Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

Safety culture is often considered as being the role given to safety in the trade-offs made within an organization. But what is the scope of these trade-offs? If operational activities at the sharp end are naturally included in the safety culture perimeter, other trade-offs are made that structure operational activities, especially through the development of processes, procedures, organizational structure and policies but also through technological choices. These trade-offs are made within the environment of the organization, and that inevitably induces constraints on the role given to safety, as there are already trade-offs inherited from this environment. Likewise, a variety of safety models exist in this environment, in the sense of assumptions or beliefs as to how safety is ensured or more often is to be ensured. Eventually, each organization combines a mix of safety models, some partly conflicting with others. To what extent is an organization aware of the complexity of operations and of what it takes to operate safely? Is this also part of its safety culture? To what extent and how can this complexity be addressed? These are some of the questions addressed in the paper.

The aim of this chapter is to highlight three key issues that safety researchers and practitioners should consider as part of a cultural approach to the study and improvement of safety. The three issues are: (1) the relationship between integration and differentiation in safety culture research, (2) moving from descriptions of safety cultures to improvement of safety, and (3) the possible downsides of a cultural approach to safety. The chapter argues that a better understanding of boundary processes between groups is vital for a cultural approach to safety improvement and gives a set of general principles for the design of improvement initiatives. Some limits and limitations to the cultural approach to safety are also discussed.

As an emerging scientific concept, the notion of “safety culture” presents obvious difficulties. But this does not preclude that it can be quite useful for the management of safety. However, the usual understanding of the concept lacks a reference to an explicit safety paradigm. It describes features that are expected to foster safety, but does not explicitly mention the underlying assumptions about the safety strategy expected to make the safe. Yet, there is no one single strategy to make a system safe. Even within a given organization, there must be a variety of strategies, with a different balance between predetermination and adaptation, and different levels of control on front line operators. Each of these safety management modes will inevitably generate the corresponding “safety culture”. The underlying safety management mode behind the current safety culture vision is a non-punitive version of a normative and hierarchical safety management mode. However, evolving toward this mode does not necessarily mean that safety culture is becoming more mature. Recent catastrophic accidents have illustrated the increasing vulnerability of our systems to the unexpected, and illustrated the need for a refined safety paradigm.

Safety culture is a highly successful idea. Whatever your understanding of this idea, and whether you like it or not, you cannot ignore it. Safety culture has become a commodity (a product) that is promoted by various actors and enacted by various tools and practices. I first describe the ‘safety culture system’ that produces this commodification process. Then I discuss its upsides and downsides. Finally, I argue that, rather than debating on whether safety culture is a good idea or not, we should try to get the most of it by playing within the system that sustains the commodifying of safety culture. I suggest that safety culture should be taken as a vocabulary and as an asset. I also propose that rejuvenating the idea will come from introducing new actors into the system of safety culture.

This chapter aims to briefly summarize some of the key findings of the strategic analysis presented in this book. The main message is that a safety culture approach for an at-risk industry must be tailored according to what already exists in the company and to the aim that is pursued. Different historical backgrounds, different contexts, different constraints will require different ways and different paces for change and improvement. This short chapter suggests a number of prerequisites for a successful evolution in safety culture.