Dusty Roach
Throughout the years I’ve run across numerous catchy little phrases in the safety world. Maybe you’ve heard some of them: Safety, You Can Live with It! Safety First! Or… Safety, First to Go! (LOL). Safety is No Accident. Think Safety, It Couldn’t Hurt.
Seldom do they change any behaviors.
Some companies run contests to generate new slogans, interest, and buy-in. Granted, some are cheesy, most don’t motivate, and some are actually hilarious! However, there is not much “buy in,” where most of the popular ones are concerned. One slogan that I always found interesting was, Inspect What You Expect!
The weakness of this little safety/operational slogan is that it does not define either the role or expectations of the inspector nor does it define the parameters of the expectations. As is the case with other good intentions in the working world, inspections do not necessarily reflect the intent of expectations, and that can be true regardless of what’s been discussed in training, education, or practical application. Inspection is great if adequate and proper training actually reflects values, intent, policies, and procedures. I go back to the old saying, Plan, Organize, Delegate, Communicate, Control, and Follow up! Then after you train them adequately on what you expect, they can determine what they can expect if they do or do not meet the standards you have set forth.
It sounds simple but it is far from a simple process…
So what is the intent of the inspections?
Is it solely compliance? Is the intention safety? Is it speed? Is it efficiency? Is it the welfare of the individual or the company? Is it profitability? Is the effort a nuisance? Or is it just an inspection to alleviate one’s conscience to satisfy the minimum requirements and documentation? Or is it all of the above?
What is truly the motivation for inspections?
I’ve found that inspections are mainly driven by compliance, for quality control. Yet the problem with inspections is that there are time constraints and subsequently cost considerations with the inspectors, who themselves do or do not rigidly adhere to the desired end result.
Of course there are exceptions, but the great inspections that have follow-up are in the minority of the real world. Most inspectors are sharp as a tack but when it comes to motivation to affect the outcome, there is very little follow up. Not everyone is driven by costs, motivation, and profitability. Most workers in our oil and gas industry are driven by the paycheck. We can try to mandate discipline and pride, but we cannot mandate morals. Not everyone shares our enthusiasm for a job well done. We can, however, reward and recognize pride with meaningful inducements.
Anyone can read down an inspection list, but how much training is in that process? Do they feel comfortable telling everything or do they gloss over the details? Do the workers tell the truth to the powers that be, or does the inspector want to just “get by” to go do the next job and check off the list?
Who is checking the “checker”? What is the intended motivation? How well does the “checker” check the inspection? Does he motivate others to excel? Does the checker perceive himself/herself as someone holding power and authority? What experience and/or motivation does the checker really have?
I’ve found that the people in the field do take a great deal of pride in what they do for a living.
BUT the message from the top is not necessarily what is reaching the actual worker in the field whose work is being scrutinized.
Inspections are generally treated as another necessary task to ensure quality of the work being done. It is usually impersonal and stays that way until someone acts upon an opportunity to improve. Otherwise, though, inspections suffer from a impersonal aspect, a feeling that they are tasks where no one really has a dog in the hunt.
Whenever I do inspections, I attempt to show that I care. I seek to understand the meaning and the value of the inspection and to genuinely care. I try daily to hone my skills to not just check off the lists, but show value in what we do and how to make it better…
That’s why I inspect what I expect. Pencil whipping an inspection usually costs more in the long run than it saves, in safety and quality control.
Safety is like baseball. It’s not how many hits you have; it’s how many times you reach home safely. —Dusty
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dusty Roach is a safety professional based in Midland. He is also a public speaker on subjects of leadership and safety, and he maintains a personal website at dustyroach.com.