The first two parts of this series provided a thumb nail sketch of two schools of thought in behavioral safety: Cognitivism and behaviorism. Let's now change the perspective of the discussion from the theorists to the practitioners. After all, once the arguments have been made and the theories debated, it's the safety professional who serves as the final judge in the sense that it's the safety professional who decides which kind of training to implement.

Safety professionals, safety committee members and employees with safety responsibilities generally aren't stuck on theories and methodologies. They just want to know what will be most effective in making employees safe and preventing injuries and incidents. As between the two approaches, which one makes the most sense for the safety professional to build his or her training program on?

Which Approach Is 'Better'?

The question of which approach is better is impossible to answer. Behavior-based proponents like to assert that research shows that theirs is the best approach. Nonsense! There's never been a comparative study related to industrial safety, health and environmental performance showing that one approach works better than the other. The Topf organization has conducted case studies that show progress and improvement at specific client sites using their approach, as have most of the providers of other approaches. But these studies didn't compare one approach with the other in any systematic or scientific way, only through assertion of the providers.

Although we agree with much of the thinking behind the behavior-based approach, we at Topf contend that the cognitive approach also makes an essential contribution. It's our conviction that raising awareness and addressing the beliefs and attitudes that drive our behaviors first are the key to preventing injuries and creating lasting behavioral change. This method has resulted in immediate, short-term and subsequently long-term changes in attitudes and behaviors, in both line and management employees.

It's Not Either-Or

The question of which approach is better is not only impossible to answer but unnecessary to ask. The assumption that safety professionals have to choose between one or the other is a fallacy. They don't have to pick just one approach.

In fact, relying on just one approach probably won't work, no matter which one it is. Typical sites include hundreds of individuals with unique life experiences and personalities. They have varying states of mental and physical health well-being. Issues, both work-related and personal affect people in ways that can cause them to respond well to safety initiatives or not. One approach is bound to work well for some of these individuals but not for others. As noted in a previous segment of this series, many incidents are caused by non-deliberate, or unconscious behaviors or factors such as daydreaming, distraction, inattention and stress, which typical behavior-based methods don't address.

Limiting yourself to one approach is also bound to be counterproductive. The dictionary defines process as "a series of actions, changes or functions that bring about an end or result; ongoing movement; progression." And so for any process to succeed over the long term, we must always evaluate, analyze, and cause the process to evolve for the better. This is a form of continuous improvement. I submit that a single approach isn't enough to produce continuous improvement.

The 'Answer'

So let's go back to our original question: Which approach is better, the cognitive or the behavioral? Our answer: A holistic approach that combines aspects of both. The Topf process is an example of such an approach. We didn't create this process overnight. On the contrary, it evolved over years and on the basis of lessons drawn from experience and the needs of our clients.

The aim of the approach is to change the culture of the organization and the unsafe attitudes and behaviors of each individual, whether a management or line/labor employee. Combining what we consider to be the strengths of cognitive (and other methodologies) and behavior-based approaches, the holistic approach is designed to strengthen specific safety-related thinking and habits and to provide strategies that generalize to normal or routine, as well as to new situations both on and off the job.

Next week, in the conclusion of the series, Mr. Topf describes the holistic approach and how to implement it.

EDITOR'S NOTE

Where's the Fire?

In yesterday's "Heroes of Workplace Safety" story we noted that Frances Perkins was a witness to the notorious Triangle Shirt Factory fire of 1911. This is true.

We noted that SafetyXChange had done a piece about the fire in the May 31 issue of Safety Best Practices. This, too, is true.

We also said you that you can get a copy of the story from the SafetyXChange archives. This, alas, is not true.

We don't currently keep the smaller stories in the archives. So, for anybody who missed it, here is a reprise of the piece. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Glenn Demby
Editor-in-Chief
SafetyXChange

Historic Moments in Workplace Safety

The Triangle Shirt Factory Fire

One of the most horrendous workplace tragedies in history took place in New York City at the Triangle Waist Company shirt factory.

Triangle was the quintessential sweatshop. The workers, mostly young women immigrants who could barely speak English, earned pennies a day. Hundreds of them were crowded together in appalling conditions.

The tragedy happened at the end of the day on March 25, 1911, when a fire broke out on the eighth floor. The building was crammed with flammable cloth and the fire quickly spread to the ninth and tenth floors. The building had no fire protection and the only exit doors on each floor were locked from the outside. The workers were trapped. 114 of them were killed.

The building owners were tried but under the laws of the day, they couldn't be convicted. The so-called Triangle Shirt Fire and its aftermath provoked outrage. It gave a huge boost to the labor movement and led to major reforms, including the enactment of fire and building codes and the first workplace safety laws.

The Triangle Shirt Factory after the notorious fire.

SAFETY FASHION & LIFESTYLE

SWEAT CITY

Now that summer has officially begun, you should be busy protecting your employees against the dangers of heat stress. How hard you have to work at it will depend in part on the location of your workplace. That's because, when it comes to sweating, all cities are not created equal.

The sweat experts at Old Spice have produced their Fourth Annual Top 100 Sweatiest Cities List of the nation's heaviest sweaters during the summer months. Last year, El Paso, Texas had the dubious distinction of being the sweatiest city in America. This year, the winner is . . . drum roll, please:

Phoenix, AZ: Named by Old Spice as America's Sweatiest City.

Phoenix, Arizona.

Here's the rest of the top 10:

2. Las Vegas
3. Tucson
4. Miami
5. Corpus Christi
6. West Palm Beach
7. Houston
8. Tampa
9. Orlando
10. Ft. Myers

If your city didn't make the Top 10 but you want to know where in the Top 100 it ranks (no pun intended), you can get the complete list in Tools.

Story Tools:  Email This Post  Print This Post Top