Skip to content
Sign in
Artwork for Safe As Podcast
ScienceSocial Sciences

Safe As Podcast

Ben Hutchinson

A podcast dedicated to the thrifty analysis of safety science, risk, systems, and performance research.

Jump onto SafetyInsights.Org for more research.

Intro/Output "Dark Synth Wave" by ElephantGreen (PixaBay.com)

Play
Open in
  • 35 episodes
  • a few times a week
  • Avg 14 min
  • English

Episodes 35

NewestOldestLongest
All20Unplayed20In progress0Played0
Counted on this page — what you have heard stays on this device, so it is not something the list can be paged by.
  • S1 · E108
    Yesterday · 14 min

    108: Professor Robin Dillon-Merrill Part 2: Resilient Vs Vulnerable Near misses

    Can AI help us identify critical safety blind-spots before disaster?Part 2 interview with Professor Robin Dillon-Merrill (Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business), who unpacks her 20+ years of research on decision-making under risk, outcome bias, and how organizations misinterpret near misses.We discuss:a) why near-miss biases shape human decision-making & how we can build robust systems to counter them catch them b) why technical experts are uniquely positioned to simulate counterfactuals ('what could have happened, but didn't')c) how well-intended safety messaging becomes background noise without institutional actiond) how cutting-edge AI & machine learning can triage gigantic incident datasets before catastrophe.Plus, Robin discusses real-world safety challenges with autonomous vehicles, such as Waymo vehicles illegally passing school buses in Texas.Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E107
    Wednesday · 4 min

    E107: Skip-Order-Action Framework: Measuring Work-As-Done in the Field (HOP / Safety-II)

    Today we unpack a study tracking 1,422 procedural steps across 40 petrochemical operations. Using their Skip-Order-Action (SOA) Framework, they explored how frontline personnel navigate written instructions in practice: revealing that roughly 1/3 of steps depart from prescribed methods even when tasks are completed successfully. We explore how: a. the SOA framework functions b. how workers using paper instructions followed fewer steps as the task progressed (e.g. dropping from ~75% adherence to 55%)c. what these findings mean for safety professionals advancing a Safety-II / HOP approachReference: Ashraf, A. M., Peres, S. C., & Sasangohar, F. (2025). Beyond Compliance: Investigating Work-as-Done in Procedural Work with the Systematic Skip-Order-Action (SOA) Framework. Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E106
    October 11 · 4 min

    E106: Boeing 737 MAX Disaster: When High-Authority Systems Go "Strong, Silent, and Wrong"

    What happens when a high-authority automated system operate with an incorrect model of reality?This question is explored via Dekker & Woods’ (2024) article on automated systems that are Strong, Silent, and Wrong.We explore the breakdown of human-automation coordination, mode confusion, and automation surprises, using the Boeing 737 MAX MCAS accidents as a central example. Learn how complex system design must prioritize observability, redirectability, and graceful failure.Ref: Dekker, S. W., & Woods, D. D. (2024). Wrong, strong, and silent: What happens when automated systems with high autonomy and high authority misbehave? Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 18(4), 339–347.Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E105
    October 7 · 4 min

    E105: Does Fatigue Cause Attentional Blindness? (Quickisode)

    Can fatigue cause visual blindness in plant operators and drivers?In this video, I review a 2019 study from Li et al. (Automation in Construction) who used wearable eye-tracking tech to measure how prolonged excavator operation / time-on-task fatigue impacts hazard detection and visual attention.Namely, whether the operators notice workers walking behind the excavator over a shift.Key findings:a. Hazard miss rates increased over 40% after 60 mins. Overall detection rates dropped to 70% at 36 minutes and down to 60% by the 60-minute mark.b. Operators took significantly longer to recognize peripheral hazards as fatigue increased.c. Visual attention on the excavator side mirrors and rearview mirrors decreased over the task. Operators stopped scanning peripheral blind spots and focused almost exclusively on the central display directly in front of them. Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E104
    October 4 · 17 min

    E104: Professor Robin Dillon-Merrill Part 1: Near Misses & Confusing Luck with Resilience

    Do we routinely mistake good luck with systemic resilience – until something blows up? Today I speak with Professor Robin Dillon-Merrill (Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business), who breaks down her 20+ years of research on decision-making under risk, outcome bias, and how organizations misinterpret near misses. We discuss: • The differences between resilient vs vulnerable near misses: How the perceived ‘margin of safety’ desensitizes organizations to risk when luck is the primary reason failure was averted. • Managing outcome bias: Why leaders who experience lucky successes are possibly judged as more competent and promotable than those who face bad luck, even when their underlying decision quality is identical. • Counterfactual thinking: How processes used by NASA facilitate teams to evaluate alternative outcomes and decouple decision quality from outcomes. • Gathering info: Why decision makers consistently stop searching for critical warning signs long before they have sufficient data. • Why ‘speaking up’ campaigns fail: Safety reporting programs may be ineffective for recognising an issue since the issue isn’t recognised as danger in the first place. Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E103
    September 30 · 5 min

    E103: Does HOP Actually Work? Real Data From a 5-Year Study (Quickisode)

    Does a Human & Organizational Performance (HOP) initiative improve learning and the quality of actions? And what happens when the initiative stops?This quickisode unpacks Christopher Mastrangelo’s 2026 Master’s thesis examining a multi-year HOP implementation at a large biopharmaceutical company. His project tracked operational data from 2020 through July 2025 across key metrics: a. deviation initiation ratesb. root cause classification practicesc. CAPA types, andd. cultural persistence after formal support was removed. The HOP initiative seemingly resulted in:a. A drop in quality deviationsb. A shift away from findings of 'human error' towards organisational improvementsc. Fixing systems rather than retraining peopleAnd what happens when the HOP initiative and key stakeholders are dissolved? After the dedicated HOP team was dissolved in mid-2024, formal training scores dropped, and 'human factors' classifications (e.g. focusing on people rather than the system) crept back in. But, frontline work execution and proactive learning mindsets persisted. Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E102
    September 27 · 18 min

    E102: Writing Better Safety Procedures Part 2: Rules vs Reality, WAI/WAD, Safety-II & Workarounds

    In a 5-year petrochemical study examining over 1,400 work steps, 1/3 were performed differently from what was written in the procedure, but every task was completed successfully.Is this non-compliance or a display of worker aptitude and resilient skill? In Part 2 of our series on procedures, we look beyond the "100% compliance" rhetoric and unpack the gap between work-as-imagined (WAI) and work-as-done (WAD). We explore why workers adapt rules, how to categorise workarounds, and how to redesign safety procedures as resources for action rather than as tools for worker control. We cover: a. why procedures assume work is linear, predictable and controllable - and why real-world conditions constantly force adaptation b. The RES framework which explores three drivers of procedural adaptation: Routine, Efficiency, and Safety c. The difference between viewing procedures as top-down mandates (Model 1) vs localised, situated tools (Model 2) d. The limits of compliance checks, and how 'pencil whipping' procedures fails to assure adequate rule following, and why procedure quality and safety climate may matter more e. How airline pilots handle complex emergencies by drawing on fragments from checklists and SOPs rather than following linear scripts f. The challenges of over-specification vs under-specification, and why cramming in more details forces workers into a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' trap g. Using Scenario-Based Training (SBT) & Gary Klein’s ShadowBox approaches, and HPOG’s Walk-Through Talk-Through to build expertise & redesign work systems Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E101
    September 23 · 6 min

    E101: From Blame to Restorative Justice: A Just Culture Tool (HOP / Safety-II / New View)

    Do traditional approaches unintentionally blame front-line workers instead of fixing broken organisational systems?This Quickisode unpacks how an international energy company redesigned its Just Culture (JC) framework to shift focus from individual culpability to systemic weaknesses.This company found that traditional approaches relied on judgement terminology, like violation or negligence, and frequently misapplied as disciplinary tools.Their redesigned JC tried to address these limitations, including:a. decoupling the analysis from disciplineb. separating the evaluation of system conditions from HR disciplinary actionsc. neutral language by removing terms like violationd. evaluating supervisory influence and management decisions alongside worker actionsBased on this case study, they found that 90% of non-conformances stemmed from underlying system weaknesses, like from unclear procedures, resource constraints, or task complexity.The revised tool led to 55% of corrective actions being tied to system improvements, whereas disciplinary action occurred in only 5% of cases.Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E99
    September 16 · 4 min

    E99: 25 Questions for Better Incident Investigations | Safety-II / HOP

    Do your investigations often conclude when you've identified 'human error', or a pesky person not following rules?Do you want to improve the quality and depth of your learning opportunities?One way is via local rationality: understanding why decisions & actions made sense to people at the time. It's a core feature in human factors / safety-II / and Human and Organizational Performance (HOP).This episode unpacks Louise Roe's Local Rationality Question Tool in her article presented at the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (CIEHF) 2025 conference.The tool covers things like: - workload, time pressure & environmental cues; goals, assumptions & information available- training, policies & useable job aids- team dynamics & information flow- Expectations & imagined outcomes/'what ifs'Ref: Roe, L. (2025). Local rationality question tool: understanding why it made sense at the time. In Golightly, D., Balfe, N., & Charles, R. (Eds.), Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors 2025: Proceedings of the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors Annual Conference (pp. 360-362). CIEHF. Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E98
    September 13 · 14 min

    E98: Writing better procedures part 1: Action verbs, human factors & more

    Why are so many procedures technically accurate, but barely workable in practice?In Part 1 of this two part series on procedural systems, we unpack the technical side of writing better, more useable procedures: exploring how to reduce safety clutter, choosing the right type of rule, and structure instructions so they support work.We unpack:• Types of rules: performance goal vs. process vs. action rules & how they limit or enable discretion• Formatting: Action-verb steps, concrete language & single-action steps• Critical steps: Highlighting actions where mistakes cause immediate or unrecoverable harm• Warnings & alerts: What guidelines and research suggests about effective warning placementAnd more.In Part 2, we go beyond technical writing and structure to unpack procedures from a Resilience Engineering and Safety-II perspective – procedures as resources for action.Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E96
    September 6 · 24 min

    E96: Dr Linda Bellamy Part 1: Fatal vs Minor hazards, SIFs & Barrier Failures

    Is there a relationship between fatal and minor hazard exposures? Recent SIF research & movements suggest 'NO' - what kills people aren't the same as what hurts them. But is that scientifically accurate? Part 1 discussion with Dr Linda Bellamy, who undertook perhaps the largest study of this kind exploring the connection - and, there ** is ** a connection. We discuss barrier/control systems & how they fail and succeed, weak signals, indicators and more. Resources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E95
    August 30 · 28 min

    E95: Critical Controls & Barriers - Part 4: What do barrier models leave out? A Safety-II critique

    A bowtie or critical control register may be useful tools, but they aren't the work.In Part 4 of this series, I unpack what control / barrier models can leave out: e.g. changing conditions, competing goals, control dependencies, unintended consequences and the adaptations people make to keep work functioning.I also explore how controls can change the systems they are introduced into, why more barriers don't always mean greater risk control, and why successful work may conceal degraded controls and poor design.We should specify, support and verify barriers but also ask: "What do the people using the control know that the bowtie doesn’t show?"Part 1: https://youtu.be/qQfORHGC4BsPart 2: https://youtu.be/7sPqw5NAyiEPart 3: https://youtu.be/Ly1mEn_KCLQResources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSupport the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E94
    August 23 · 14 min

    E94: Dr Marcin Nazaruk Part 2: HOP, New View, Learning from Daily Work

    Today I interview Dr Marcin Nazaruk, who shares his practical experience and research on learning from normal work / daily work, HOP / New View / Safety-II, to improve learning and risk management.The discussion also explores themes around risk controls, work constraints, risk assessments, and error traps.Support the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E93
    August 16 · 29 min

    E93: Critical Controls & Barriers & Safeguard | Part 3: Human Factors & Human Performance

    How do we set realistic and effective human performance expectations in our barrier approaches?In part 1 we looked at definitions of controls and barriers, whereas in part 2 we explored a deeper dive into their applications and escalation factors.This episode unpacks a few key sources to explore critical human factors and human performance considerations for barrier / control systems.Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSubscribe to the series for Part 4.Support the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • August 9 · 16 min

    E92: Dr Marcin Nazaruk Part 1: HOP, New View, Learning from Daily Work

    Today I interview Dr Marcin Nazaruk, who shares his practical experience and research on learning from normal work / daily work, HOP / New View / Safety-II, to improve learning and risk management.The discussion also explores themes around risk controls, work constraints, risk assessments, and error traps.Support the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E91
    August 2 · 30 min

    E91: Critical Controls & Barriers & Safeguards | Part 2: From paper to practice (e.g. bow-ties & more)

    How do we translate a paper barrier system into one that's functional and verified as effective?Whereas part 1 looked at key definitions of control, barrier, safeguard, support, and verification activity - this episode dives deeper into the use of such frameworks.In particular, we unpack escalation / degradation / erosion factors, and the necessary support mechanisms to ensure controls work as intended, when intended.Key sources analysed in this episode:International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) – Critical Control Management FrameworkThe Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (CIEHF) – Human Factors in Barrier ManagementConstruction Safety Research Alliance (CSRA) & Professor Matthew HallowellPetroleum Safety Authority (PSA) NorwayResources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSubscribe to the series for Parts 3, and 4.Support the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E89
    July 26 · 11 min

    E90: Dr Guido Carim Jr Part 2

    Part 2 of our interview with Dr. Guido Carim Junior, Associate Professor of Aviation, pilot, researcher, and safety scientist. We pick up the conversation with digital checklists, examining the potential role of AI and how "smart" features risk narrowing human decision-making rather than supporting it.Guido shares critical thoughts on the line between genuine organizational resilience and workarounds that mask underlying brittleness. We discuss the "tragedy of adaptability" and potential blind spots within Safety-II and HOP when organizations over-rely on human adaptation instead of fixing flawed systems.We also cover how to surface informal practices for learning without turning them into rigid, bureaucratic rules, and why safety audits need to look past green-checking compliance documents to tune into weak signals and daily operational reality.Please Like, Subscribe and Share. Also check out my blog at https://SafetyInsights.OrgSupport the channel here: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

  • S1 · E89
    July 19 · 26 min

    E89: Critical Controls, Barriers & Safeguards | Part 1: Definitions & Inconsistencies

    Is that a control, barrier, safeguard, support, or verification activity? Is it an object, a human act, a system or just a procedure? Does it actually address the hazardous energy, or does it sound good on paper?If we label every single checklist and administrative task a "critical control," do we risk diluting the operational focus required to prevent high-consequence events? If everything is critical, nothing is.Part 1 of this 4-part series unpacks how these terms are used (and misused) across the industry, evaluating the baseline definitions that dictate how we manage risk.Key sources analysed in this episode:International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) – Critical Control Management FrameworkThe Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (CIEHF) – Human Factors in Barrier ManagementConstruction Safety Research Alliance (CSRA) & Professor Matthew HallowellPetroleum Safety Authority (PSA) NorwayResources & Links:Website & Articles: https://safetyinsights.orgSubscribe to the series for Parts 2, 3, and 4.Support the channel: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

Showing 1–20 of 35 episodes