Career Path > Safety
BBS
Marlin:
"Fixing Broken Windows" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixing_Broken_Windows) was initially written in reference to criminology and neighborhoods, but as I reference it, it is probably better explained in the book Tipping Point ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tipping_Point ) which tries to explain how small things make a big difference. Malcolm Gladwell has written several books that deal with behavior, I would recommend all of them.
Already Gone:
--- Quote from: mostlyharmless on Apr 27, 2010, 02:09 ---Please explain "broken windows" theory.
--- End quote ---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixing_Broken_Windows
This article discusses the BWT. Basically, it comes down to the idea the if you do not tolerate small, seemingly harmless, infractions, the result will be a decrease in greater crimes. If you fix the broken windows, the vandals won't be as likely to break more=>there will be fewer property crimes=>there sill be fewer violent crimes. Ergo, fixing the small things fixes the big things.
Rudy Giuliani used to make the MTA clean the graffiti off the subway trains every day. This took time, when everybody was sick of their train being late every morning, they started to be less and less tolerant of graffiti artists vandalizing the trains. When the trains became cleaner, and ran on time, society became easier to live in. He made the cops ticket people for littering, double-parking, riding bicycles on the sidewalk, etc. As New Yorkers began to notice the new orderliness of their society, they began to feel entitled to live in an orderly, clean, polite city - instead of the chaos that reigned before. They became less tolerant of unacceptable behavior AND straightened up their own a little as well.
The theory has its flaws and detractors, but the basic premise is that people adapt to fit in to the culture that surrounds them. Kids use drugs if their friends are using drugs. EVERYBODY speeds as long as everybody else is speeding. "Keeping up with traffic" is the way of the road because it is the way of life.
--- Quote from: mostlyharmless on Apr 27, 2010, 02:09 ---BBS is voluntary though the performance of observations is directly tied to a salaried persons wage increase.
--- End quote ---
This is where you get your pile of fluff. Managers should not be doing BBS observations. First, they get PAID to supervise. So, why should they have to fill out a stupid card? Second, they generally write up more positive observations on their own work groups. The whole point of the observations is that any worker, at any level, can take time to observe any work group at any time objectively, provide a critique and coaching, and LEARN SOMETHING from the experience. Compiling data on observations is pointless if people only tell what you want to hear - or if they use it to make their work group look better in comparison to others. Basically, management uses BBS cards as a self-congratulatory exercise and to placate themselves into believing that they are promoting a safe work place. Spend a week looking at the pile of cards that gets turned in, and you'll see what I mean.
Where BBS earns its money is when the rank and file do the observations. They look at the job from a
worker's point of view. They get a chance to look at things that they usually take for granted. By taking an objective view at someone else working, the observer gets to concentrate on the safety and quality aspects of the job. They will notice things that those involved in the job don't notice or aren't giving enough attention to. So, by doing a BBS observation, the observer actually gets to improve his or her own safety performance, if he or she so desires. Otherwise, they are just filling out the cards because they have to, and get nothing out of it.
The Reinforcement aspect of BBS has a good chance of working if it is 1) Sincere, 2) Meaningful, 3) Timely, 4) Appropriate, and 5) Consistent.
The BWT and BBS are similar in that they are peer oriented. Peer pressure to work safely is more effective than management pressure. Creating an environment where it is acceptable to the workers and their peers to work safely and encourage each other is a difficult task, but it can work if management buys in and backs it up.
The raffles are a well-intentioned, but misguided, attempt to create this peer regulated atmosphere. Getting hurt can decrease a co-worker's chance (or everyone's) of winning that XBox or television or pickup truck. So, in theory, workers will encourage their peers to be safe so that the prizes will stay available. But, too much focus on the reward leads to cheating. If the reward is a safe workplace, instead of a Harley-Davidson Screaming Eagle Street Glider, it won't be as sexy, but it will be the correct reward for accomplishing the correct objective. People will hide cuts, bruises, sprains, and even fractures to get a shot at winning a $36,000 cycle. But, to get a safe workplace they will avoid them, report them, prevent them, learn from them, and move on in the right direction.
Check out these links.
http://www.ishn.com/Articles/Column/9a4d76bcb30c7010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____
http://www.safetyperformance.com/pdf/Articles/2004/AreyouaSuccessSeekeroraFailureAvoider.pdf
Marlin:
--- Quote from: BeerCourt on Apr 27, 2010, 03:36 ---The raffles are a well-intentioned, but misguided, attempt to create this peer regulated atmosphere. Getting hurt can decrease a co-worker's chance (or everyone's) of winning that XBox or television or pickup truck. So, in theory, workers will encourage their peers to be safe so that the prizes will stay available. But, too much focus on the reward leads to cheating. If the reward is a safe workplace, instead of a Harley-Davidson Screaming Eagle Street Glider, it won't be as sexy, but it will be the correct reward for accomplishing the correct objective. People will hide cuts, bruises, sprains, and even fractures to get a shot at winning a $36,000 cycle. But, to get a safe workplace they will avoid them, report them, prevent them, learn from them, and move on in the right direction.
--- End quote ---
When the raffle is done by chits (or wooden nickles on my current project) that are awarded for doing the right thing this is avoided. If the chances at the raffle are given to people seen doing a job safely or for submiting a suggestion for improvement, then safety, not production becomes the driving force. You are right that using safety milestones is counter productive in modifying safety behavior but not all raffles are done using accident rate as its basis.
Already Gone:
Oh yeah. Absolutely. A little reward for doing the right thing is a winner. That is the kind of positive reinforcement that has shown to be effective. But, what do you do when somebody makes a bad choice? Do you make them give you back a wooden nickel if you observe an unsafe behavior?
Marlin:
--- Quote from: BeerCourt on Apr 28, 2010, 07:46 ---Oh yeah. Absolutely. A little reward for doing the right thing is a winner. That is the kind of positive reinforcement that has shown to be effective. But, what do you do when somebody makes a bad choice? Do you make them give you back a wooden nickel if you observe an unsafe behavior?
--- End quote ---
Public flogging and the stocks. 8)
We both know that current PC group hug management styles require coaching and positive reinforcement. ::)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version