Unsafe Behavior. Conscious Violation or Human Error?

From Safety-1 to Safety-2: Shifting the Focus in Risk Management

At the base of Heinrich's pyramid lies unsafe behavior. The traditional approach to HSE (Safety-1) focuses on actual incidents and injuries, which account for only about 3.5% of all undesirable events in production. The remaining 93% are routine deviations and micro-violations that often remain out of sight for specialists. The transition to the Safety-2 concept involves managing this exact array of everyday risks. During the webinar, Stanislav Vodyanitsky, HSE Manager at Unilever, explains how the World Class Manufacturing (WCM) methodology helps systematically reduce the number of unsafe acts and conditions.

The Nature of Unsafe Behavior: Error or Sabotage

To effectively eliminate risks, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between unintentional human errors and conscious violations of HSE requirements. Using production statistics as an example, the speaker shows that the vast majority of deviations are routine and situational violations, as well as simple forgetfulness. Errors can arise from past experience (when requirements were lower at a previous workplace) or training deficiencies. Conscious violations, on the other hand, are often provoked by the inconvenience of safe work methods or external factors, such as being distracted by a phone call.

Engineering Solutions vs. Human Factor

The presentation details 15 countermeasures to prevent unsafe behavior, divided into error protection (Error-proof) and protection against conscious violations (Full-proof). The key principle is to make the safe execution of a task the only possible way.

• Error-proof systems: aimed at preventing accidental errors. For example, using spring-loaded knives with automatically retracting blades, or an audio alert when entering a staircase reminding to hold the handrail.
• Full-proof systems: eliminate the possibility of a violation even with the worker's conscious desire to do so. The speaker gives an example of a forklift engine interlock: the machine will not start until the seat belt is fastened correctly (in front of the driver, not behind their back). Another example is the installation of additional protective screens with limit switches that physically prevent putting hands into a running mechanism.

Visualization and 5T Principles

A significant part of behavior management is based on workspace organization. Implementing the 5T principles (fixed paths, fixed places, standard visualization, fixed quantity, and color standardization) minimizes the cognitive load on personnel. When every action and storage location is intuitively clear, the probability of error drops sharply. Visualizing risks and areas of responsibility makes the safety management process transparent for every shift employee.

Evolution of Safety Culture

Engineering barriers cannot cover 100% of production situations, so developing a safety culture remains critically important. The transition from a calculative approach (where risks are simply assessed) to a proactive and generative one requires involving the workers themselves in the process of finding solutions. Practice shows that employees are more willing to follow rules if they participated in developing the protective measures. At the same time, it is important to avoid destructive motivation methods — for example, paying bonuses for zero injuries, which inevitably leads to hiding incidents.

What you will learn from this webinar:

• How to classify unsafe acts and select adequate countermeasures for each type?
• What is the fundamental difference between Error-proof and Full-proof systems using real production examples?
• Why does financial motivation for "zero injuries" destroy the HSE management system?
• How to use 5T principles to reduce the probability of human error?
• How to involve production personnel and contractors in the continuous process of identifying and eliminating risks?