Positive Influence:

Cutting Edge Ideas on Behavior-Based Safety, Quality and Leadership

Human Behavior is the Bottom Line in Organizational Change: Part 1

Human Behavior is the Bottom Line in Organizational Change: Part 1

I have always been baffled by the word “deep” when applied to a person. I think it is used to describe someone who says cryptic and abstract things about themselves; they use words and phrases that sound authentic but they are constructed to have an effect. “Deep” people are attempting to differentiate themselves from the herd; they want to sound exotic and mystical. They want the words they use to have multiple meanings that are difficult to pin down precisely.

The phenomenon that drives the confusion around understanding ourselves and others—the mysticism that surrounds romantic descriptions of personalities—is related to the language we use to discuss and describe what ourselves and others do. Complex words are really meant to summarize the observation of multiple human behaviors that are all similar and collectively can describe those similar behaviors. For example, 10 similar behaviors describe a supervisor’s statement, “Jim is unenthusiastic about his work.”

Continue reading
  1200 Hits
0 Comments
1200 Hits
  0 Comments

Behavior-Based Safety Teams: Part 2

Behavior-Based Safety Teams: Part 2

In Part 1 of this series, I pointed out the value of creating Behavior Based Safety teams to eliminate employee disinterest, demotivation, and disengagement in a Behavior Based Safety (BBS) process. A traditional BBS process creates functional silos—senior leaders, supervisors, support staff, steering committees, and observers all have specific tasks within the process. Restricting training and experience to specific groups eliminates the benefits of interdisciplinary, cross-functional development. Cross-training has for many years proven to increase the performance capital of employees. Employees who are not participants in any of these functional silos can feel excluded and disengaged.

Over the last 15 years I have heard BBS facilitators voicing frustration about how BBS at their plant or company has lost steam and employees were becoming disinterested. They didn’t know why, so they searched for the mythical “shot in the arm,” that mysterious something that will regenerate employee enthusiasm and involvement. They never questioned the fundamental structure of the BBS process. Yet, it is obvious to the unbiased that the typical BBS process is not structured to facilitate a team environment. Subsequently, the social dynamics that would lead to high levels of participation and involvement have been overlooked. There is no process for optimizing the social dynamic unless individuals are organized as part of a group that has a purpose they value. Creating teams fulfills the organizational structure that is needed and creating a safe work environment for that team provides the purpose that has value.

Continue reading
  1300 Hits
0 Comments
1300 Hits

Behavior-Based Safety Teams: Part 1

Behavior-Based Safety Teams: Part 1

The foundation components of Behavior Based Safety (BBS) are well known: Leadership support and involvement, Steering Committee, Observers, Systematic Data collection and Analysis, and Feedback. The methods for organizing and administering these functional components vary broadly. Many companies adhere to a model acquired from one of the well-known consulting providers while others put together a home-grown model which usually excludes one or more of these key components. An example of the latter would be a company that puts together their own system which includes only observations without any special leadership training, an employee based steering committee, or a reliable data system.

There are problems in establishing commitment to the process that occur quite frequently; one problem is the absence of employee participation. Inadequate employee participation derails a great many BBS processes. Causes for low levels of employee participation include the inability of frontline supervisors to deliver recognition, the inability of observers to provide feedback properly, and the absence of senior leadership involvement and support. Without leadership attention and visible involvement, BBS is put on the back burner. It may start out strong, but it will drift as more pressing production problems arise. Under these circumstances, frontline employees find little reason to engage in the process.

Continue reading
  1386 Hits
0 Comments
1386 Hits

Incentives, Teams and Behavior-Based Safety

Incentives, Teams and Behavior-Based Safety

Incentivization of performance outcomes has been around for a long time. In the field of safety, it has proven to be problematic in some cases and disastrous in others. Gaming the safety data is associated with incentives, particularly financial incentives. Often referred to as “pencil whipping,” early behavior based safety (BBS) processes were crippled by unreliable data. In that sense, the financial incentives contribute to unethical behavior. Often the seductive nature of large dollar rewards has motivated employees to do much worse than this.

When dollars were associated with the number of behavioral observations or with decreases in Recordable Injuries, the data was often proven to be inaccurate. One of the key principles developed from 70 years of scientific research into the cause of human behavior states that our behavior is driven by its consequences – that is when we do something, we focus on whether it works for us or not. If we turn the knob on the door, does the door open – a consequence related to our intention, the reason we performed the behavior.

Continue reading
  1269 Hits
0 Comments
1269 Hits

Quality Professionals Discover Human Behavior

Quality Professionals Discover Human Behavior

You may think I'm trying to be facetious with the title of this article, but you would be wrong. It is true; the emphasis on behavior in safety improvement efforts has crossed organizational lines and migrated into the realm of quality improvement. A quality professional somewhere noticed that focusing on safe behavior and unsafe behavior, defining each precisely so that everyone knew those behaviors were relative to their jobs, measuring the frequency of safe behaviors, and providing recognition for increases in safe behavior led to remarkable reductions in injury frequency.

That was the beginning. Then, he or she asked the most important question that has been posed to quality professionals in decades: "Isn't behavior important to implementing quality improvement initiatives and improving product quality?" Suddenly, an epiphany occurred; a realization of a fact too simple to even bother to deny: of course, behavior is an important element in quality—in many ways! Behavior is important in everything we do in an organization to fulfill our mission and reach our objectives.

Continue reading
  1088 Hits
0 Comments
1088 Hits
  0 Comments

50 Years of Failed Initiatives: Why Behavior Based Safety and Other Initiatives Often Fail

50 Years of Failed Initiatives: Why Behavior Based Safety and Other Initiatives Often Fail

Quality initiatives, safety initiatives, and organizational change initiatives of every description often fail. The reason – the initiatives fail to change employee behavior – the way employees do things. The underlying fallacy that prevents change is leadership's belief that developing and communicating new ways of doing things will be accepted and practiced by employees. Old ways of doing their jobs are supported by strong habits, skills, behavioral shortcuts, and behavioral efficiencies. Most "improvement" initiatives require historically effective behaviors to be cast aside and replaced by new ways of doing things that require learning, practice, mistakes, and repetitive practice.

New behavior requires new consequences – positive feedback and positive reinforcement – to ensure the behaviors become habits. The things employees do prior to a change initiative are a function of what that behavior provides for the employee. Protective safety equipment is often uncomfortable to wear and many prescribed safety behaviors are time consuming and require extra effort; so that behavior leads to some negatives for the employee. Performers often do not perform behaviors because the consequences to them are discomfort and effort. In that sense, there is a payoff for not performing the safe behaviors and doing something unsafe

Continue reading
  1051 Hits
1 Comment
1051 Hits
  1 Comment