Zero is a round number, and it is also a complex number, because it is a symbol for nothing. Literally.
In some cases, it is a number that is hard to grasp, hard to envision. After all, it signifies nothing. Can you visualize nothing? As a popular saying goes, “If you aim at nothing, you’ll hit it every time.” But really, what is zero? Can it be a goal? A realistic one?
In the case of workplace safety, zero is an easy number to talk about but a very difficult number to achieve.
Is it really difficult to achieve nothing? Well, of course not. Just sit your butt on a couch for hours and see how easy it is. But when you see zero as an actual number and not a symbol and use it to represent a target of zero workplace incidents, injuries or deaths, suddenly “nothing” looks like a really big something.
[Image courtesy of Flickr user Pedrik via a Creative Commons license]The number zero can mean something, or it can signify nothing. In safety, is zero nothing? No, it’s actually a common and significant goal, but before you try to achieve it, you need to ask some questions regarding feasibility.
Oh sure, the goal of zero is noble and honorable, but as you may recall from the Seven Deadly Delusions and Realities blog posts earlier this month, you realize that whether zero is achievable is something to be discussed when you are down to very few incidents in a year. However, if you want to really achieve this goal, you should not just jump into it and start making rousing speeches to your workers about the importance of zero. Your first need to ask yourself and your management team eight important questions, as presented by Michael Burnham’s article in the April 2o15 issue of Professional Safety magazine. Of course it is not just about these questions – it’s about the answers that come to you.
Question #1: Is this target achievable to motivate workers?
Think about this this way – zero is a great destination, but a good map shows the path you take. You don’t just get there. It takes planning, understanding the steps and progress you need to get there, and understanding where you are now. If the trip is too far, your workers will eventually get bored and keep asking, “Are we there yet?” Fity times. In two minutes. If the goal itself is unrealistic, maybe focus more on the “pit stops” along the way that show progress.
Question #2: What is the real reason the organization exists?
This has to do with priorities. If a business is all about safety as the only priority, then how does the business make any money at all? In other words, be realistic – there are reasons your doors are open, and those should be high on the priority list. Safety should also be important, but make sure it is in its proper place in the hierarchy when it comes to doling out those precious limited resources that will improve the company.
Question #3: Will the company go “all in” on perfection, starting from the beginning?
The reality is this – if you don’t have perfect systems in place, you cannot achieve perfection in the outcomes in terms of a lack of injuries or incidents. Based on the current safety program in place, how much effort is the company (and by extension, its workforce) willing to put into achieving perfection in its safety program so that a perfect outcome can be assured? How much effort will it take? And what does perfection mean in this case? Think of this – to achieve perfect inputs, a company has to be willing to consider unlimited resources for safety (whatever safety wants, it gets); any work-related conflicts are always decided on the side of safety; and workers have to achieve 100 percent on a training exam in order to work; willing to make concessions if it means having enforceable safety provisions in contracts; and every single hazard is addressed and mitigated, regardless of any constituency that might be affected. Will your company do that?
Question #4: Can the company really mitigate all possible causes?
As was discussed briefly in an earlier post about deadly delusions, many safety protocols, no matter how robust, will tend to miss some important aspects: the protocols account for deliberate, logical and intentional actions and behaviors by workers and equipment, but they do not account for the irrational and/or unintentional. If you think you can account for every contingency, think about this from a possible victim’s perspective. In general accidents can be seen as preventable in theory, but is it possible for someone to get injured through some behavior or action by another person or equipment that is actually beyond his or her control? The short answer is yes; people get hurt in car accidents all the time, and often the one who is injured did nothing wrong, but had no control over the other driver or car.
Question #5: What human limitations are leading to the most mistakes?
There are several “illusions” that can contribute to human error in the workplace, and it is important for the company to understand these limitations before making any steps toward a target zero. The human brain can mislead people into being better than they really are in several areas: attention (if we are too focused on a task, we miss a lot fo context around us), memory (we tend not to remember as much or as accurately as we believe), confidence (we think we are more competent than we really are), knowledge (we think we know more than we really do), cause (we often link events together as coincidental or causal, when no link actually exists), or potential (we can do so much more if only we could unlock the latent power in our brains).
Question #6: Can this target adversely affect leadership?
This comes down to trust and integrity. It is one thing for a leader to talk about target zero and express a desire to get the company to buy into the initiatives that will help move the company toward the goal, but it is another thing to actually follow through on what is said. A leader does what he says, and when he does what he says, those in the role of follower will trust that leader to lead them. Anyone can implement a program that is designed to meet the zero target, but if the leader only talks and does not do, integrity is eroded and thus trust and loyalty will be close behind. And when that fades, the zero target becomes the same pipe dream as a piece of paper turning itself into a paper airplane.
Question #7: Can the company still grow with this target in place?
Research has shown that having a zero target seems to discourage reporting of incidents or injuries. When the focus is only on the end and not the means, incidents and injuries tend to occur. Just because they are not reported does not mean they don’t exist. And every injury and incident is an opportunity for the company to learn lessons, make changes and improve. When the focus is solely on zero, will there be a willingness to look to possible incident risks and be positive and proactive about them, or will there be a close-mindedness where any incident subjects the victim or the person causing the problem to be suspended or terminated? The attitude of the company is vital in answering this question.
Question #8: If not zero, then what could be Target B?
If, in the process of answering the previous seven questions, you determine that target zero might be a little too far-fetched for now, consider looking into some of these practical steps that by themselves could help move your company closer to the point where that target zero seems more possible. Consider giving random rewards to workers who consistently exhibit correct and safe behaviors and actions. Consider encouraging workers to teach each other during “teachable moments.” Consider reminders of the company’s actual purpose or mission aside from the safety aspect. These are just a couple of ideas to consider for your work place that could help improve safety, even if the idea of zero is just too complex a number to be attainable in the present. Don’t give up on the goal, but be willing to adjust it to meet where your company is now and where it can be in one to two years, and then reassess the goal after that.