Kevin Burns Blog

Zero is more than a measurement. It is a philosophy.

Zero has become a divisive term. There are those who believe in Zero and there are those who believe that Zero cannot be sustained. Speak out loud your belief in Zero and you open yourself to attack from those who believe that Zero cannot sustain - and vice versa.

Both sides look at Zero as a result. But Zero is more than a measurement. It is a philosophy. If you truly believe in safety, you ultimately believe in Zero.

“Safety Second” doesn’t roll off the tongue as a strong corporate value. “Be almost safe” doesn’t inspire anyone to take safety seriously. But how often do you see organizations celebrating “almost safety?” Industry-average safety performance does not inspire anyone to embrace safety as a personal value. Acceptable risk is not acceptable. Companies preach Zero Harm. But do they really mean it?

Companies claim to value safety over all else but unknowingly engage in activities that undermine that desire.

Good companies want to protect their people from harm in the workplace. Of that there is little doubt. A problem exists, however, when deed does not align with word. Over 70% of North American workers are not fully engaged in their job. Without being fully engaged in the job, there is little likelihood that an employee will be fully engaged in safely doing the job.

Companies claim to value safety over all else. But they unknowingly engage in activities that undermine that desire. Companies want to become world-class performers in safety but measure themselves against industry averages. Companies say they make safety the top priority but then don't invest in peripheral training. Many don't have support materials to own the hearts and minds of their employees. Eventually employees clue-in and say, "don't tell me how much you care - show me."

The safety world is moving away from simple compliance models. Integration of omnipresent safety (permeating throughout the organization) is the next level. Here's where the real work needs to be done. Let's start with the 3 things that organizations must do better before safety performance can improve.

Do not underestimate the power of a well-crafted safety campaign for supporting your safety initiatives.

Federal elections are in full-swing in Canada, USA, Argentina and Hong Kong. But then, there are elections always going on somewhere. But it’s the national elections that dominate the TV and radio airwaves. All of the political parties fight for attention of voters in the hopes of swaying their ballot “X.”

The political parties constantly assess their messages’ effectiveness. If the message isn’t resonating with the voter, they change it up in the hopes that the new message does. They engage polls and surveys. They take random sample sizes and ask questions. And they buy advertising.

Advertising is a one-way street: outward. It talks at us not with us. There is no conversation. There is no engagement. However, to improve safety communication is not about buying advertising. To build engagement, especially in safety, requires more than just banners and signs, or a few words at the monthly safety meeting.

The position of safety person is no more important than any other employee position. No one job is more important or carries more weight than another.

When you’re trying to get employee buy-in to the safety program, you are trying to advance an ideal. You are, in essence, selling a point-of-view and the safety program. Selling an idea takes tact and strategy. This is where safety people can make a big mistake. They assume that safety will sell itself. They also assume that employees will respect the safety person’s position. Neither can be assumed.

In twenty years of consulting with safety people, senior managers, and front-line staff, I have encountered two big reasons why employees don’t respect safety, the safety program or the safety person. These are by no means absolutes. However, the first is that employees can feel manipulated by safety, the safety people or the safety program. The second is that they feel that the safety person can demand undue respect.

The move toward personal leadership-focused safety culture requires that supervisors have management skills.

Front-line supervisors are not only responsible for safety performance but almost all of the production activities. In addition, supervisors are responsible for assigning tasks, ensuring quality production and providing technical expertise. They have to do that while finding ways to help employees find their internal motivation and desire to do the job well. Employees also expect their supervisors to offer positive performance feedback. That's a key requirement to keeping employees engaged and motivated.

Any shortfall in employee training falls onto the supervisor to fix. Poor employee skills training means the supervisor must fix that - on the fly. And the front-line supervisor is expected to fix safety procedure issues on the fly as well. Plus, the supervisor is expected to take employee concerns up to the appropriate middle manager.

The execution of training (or lack of it) falls upon the shoulders of the front-line supervisors. Most times, these folks are thrust into their jobs without any preparation.

Employees who don't care about their job, don’t care about safely doing the job.

There is a lot of talk of leadership on the job these days; specifically, safety leadership. Why? Employee leadership raises personal standards and contribution especially in safety. Leadership is an attitude. People who own the attitude of personal leadership do better, conscientious work.

Old-style, top-down management is fast becoming ineffective and giving way to teams, mentoring and coaching. Involvement is key to shifting the safety paradigm. Managers telling employees what to do is outdated. Companies are coaching employees to voluntarily step up their personal safety leadership capacity.

Companies are attempting to improve employee safety buy-in. As a result, there is much discussion on responsibility and accountability. Personal leadership capacity in safety is the next level of safety engagement. Disengagement levels hover around 70%. Companies are attempting to fight back to help their people engage.

Safety is not argued as an economics case. It is presented as an enforcement initiative.

(Excerpt taken from Kevin’s new e-book, Running With Scissors - 10 Reasons To Invest in Safety In Slow Times.)

Employees may know logically that safety is the right choice. But, it is the story of why you choose safety that is more compelling to others.

What’s your story? Everyone has a story about the time they made the decision to jump on the safety bandwagon. Everyone has a story of why safety is important to them. Some of those stories may be as the result of suffering a workplace injury. Some may be of losing a friend or family member. Some may be from a realization from something someone said that affected them at an emotional level. But before most people choose safety as one of their personal values, there is usually a story. Unfortunately, most stories are sad.

Why People Choose

Ask someone why they choose a retirement savings plan. You will hear stories of wanting freedom in retirement, to travel, to see the world, to enjoy grandkids, etc. They are not sad stories. They are stories the come from caring about family and loved ones. They also want financial independence.

Your people deserve your best communication effort. Their safety depends on it.

Zero-Speak. It’s not just a clever name. It’s a mindset and a safety communications philosophy. Zero-Speak is a way of ensuring that you communicate effectively with your people. To move you closer to the ultimate goal of your safety program requires effective communication. If you have to repeat yourself, your people aren't buying-in to what you're saying. They're tolerating safety rules. What you say and how you say it matters. You need to maximize your Zero-Speak opportunities.

Here are four solid ways to begin implementing a Zero-Speak philosophy in your safety program:

Help people develop a plan to positively embrace safety instead of negatively avoiding injury.

Safety has done a terrible disservice to itself. It has aligned itself with gruesome scare tactics in the hopes of getting workers compliance. “Fail to follow protocols,” you hear them say, “and you too could lose a body part.” What-if’s and maybe’s don’t sell safety. And safety needs to be sold.