A product might be on the market for years when, suddenly, public outcry causes it to be taken off the shelves. When consumer reaction causes a crisis, companies don’t have time to focus on the underlying factors that created it. Once the storm blows over, there’s rarely an opportunity for product stewards to step back and reflect.
When new safety programs or processes are rolled out unsuccessfully, there has almost always been a failure to determine either the factors necessary for success, the factors that can contribute to failure, or some combination of both.
People are hard-wired to take shortcuts due to the balance between energy intake (i.e. food) and energy output (i.e. effort spent on an activity) which means we automatically take the “path of least resistance.”
About 15 years ago, I read an important engagement story regarding a line worker with a major automotive manufacturer in the United States. The story evolved from an organizational push to gain more involvement from their workers at a time when it was critical.
People at risk, be it from natural disasters, terrorist attacks or other incidents in daily life, need to be able to take appropriate safety actions based on a proper understanding of the level and nature of the emergency.
With one of the fast-growing economies among developed nations – and one largely driven by industry and construction – South Korea faces occupational safety and health challenges similar to those in other countries.
Creating a culture of safety isn’t just meant for full-time employees of an organization. It requires the involvement all workers whether full-time, temporary or contract and the diligence of the companies or organizations where their work occurs.