Drew Rae and David Provan wrote a paper (https://lnkd.in/ekZXiaE6 ) that is important for my thinking about safety management.

While managers and workers engage in safety activities—like toolbox talks, risk assessments, and incident investigations—under the premise of keeping people safe, we are advised to reflect on the impact of our ritualized safety work on making operations safer. 

Safety work often serves dual purposes: ensuring safety and giving the appearance of it. Much of it may be more symbolic, reinforcing values or ensuring compliance, rather than directly preventing accidents.

Types of Safety Work
1. Social Safety reinforces safety as a core value, using slogans (see illustration), rituals, and narratives.
2. Demonstrated Safety proves to external stakeholders (regulators, customers) that safety standards are met.
3. Administrative Safety is about compliance through structured processes, rules, and standards.
4. Physical Safety directly changes the work environment, like using protective equipment or safety barriers.

Many safety activities do little to reduce actual risks and may focus more on maintaining organizational legitimacy. This creates feedback loops between administrative, social, and demonstrated safety, thereby often reinforcing systems that don’t directly enhance operational safety (the absence of harm).

Strong performance in one area (e.g., administrative safety) can mask weaknesses in others. Over time, the focus shifts to ensuring compliance and protecting from liability rather than addressing the systemic causes of accidents.

All forms of safety work—social, demonstrated, administrative, and physical—must interact and support operational safety, not compete for resources or serve as a defense mechanism. Organizations must strengthen the connection between safety work and operational safety to achieve real, lasting improvements.

Are your safety efforts symbolic, or are they truly making a difference on the front line?