Every safety leader has faced the question, “What’s the one thing that would make our safety performance improve?”
Unlike in production or quality, where persistent issues prompt process reviews and systemic fixes, safety is often viewed through a single-intervention lens, sometimes resulting in a stand-down or a new training program in response to an incident. But safety, like any business function, thrives when treated as a process.
Effective safety isn’t about one strategic lever, nor is it about picking the “right” theory or model. It’s about understanding the rich toolkit of models (see “Safety theory and model quick guide”) available to safety professionals and adapting those approaches to fit the evolving reality of a workplace. (Note that your personal preference of approach may not be best for your organization. In future columns, we’ll explore how to bridge that gap in safety maturity.)
Not much is new, just new applications
Much of what’s considered innovative in today’s safety philosophies – whether it’s Human and Organizational Performance, high-reliability organization thinking, resilience engineering, or even Safety II – has roots in decades-old research and guidance.
Contemporary experts have helped distill these ideas into digestible “principles,” but the underlying concepts remain rooted in well-established science and practical lessons from high-risk industries. What’s changed is the way organizations communicate and share data, often aided by new technology, including artificial intelligence.
With today’s digital tools, global teams, and dispersed or lone workforces, safety can be embedded, measured and communicated in ways never before possible. Adapting classic ideas for modern organizations isn’t just possible, it’s essential.
No theory or model is ‘the answer’
It’s tempting to frame new ideas as a replacement for “outdated” approaches, or debate which theory or model is best. But, just as no one would expect a single process change to fix all quality or production problems, there isn’t one safety approach that fits every context.
For example, Safety I is characterized by proactive compliance, structured procedures, observation and linear root cause analysis, and it remains foundational for most safety management systems. At its best, Safety I is about ensuring strong systems and policies, led by management accountability and robust process discipline. Blaming individuals is a failure of application, not a flaw in the model itself.
At the same time, ideas from Safety II, HOP, human factors or Total Worker Health help broaden the toolkit by inviting proactive learning, a focus on resilience, and addressing the complexities of humans and organizations.
High-reliability models have long been valued in high-risk sectors, and their adoption into lower-consequence workplaces continues to present challenges and opportunities for growth.
Modern safety is about blending and alignment
The real art is integrating these theories and models with your organization’s management system approach. Same as a production manager tracks process indicators and looks for systemic fixes, safety leaders must map theory to management practices: What procedures guide decision-making? How are leading indicators tracked? Where can human error be detected and tolerated? What well-being pressures influence behavior?
Rather than divide the field into “old” and “new,” recognize that every theory or model has strengths and weaknesses. The challenge for safety pros is to identify which elements of each approach fit current organizational needs and hazards to further align them within a management system that allows for continuous process improvement. The underlying principles don’t change; it’s up to the safety pro to build on, adapt and otherwise customize the available theories and models for their workplace.
SIF prevention: Focusing on what matters most
Serious incident and fatality prevention transcends specific models with an aim to focus limited resources where they’ll make the greatest impact. Whether applying Safety I controls, HOP learning teams or expanding into Total Worker Health, the goal is to prioritize and systematically address hazards with the greatest potential for life-altering consequences. This holistic approach helps ensure safety programs deliver tangible, meaningful results.
Safety as a process, not an event
Just as organizations wouldn’t expect a single fix to resolve every production issue, safety maturity is about continuous, system-driven improvements. Safety leaders who educate their teams to think systemically, focus resources on preventing SIFs and take a proactive approach will best position their programs for lasting success.
There’s no single “right” model in safety. The best approach is the one that fits the culture, risks and management system of the organization while staying open to proven ideas that deliver safer outcomes.
Now that you understand foundational safety theories and models, you may have more questions. Take this opportunity to talk with operations managers and executives about how they approach process management. This insight will help you understand how to blend safety models to meet your organization’s unique challenges.
In a future column, we’ll explore how to assess your organization’s safety maturity and determine which approaches can deliver the best results for your people and mission.
Abby Ferri is senior leader for NSC Networks at the National Safety Council. In this position, she works with a team that provides unique forums for member company interaction, facilitates benchmarking, aligns special projects across the organization, and delivers safety consulting and thought leadership. She is a leader in global risk management and worker safety with over 20 years of experience.
