplish the assignment. Management usually can enable these needs to justify a “yes” to this question.

The second question is an education question. Have you received the appropriate justification, perhaps including evidence-based data, to believe the process will work to bring your team or organization closer to a shared vision? In safety terms, will the method (e.g., a certain behavior-based coaching process, a close-call reporting procedure or a new hazard-recognition and removal directive) bring us closer to our vision of being injury free?

While a “yes” answer to the first two questions usually can be accomplished through interpersonal conversation and manipulations of environmental conditions, a “yes” answer to the third question can be difficult to obtain. A “yes” to “Is it worth it?” means you believe all the extra time, effort and inconvenience needed to comply with all safety regulations and procedures are worth the effort.

Many of us take risks daily, including talking on a cell phone or text messaging while driving over the speed limit, and we fortunately avoid injury. Indeed, we are rewarded for our risk-taking with convenience, time-saving comfort and even tacit approval from observers who don't object to our at-risk behavior.

Safety leaders attempt to convince people that the extras for injury prevention are worth the effort by showing group statistics of injury rates, perhaps evidencing a reduction in TRIR as a function of a particular safety program. However, the average person is not persuaded because it's easy to say to oneself, “It won't happen to me.” Statistics are not personal enough. The next new E-word is now relevant.