Although it seems to make perfect, intuitive sense that people would get hurt when they are doing the most dangerous things, that isn’t what actually happens to more than 95 percent of us. So, what does this mean in terms of the old risk assessment matrix?

Yes, this is a story about errors - plural - made by one person, me. I’m not going to beat myself up here. James Reason, professor emeritus at the University of Manchester (UK), and one of the seminal authorities on human error, reminds us that most errors are caused by good, competent people who are trying to do the right thing.

The focus on human performance has quickly become no more than human error of yesteryear. I’m amazed at how many “neuroscience solutions” there suddenly are that can fix human (safety) performance.

It’s long overdue, according to Dr. Sidney Dekker, who in 2014 wrote an essay on “The ‘Failed State’ of Safety.” Yes, says Corrie Pitzer, who is giving a talk, “Safety at a Dead End” at the American Society of Safety Professionals’ annual conference this June.

Allergan plc, headquartered in Dublin, Ireland, is a global pharmaceutical company. ISHN asked David Eherts, PhD, CIH, Vice President Global EHS, based in Madison, NJ, to explain how the company is implementing the “New View” of safety.

The 2018 edition of NFPA 70E®, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace®, addresses issues that should be put into practice at any workplace. New voluntary requirements and guidance cover risk assessment, the hierarchy of controls, human error, job safety planning, management systems, work performance and workplace culture.

In industries where there has been success in error reduction, a common element is that there is a distinct focus on the quality of safety activities and processes, with leadership actively fighting against safety processes becoming 'tick the box' activities.