The first two parts of this series provided a thumbnail sketch of two schools of thought in behavioral safety: cognitivism and behaviorism. Let's now change the perspective of the discussion from theory to practice. 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.

Safety Training Is 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 and 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' to the Safety Training Question

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.

Conclusion

Next week, in the conclusion of the series, I'll describe the holistic approach and how to implement it.

ATTITUDE QUIZ

Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, Author of The Power of Positive Thinking

Who Said It?

By Catherine Jones

Match the following quotes on attitudes with the person who uttered them.

1. Attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference.

2. Our attitudes control our lives. Attitudes are a secret power working twenty-four hours a day, for good or bad. It is of paramount importance that we know how to harness and control this great force.

3. Work is either fun or drudgery. It depends on your attitude. I like fun.

4. We cannot change our past. We cannot change the fact that people act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude.

5. Change your thoughts and you change your world.

Choices:
Colleen C. Barrett, President and COO, Southwest Airlines Company
Charles Swindoll, Pastor, Author and Educator
Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Norman Vincent Peale, Author/Theologian
Tom Blandi, French literary theorist and author

Answers:
1. Winston Churchill
2. Tom Blandi
3. Colleen C. Barrett
4. Charles Swindoll
5. Norman Vincent Peale

Story Tools:  Email This Post  Print This Post Top