Skip to main content
IOSH Magazine: Safety, Health and Wellbeing in the world of work - return to the homepage IOSH Magaazine logo
  • Visit IOSH Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit @ioshmagazine on Twitter
  • Visit IOSH Magazine on LinkedIn
Gender equality
Practice meets perfect
May/June 2023 issue

Main navigation

  • Home
    • Browse previous issues
    • Member accolades
    • Member tributes
  • Health
    • Mental health and wellbeing
      • Bullying
      • Drugs and alcohol
      • Mental health
      • Stress
      • Wellbeing
    • Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs)
      • Ergonomics
      • Manual handling
      • Vibration
    • Occupational cancer
      • Asbestos
      • Hazardous substances
      • Radiation
  • Safety
    • Incident management
      • Chemicals
      • Electricity
      • Fire
      • First aid
      • Slips and trips
    • Non-health related fatalities
      • Road safety
      • Work at height
    • Risk management
      • Confined spaces
      • Disability
      • Legionella
      • Lifting operations
      • Lone workers
      • Noise
      • Personal protective equipment
      • Violence at work
      • Work equipment
      • Workplace transport
  • Management
    • Human factors
      • Accident reduction
      • Behavioural safety
      • Control of contractors
      • Migrant workers
      • Older workers
      • Reporting
      • Safe systems of work
      • Sickness absence
      • Young workers
    • Leadership and management
      • Employee involvement
      • Management systems
    • Management standards
      • ISO 45001
      • ISO 45003
    • Planning
      • Assurance
      • Compliance
      • Emergency planning
      • Insurance
    • Rehabilitation
      • Personal injury
      • Return to work
    • Strategy
      • Corporate governance
      • Performance/results
      • Regulation/enforcement
      • Reputation
    • Sustainability
      • Human capital and Vision Zero
  • Skills
    • Communication
    • Personal performance
      • Achieving Fellowship
      • Career development
      • Competencies
      • Personal development
      • Professional skills
      • Qualifications
    • Stakeholder management
    • Working with others
      • Leadership
      • Future Leaders
  • Jobs
  • Covid-19
  • Knowledge Bank
    • Back to basics
    • Book club
    • Infographics
    • Podcast
    • Reports
    • Webinars
    • Videos
  • Products & Services
  • Management
    • Human factors
      • Sickness absence
      • Accident reduction
      • Behavioural safety
      • Control of contractors
      • Migrant workers
      • Older workers
      • Reporting
      • Safe systems of work
      • Young workers
    • Leadership and management
      • Employee involvement
      • Leadership
      • Management systems
    • Management standards
      • ISO 45001
      • ISO 45003
    • Planning
      • Assurance
      • Compliance
      • Emergency planning
      • Insurance
    • Strategy
      • Corporate governance
      • Performance/results
      • Regulation/enforcement
      • Reputation
    • Sustainability
      • Human capital and Vision Zero
  • Health
    • COVID-19
    • Mental health and wellbeing
      • Bullying
      • Drugs and alcohol
      • Mental health
      • Stress
      • Wellbeing
    • Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs)
      • Ergonomics
      • Manual handling
      • Vibration
    • Occupational cancer
      • Asbestos
      • Hazardous substances
      • Radiation
  • Safety
    • Incident management
      • Chemicals
      • Electricity
      • Fire
      • First aid
      • Slips and trips
    • Non-health related fatalities
      • Road safety
      • Work at height
    • Risk management
      • Confined spaces
      • Disability
      • Legionella
      • Lifting operations
      • Lone workers
      • Noise
      • Personal protective equipment
      • Violence at work
      • Work equipment
      • Workplace transport
  • Skills
    • Communication
    • Personal performance
      • Career development
      • Competencies
      • Personal development
      • Qualifications
      • Professional skills
      • Achieving Fellowship
    • Stakeholder management
    • Working with others
      • Leadership
      • Future Leaders
  • Transport and logistics
  • Third sector
  • Retail
  • Mining and quarrying
  • Rail
  • Rehabilitation
    • Personal injury
    • Return to work
  • Utilities
  • Manufacturing and engineering
  • Construction
  • Sector: IOSH Branch
    • Sector: Northern Ireland
    • Sector: Midland
    • Sector: Merseyside
    • Sector: Manchester and North West Districts
    • Sector: Ireland East
    • Sector: Ireland
    • Sector: Edinburgh
    • Sector: Desmond-South Munster
    • Sector: Qatar
    • Sector: Oman
    • Singapore
    • Sector: South Coast
    • Sector: South Wales
    • Sector: Thames Valley
    • Sector: Tyne and Wear
    • Sector: UAE
    • Sector: West of Scotland
    • Sector: Yorkshire
  • Healthcare
  • Sector: Fire
  • Sector: Financial/general services
  • Sector: Energy
  • Education
  • Sector: Communications and media
  • Chemicals
  • Sector: Central government
  • Catering and leisure
  • Agriculture and forestry
  • Sector: Local government
  • Sector: IOSH Group
    • Sector: Financial Services
    • Sector: Sports Grounds and Events
    • Rural industries
    • Sector: railway
    • Public Services
    • Sector: Offshore
    • Sector: Hazardous Industries
    • Sector: Food and Drink
    • Sector: Fire Risk Management
    • Education
    • Construction
    • Sector: Aviation and Aerospace
Quick links:
  • Home
  • Categories
  • Features
Leadership and management

Influencing safety behaviours in the 'new world'

Open-access content Dr Jennifer Lunt and Malc Staves — Wednesday 2nd September 2020
From the archive:  Just so you know, this article is more than 2 years old.
Influencing OSH behaviour in a new world

iStock

Psychologist Dr Jennifer Lunt and L’Oréal's global health and safety director, Malc Staves, are urging businesses to consider using behaviour change interventions to mitigate COVID-19 risks. 

As we slowly emerge from lockdown, we are facing a ‘new’ normal, where it looks increasingly likely that we must live and work with COVID-19 risks for many months to come. Throughout the pandemic, we have seen health and safety take a dominant role in national and international discourse and within organisational risk management. Health and safety has been openly acknowledged as integral to keeping a workforce functional. This must be sustained in a complex COVID-19 risk context. 

Implicit in creating the new normal is behaviour change. It's helpful to reflect on what we have learnt so far about behaviour change in OSH generally to determine what is critical to working safely in this new normal.

Change in itself is regarded as one of the best opportunities on which to piggyback further behaviour change. This article represents a summary of this learning. It also invites readers to share their experiences in applying low-cost behaviour change interventions – in particular via this survey. The results will be published on ioshmagazine.com at a later date. 

Human error vs violation

In health and safety, we know that there are two main types of risk-taking behaviours: violations, which are intentional; and human error, which are unintentional. The rise of behavioural insights and nudging over the last decade emphasises that we must consider two types of decision-making systems as mediators of behaviour change. These comprise: 

  • System 1: referring to a more instinctive, emotional and automatic decision-making processes; thereby more closely aligned to human error
  • System 2: referring to a more deliberate, logical but slower decision-making processes, appearing more like violations. 

Contrasting the UK public’s response early on in the pandemic with what has since followed, helps highlight the distinction between the two systems. Prior to lockdown in mid-March, when social distancing was more reliant on individual discretion, more of the public went to the beaches, parks and mountains than should have done.

At this point, we were perhaps prone to some of the hunches and decision-making biases that characterise system 1. This includes ‘discounting’, whereby we tend to underestimate longer-term risk, or ambiguity bias, where we favour making decisions based on what we know (usual ways of enjoying sunshine) over what we don’t know (which was, back then, the experience of having COVID-19). The more people that did it, especially from among our own ‘herd’ (such as hill walkers or sunbathers), the more it was legitimised through ‘herd mentality’. 

System 2 then seemingly got the upper hand. The imposition of lockdown, daily death tally, array of personal stories of tragedy, severity of symptoms experienced by formerly healthy people along with protracted recovery for many made the health advantages of observing social distancing much more salient, obvious and concrete. At that time, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo bluntly captured the choice as ‘isolation’ or ‘death’ as COVID-19 gripped his city. The choice between the immediate gains (life preservation and being a responsible citizen) and cons (disrupted lives, economic disadvantage) kept the decision firmly within our more rational system 2. It was a no brainer. 

As we slowly emerge from lockdown, the balance between systems 1 and 2 is seemingly in continual flux. Now that the economic consequences are becoming tangible and personal, and pandemic advice more nuanced and context dependent, we are once again more prone to the biases, emotions and hunches that reside within our system 1. 

Nonetheless, our response to the pandemic tells us that that health and safety messaging must appeal to both emotional and intellectual reasoning both to motivate and ensure that risk judgements are reliably informed.

Behaviour change

So what else have we learnt within health and safety in recent years about how we can encourage safety behaviour via these two systems? Relevant learning can be drawn from human factors, safety culture, behavioural safety and behavioural insights work. The latter in particular refers to the use of simple low-cost interventions to affect behaviour change within large populations, primarily but not exclusively through nudging a desired behaviour without restricting choice and without necessarily invoking conscious awareness. 

Behavioural insights research has burgeoned over the last 10 years, with successes in a range of areas such public health, finance and business practices. Its reach eventually extended to health and safety, culminating in publication of the EAST Health and Safety report.

Key lessons learnt from applying relevant behaviour change theory to health and safety, and nudge theory in particular, include the following.

1. Nudges aren’t just subconscious

The most widespread behaviour change approaches used in health and safety has mainly concerned behavioural safety and safety culture, intended to modify behaviour via observation and feedback on the one hand, or reshaping the underlying values on the other. Arguably the mechanisms by which these operate make them more applicable to intentional behaviour, such as violations. 

The advent of ‘nudge’ presented the health and safety practitioners potential new options for changing safety behaviour. The emphasis on the design of the social and physical context so as to nudge more desirable behaviour without invoking conscious awareness implied some relevance to hard-to-resolve human error.

From the nudge narrative that has developed since, it appears misguided to regard nudging as a purely sub-conscious process. For example, a nudge classification developed by Lindhout and Reiners (2017) separates nudges according to whether they are either transparent or non-transparent, and, crucially, automatic or rational. Similarly, nudge-type interventions utilised by the behavioural insights team include examples that encourage deliberate contingency planning via ‘implementation intentions’ (for example, pledges such as ‘if I sit at my desk longer than 50 minutes I will take a short walk’).  

2. ‘How’ rather than ‘why’ classifications 

Various methods for classifying nudges have been developed over the years. ‘MINDSPACE’ is an earlier example that appeared to group nudges according either the type of decision-making bias they target (‘norms’ or ‘ego’) or the nudge ‘method’ used (incentive).

Simpler groupings have more recently emerged that focus more on nudge ‘methods’. This includes the Behavioural Insights 'EAST' classification steering selection of methods that are easy, attractive, social and timely. Similarly, and by no means exclusive to nudge, Michie et al’s (2014) behaviour change wheel separates behaviour change interventions according to their ‘function’ (such as coercion, incentivisation, persuasion, education, etc).

Despite this focus on how nudges methods work, there could still be merit in detailing to the health and safety practitioner the nature of the decision-making biases that nudges are designed to target. This could (a) explain why employees don’t follow the rules despite safety awareness raising and (b) educate health and safety decision makers on some of the biases they may be subject to when interpreting the level of engagement within their workforce. For example, ‘loss aversion’ can be used to explain why stop techniques can fail to work. The certain losses of stopping production could easily be perceived as outweighing the uncertain gain of preventing an accident that might or might not happen.

Similarly, explaining to senior managers accountable for health and safety how confirmation bias works (sub-consciously selecting information that verifies an existing point of view) might encourage them to actively seek bad news as a way of staying responsive to risk. 

3. Nudging one-by-one?

Guidance on nudge design advocates identifying a single behaviour to target and then working backwards (for example identify determinants via research and consultation, select change techniques, choice of media, etc). For the health and safety practitioner, this creates clarity over how to design a more precise nudge-type intervention. However, we know that risk taking can be a reflection of wider safety culture, and therefore occur across a range of behaviours. To focus on discrete behaviours or even ‘spill-over’ behaviours’ may overlook shared underlying root causes and be unnecessarily inefficient as a result. 

4. It’s not just effectiveness that matters

Formal guidance on selecting the most appropriate behaviour change intervention recognises that is not just effectiveness that is important, but that affordability, practicality, acceptability (usability, ethic), side-effects (unintended consequences) and equity (will reduce harm to a similar extent for all recipients) should also feature in behavioural intervention design decision (Michie et al 2014). 

5. Sludge or nudge?

Nudging has often been criticised as manipulative, especially where it is ambiguous as to whether it is in the recipient’s best interests. Nudge misuse has more recently labelled as ‘sludge’, referring to behavioural interventions that cause friction in some way, for example, by being onerous, confusing, or against the persons best interest. An example of the latter includes the gambling apps that require football fans to make a wager in order to view a football game on line Arguably, safety has had an easier time in fending off sludge. Nudging someone to be safer can only ever be in their best interest, meaning that nudging safety comfortably fulfils ‘Rawls Publicity Principle’ of being to the general public’s advantage.  

Other more specific lessons learnt from applying nudge-type interventions to health and safety are captured in the table below and organised according to the BIT’s EAST framework. Examples of their relevance to COVID-19 risk control are provided in italics.

Easy

We can make safety easier by:

  • Integrating new safety solutions into existing safety solutions (such as embedding new COVID-19 safety checks into existing checklists or safety culture audits into safety risk audits)
  • Integrating safety management into mainstream management (such as embedding individual safety objectives into performance appraisals including COVID-19 risk vigilance)
  • Creating flexibility within our workforce skill base that permits quicker reallocation of resources (for example to cover colleagues that are off sick or off because of track and trace) 
  • Using defaults that make the safe way the only way (such as deadman’s switches, safety interlocks, safe guarding or removing seating to preserve social distancing) but be mindful that this may hamper education and ability to make informed choices. 
  • If we can’t make safety the only way, make it the easiest way (for example make PPE easily accessible, comfortable, usable and reliable and not just available).  
  • Simplifying procedures, forms and paper work to minimised human error in their use, completion or application (including facilitating reliable communication at shift-handovers including on COVID-19 risk controls). 
  • Control safety distractions wherever possible (for example limit phone use and social banter while workers walk from place to place). 

We should not:

  • Overlook the why and regard nudges as a substitute to a robust health and safety management system (we should look after the PPE supply chain as well as immediate availability). Exceptions to this may in low income countries where, as a more affordable solution, nudges may be ‘better than nothing’. 
  • Expect people to behave safely without creating a work context (physical and social) that enables them to be safe (for example fail to design for social distancing). 
  • Avoid negative learning transfer (such as assuming flu risk control measures are sufficient for COVID-19) 

Attractive

We should:

  • Communicate why controls are necessary and how they should work to educate a workforce and keep them ‘onside’ (such as why mask wearing is necessary not just that it should be work)
  • Use a mix of positive (that states the gains) and negative framing (that highlights the risk) to maintaining awareness of risk, incentivise desired behaviour and avoiding denial through excessive fear messaging (such as 'be a hero, wear a mask')
  • Consider appealing to professional identity to encourage uptake of safety messages (such as I wear PPE because I’m a responsible employee/good citizen)
  • ‘Brand’ safety signage so that it has a common easy-to-spot look and feel (colourful, images and text) (such as all COVID-19 messages/communication have a similar branded look and feel) 
  • Make message unambiguous and be about specific behaviours (stay at home versus stay alert)
  • Encourage employers and employees what it might feel like to get safety wrong (for example anticipated regret/shame, hardship, reputational damage (realisation of having infected vulnerable others with COVID-19 transmission routes within and outside the organisation)
  • Continue to prompt, cue and reinforce safe behaviour after it is initiated to ensure that safe behaviour is sustained (fresh COVID-19 posters/messages)
  • Use trustworthy, competent credible sources to communicate safety messages (such as CEO endorsements of COVID-19 messaging)
  • Personalise safety messages where we can to enhance personal identification with messages (someone like me cares about safety; health professionals – 'this is what we train for')
  • Reinforce the behaviour that we want repeated through feedback (supermarket staff praising shoppers for wearing masks)

We should avoid: 

  • Using shock tactics without telling people how to avoid risks (safety kills…). 
  • Ambiguous messages that are open to misinterpretation (it’s just common sense). 

Social

We should: 

  • Role model the safety behaviours we expect of others at all levels (for example wear COVID-19 PPE in public and not just at work)
  • Design and manage reporting, investigation and communication systems so that they are not perceived as unfairly blaming individuals (careful and fair manage COVID-19 reporting to ensure trust)
  • Make health and safety a shared responsibility (encourage ‘worker social responsibility’ and corporate social responsibility)
  • Provide instruction on how to conduct safety conversations constructively (advise on COVID-19 safety challenges or ‘please keep your distance’ conversations)
  • Recognise that social networks at work are useful for creating a uniform safety culture and psychological resilience (via COVID-19 safety guardians)
  • Involve the workforce in decision-making to improve accuracy and ownership (e.g. teams design their own COVID-19 messages for their own workspace)
  • Do the right and safe thing for workers so that they in turn right and safe thing for the organisation (and honour psychological safety contracts) (COVID-19 psychological contract)
  • Show that most people perform safe behaviour, that it is a social norm (publicity photos with all workers wearing face masks)

We should not: 

Refer to what the majority of people do if that is less safe, occurs less frequently safe than in our target audience. 

Timely

We should: 

  • Plan in detail (who, what, when, where and why) new behaviour should be carried out, and contingency plans for if events don’t unfold as expected and have in place contingency plans (for example, workers plan ahead about how they move around a building/go from place to place to avoid social distancing blind spots)
  • Anticipate upcoming hazards as well as deal with those facing us to maintain situation awareness (during transits) (avoid using mobile phone while walking around a building to keep COVID-19 vigilant)
  • Refresh messaging to avoid message fatigue/habituation
  • Use change as an opportunity upon which to piggy back safety messages (such as the COVID-19 epidemic as an opportunity to encourage more working at home to reduce the environmental impact). 
  • Allow time to allow people to be safe (such as so that stress/time pressures do not become a distractor). 
  • Provide sufficient notice of safety changes to allow resource allocation and preparation (especially on COVID-19 contingency planning)
  • Utilise geolocation technology so that prompts are made at the right time and location (such as on COVID-19 hot spots during a journey for work)
  • Provide timely feedback on a job done safely as well as unsafely to either to reinforce safe behaviour (such as feedback on worker social responsibility behaviour)

We should not:

  • Overload (such as in workload) or overwhelm (such as excessive communication) to the extent that it distracts from safety. 

 

Striking lessons

The rise of sludge in particular reinforces the importance of testing nudge-type interventions prior to mass roll out, for potential unanticipated consequences. For example, the widely cited automatic pension enrolment schemes once touted for their success in enabling employees to plan for their future has received some criticism for denying employees opportunity to seek alternatives (Bask 2019).

For such reasons, we urge companies to test nudge ideas’ acceptability and potential. However, when conducting research for this article, what became blatantly apparent was the paucity of nudge reporting and testing with health and safety relative to other areas, especially within peer reviewed publications and from within the UK. If we are truly to understand the potential of nudge to countering human error in particular, we as a health and safety community need to be more transparent in the detail by we report nudge-type interventions and measures we take to test them. This need not necessarily be full blown randomised control trials, running some focus groups to sense-check the acceptability of ideas would be a good start.

With this in mind, we are running a survey to facilitate more shared learning on how nudges have been used in health and safety, and similarly collect views on how nudge-type interventions can help mitigate COVID-19 risks going forward. In particular we are interested in ‘upwards’ nudge-type interventions that have been used to convince senior leadership and board executives about the importance of health and safety. If you would like to participate in this survey please access the link here. We will report the findings in a subsequent article on ioshmagazine.com. 

Finally, one striking lesson learnt from this pandemic is the need to re-evaluate the societal significance of now essential jobs that were formerly regarded as low skilled and poorly rewarded. The reporting of human capital metrics (such as leading indicators such as safety culture survey ratings) has been championed in recent years as a critical mechanism for reinforcing the health and safety business case and engendering awareness about why workforce sustainability is critical to an organisation’s overall sustainability. As an example of a nudge-type intervention, incentivising more widespread corporate human capital reporting could help drive a more compassion-based view of the jobs and workers that matter that is attractive to investors, c-suite executives and employees alike.

We’re collecting views on how nudging behaviours have been used to convince senior leadership about the importance of OSH. Take part here. 

You may also be interested in...

web_p36-38_IMG_20170315_113605.png

 Case study: Kazakhstan’s national railway

Wednesday 9th September 2020
The safety culture at Kazakhstan’s national railway hadn’t moved on from its time under Soviet control. But in the last year, new HSE director Askhat Sariyev has started to change processes, practices and – most importantly – mindsets.
Open-access content
COVID-19 risk assessments: using the evidence

 COVID-19 risk assessments: using the evidence

Wednesday 2nd September 2020
Andrew McNeil CMIOSH, Simon Rider PgDip(Law) and Dr Dawn Pope CMIOSH offer evidence of published cases of local outbreaks relating to facilities and businesses and consider how COVID-19 risk assessments can be informed.
Open-access content
Oxford Biomedica is involved in the development of a COVID vaccine – we found out more

 Rigorous routines in biotech

Friday 28th August 2020
Oxford Biomedica is involved in the development of a COVID vaccine – we found out more.
Open-access content
web_p72-73_Liv-Interview-Photo-2.png

 Future leader: Liv Beckinsale

Wednesday 9th September 2020
After a 21-month safety, health and environment (SHE) apprenticeship with Kärcher, Liv Beckinsale joined the cleaning technology firm as a SHE coordinator in May. Last year, as an 18-year-old, she attended the inaugural IOSH Future Leaders Conference.
Open-access content
web_p12-15_News-Update-NHS-staff-applauding--Getty--1220619354.png

 The critical role of healthcare workers

Wednesday 9th September 2020
The critical role played by health workers in protecting patients, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic – and action to better support this essential workforce – is brought to the fore on World Patient Safety Day.
Open-access content
web_p40-42_cleaning-window_GettyImages-972866298_v2.png

 Why fatal falls are avoidable

Wednesday 9th September 2020
There are 36 fatalities a year in UK workplace falls from height, but the government is reluctant to accept the recommendations of a report that could reduce the number.
Open-access content
Topics
Features
Leadership and management
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

Latest Jobs

Health and Safety Improvement Manager

Leeds
£35000 - £50000 per annum
Reference
5452992

SHEQ Systems Advisor

Up to £40000.00 per annum + Car Allowance
Reference
5452988

Senior Health and Safety Manager

Reading
Up to £65000.00 per annum + Great Car Allowance & Benefits
Reference
5452983
See all jobs »

Sign up for regular e-alerts

Receive the latest news and features, free to your inbox

Sign up

Subscribe to IOSH magazine

Receive the print edition straight to your door

Subscribe
IOSH Covers
​
FOLLOW US
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
CONTACT US
Contact us
Tel +44 (0)20 7880 6200
​

IOSH

About IOSH
Become a member
IOSH Events
MyIOSH

Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Subscribe to IOSH magazine
Write for IOSH magazine

IOSH Magazine

Health
Safety
Management
Skills
IOSH Jobs

© 2023 IOSH • IOSH is not responsible for the content of external sites

ioshmagazine.com and IOSH Magazine are published by Redactive Media Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ