1. THE SAFETY LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE:
BUILDING
soft-skills for exemplary
SAFETY PERFORMANCE
Tristan Casey
Despite decades of attention across a raft of
disciplines, the goal of zero harm continues to elude
the grasp of most organisations in heavy industry.
Quite simply, the costs of incidents—both personal
and financial—continue to accumulate, and represent
significant road-blocks to safety performance and
societal well-being. To overturn these costs and
continue to realise performance gains in safety,
organisations must look beyond engineering-based
control, behavioural, and attitudinal solutions, and
toward leadership.
Significant inroads to our understanding of safety
performance were made when organisations
realised that traditional engineering and control-
based approaches to safety management were
insufficient. But the hierarchy of control can only
take safety so far. The effects of technology,
automation, job design, and formalised policies
and procedures on safety performance ultimately
plateau after a certain point. Without consideration
of ‘the person element’, that inescapable and
unpredictable energy experienced by all employers,
organisations are destined for mediocre safety
performance. Indeed, while figures vary across
industries and reporting methods1, between
50%-90% of safety incidents are believed to involve
some degree of human error.
© Sentis Pty Ltd 2012. This document remains the intellectual property of Sentis Pty Ltd and is protected by copyright and registered
trademarks. No material from this Guide is to be reproduced or used in any format without express written permission. sentis.net

2. THE SAFETY LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE: BUILDING SOFT-SKILLS FOR EXEMPLARY SAFETY PERFORMANCE
FIGURE 1
Understanding these human factors proved to be 7 SURMOUNTING THE PLATEAU OF SAFETY PERFORMANCE
P.2
the key to further gains in safety performance.tt
Consequently, psychology initiated the next .. 100
evolutionary stage of occupational safety.
Behavioural, and later, cognitive-based approaches
contributed significantly to the effectiveness of %
safety management strategies across industries and
work contexts. Following the Chernobyl disaster,
occupational safety was once again reinvigorated
by the consideration of a new phenomenon—safety
culture. Knowledge of these collective social forces 0
provided a neat extension to existing models of
Engineering
workplace safety performance, and directed attention
Citizenship
Behaviour
Attitude
toward safety factors that operate across multiple
Safety
organisational levels. Yet, despite this significant
progress, occupational safety is an ongoing and
significant issue for many organisations.
In Australia, national statistics suggest that current of acquiescence, or ‘agreement in a passive way’5.
safety models and approaches, while achieving So, compliance should be taken at face value: an
significant improvement over traditional methods, fall in-principle agreement to act according to some
uncomfortably short of eradicating incidents from the externally-imposed directive. Although employee
workplace. In 2009, an estimated 640,700 workers compliance fosters a strong safety climate, risks
experienced a work-related injury or illness2. In may still be present if employees believe that shortcuts
particular, the mining industry carries a significant risk provide an immediate payoff in terms of speed and
to employee safety, with as many as 1 in 20 workers efficiency6. At this level, organisations may appear
experiencing one or more workplace incidents... ‘on the surface’ to possess a strong safety ethic,
every year. yet in reality, genuine ownership of safety is somewhat
lacklustre.
Safety incidence rates translate to significant costs for
employers, workers and society. Worksafe Australia3 BUILDING SAFETY CITIZENSHIP
estimated that during 2005-06, safety incidents cost A new wave in safety performance is coming.
the Australian economy $57.5 billion—a staggering Borrowing from industrial psychology, safety
5.9% of GDP. So, despite the attention directed scholars have begun to apply what is known as
at occupational safety, there is a sizeable shortfall ‘organisational citizenship’ to safety contexts.
between what organisations are doing and what they Organisational citizenship is an umbrella term for
are achieving in terms of safety outcomes. Moreover, behaviours outside the normal scope of employees’
mismanaged safety carries significant competitive, position descriptions. Such behaviours go above and
financial and personal costs. beyond what is minimally expected from employees7.
Whereas engineering-based safety approaches Applied to safety, citizenship or ‘participation’8
focussed exclusively on the removal or reduction behaviours range from voluntary membership of
of risk, behavioural, and to some extent, attitudinal safety committees, actively promoting management’s
and motivational approaches target employee safety initiatives, keeping informed about the latest
compliance.[Figure 1] This shift in thinking from safety changes onsite, and monitoring the safety
the physical to the psychological helped many performance of team members9. Safety citizenship
organisations realise improved safety performance represents a significant opportunity for organisations
beyond that achieved by traditional methods in high-reliability industries to capitalise on their
alone4. However, compliance will only get you so greatest asset—their people—to further reduce the
far. Indeed, compliance is often defined in terms prevalence of safety-related incidents. [Figure 2]
© Sentis Pty Ltd 2012 sentis.net

3. THE SAFETY LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE: BUILDING SOFT-SKILLS FOR EXEMPLARY SAFETY PERFORMANCE
FIGURE 2
SAFETY LEADERSHIP ON THE FRONTLINE
CORE SAFETY CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOURS It is a given that effective leadership is crucial to.... P.3
organisational performance. Study after study has
shown that specific leadership behaviours promote
Helping other crew members
to learn safety procedures employee productivity12. Leaders, through the way
HELPING and perform work duties that they interact with others at work, exert powerful
safely above what is effects over the way that employees think and act.
expected as part of their role.
Consequently, leadership researchers have put
forward and tested a number of models that describe
Raising safety concerns and the typologies of behaviours that promote employee
providing recommendations
productivity and organisational performance.
USING INITIATIVE even where others disagree
or are not receptive to
these inputs. Of these models, the ‘full range leadership model’
proposed by Bass and Avolio13 has received
Taking action to proactively considerable attention. Under this model, leadership
protect other crew members style varies across dimensions of effectiveness
from harm, such as identifying
CARING risks and preventing safety and passivity. At the low end of the model, leaders
violations before they impact can adopt a passive or laissez-faire style that is
on others. characterised by avoidance of decision-making and
Supporting leaders to other leadership responsibilities. Such leaders may
monitor and correct safety only react when issues are explicitly raised or problems
performance of the team manifest in tangible outcomes. Next, transactional
SUPPORTING through reporting violations, leaders typically use rewards, recognition, monitoring,
providing feedback and
checking work standards. and corrective feedback strategies. These leaders
are good at achieving a consistent level of basic
performance across their team. The final level in
Seeking out and monitoring
KEEPING sources of relevant safety
the model characterises active leaders who weave
information across the together a range of interpersonal and technical skills
INFORMED organisation and the industry. to inspire, motivate, and support crew members
to adopt organisational goals as their own. These
‘transformational’ leaders move followers beyond
Identifying and actioning
mere compliance and toward helpful attitudinal and
CONTINUALLY (where appropriate) changes
motivational change13.
to duties, tasks, practices and
IMPROVE procedures to further improve
safety performance. Yet, surprisingly, these concepts were only introduced
to safety-specific contexts within the last decade.
Barling and colleagues14 were the first to explicitly
Although research in this area is in its infancy, work to define and test ‘safety leadership’ as a predictor of
date has shown that leadership is a particularly powerful workplace safety. This seminal study showed that
predictor of safety citizenship behaviours9,10. During leadership, operationalised as a safety-specific form of
leader-crew interactions, implicit social ....exchanges transformational leadership, predicted the frequency
are established, whereby the leader provides feedback, of subordinates’ workplace injuries via safety climate
encouragement and support to employees. In return, (shared perceptions of management’s priority
the crew member feels obligated to reciprocate, which for safety) and employees’ safety consciousness
increases the likelihood of extra-role behaviours such (awareness of the importance of safety).
as helping, organisational loyalty, task initiative and
voluntary self-development11. Citizenship has the Since this work, a flurry of research has confirmed and
potential to burst beyond the safety performance extended the role of leadership in safety performance.
barrier established by compliance approaches; Safety leadership has been shown to increase
however, success depends on the leadership the quality of safety communication9, the strength
capabilities available within the organisation. and value of safety climate6, and the likelihood of
And this requirement is not as easily fulfilled as one compliance with safety procedures and demonstration
might think. of safety behaviours that go beyond role boundaries10.
© Sentis Pty Ltd 2012 sentis.net

4. THE SAFETY LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE: BUILDING SOFT-SKILLS FOR EXEMPLARY SAFETY PERFORMANCE
Further research has shown that certain styles of leadership space, little work to date has explored
leadership are more (or less) effective at promoting how the nature of effective leadership changes when P.4
safety outcomes. Whereas transformational applied to safety-relevant contexts. Consequently,
leadership consistently.... produces positive effects Sentis invested considerable effort to develop a
on safety performance, passive leadership conveys comprehensive leadership behavioural framework
significant negative effects15. Leaders don’t have that is based on a foundation of existing transactional
to do much at all to produce adverse outcomes— and transformational theory. In sum, the model
in fact, safety leaders that do nothing at all are still consists of eight behavioural dimensions: supporting,
likely to exude a negative influence over their work recognising, actively caring, collaborating, vision,
area. This point begs the question: how prevalent is inspiring, role-modelling, and challenging. [Figure 3]
passive leadership within your organisation, and how Together, these behaviours provide employees with
much damage is it doing to your safety bottom-line? the baseline expectations for safety performance,
and increase motivation to engage in extra-role
safety activities.
“The major cause of managerial failure among....
engineers, scientists and other technologists..... FIGURE 3
is poor interpersonal skills.” 16
G
N
Organisations that operate in highly technical
I
RT
O
fields often experience challenges with leadership
PP
capacities as employees progress up the chain. In CHALLENGING RECOGNISING
SU
these contexts, leaders perhaps end up doing less
AC
of the leading and more of the managing. In practice,
TI
engineers and other technical-folk are typically
VE
LY
promoted into leadership roles based on their job
DIMENSIONS
C
skills and knowledge. Issues arise when technical
AR
OF SAFETY
IN
skills are emphasised at the expense of interpersonal
G
LEADERSHIP
COLLABORATING
skills. In this situation,... organisations (and individuals)
R
O
often fail to realise that technical ability is inversely
LE
M
related to employee level. In reality, as management
O
D
level goes up, the importance of technical ability
EL
LI
goes down16. Where technical leaders go wrong is
N
G
that they tend to neglect the development of soft-
skills so they can continue to ‘muck-in’ with crews, INSPIRING
which requires continual updating of technical skills.
N
IO
This perspective leaves little room for leadership
S
VI
development.
Also, people with certain personality types and Of these dimensions, recognising and active caring
past experiences are more likely to be attracted to are two categories of behaviour that are particularly
technical roles, which means that the gap between relevant in safety contexts. ‘Recognising’ was drawn
current and desired leadership skill-sets can be quite from transactional leadership theory, and refers
large. While personality undoubtedly plays a role.. to leader actions that clarify what is expected of
in predicting performance in leadership roles17, the employees in terms of good safety performance,
evidence shows that leadership is trainable18. And and reward or acknowledge such performance
therein lies the problem. Organisations need effective when it occurs. Effective safety recognising
leadership to survive, yet in technical fields it is less behaviours include praising employees for safe work
likely that such talent will exist in-house. Leadership practices and encouraging compliance with set
development is a priority for organisations in ... safety standards. Recognising behaviours should
this position. be employed at both individual and team levels5.
Acknowledging and rewarding the performance
Models of safety leadership provide a useful framework of individual crew members sets up an implicit
for employee development. Although numerous.... transaction between leader and subordinate, which
models have been proposed in the general increases the likelihood of employee reciprocation
© Sentis Pty Ltd 2012 sentis.net

5. THE SAFETY LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE: BUILDING SOFT-SKILLS FOR EXEMPLARY SAFETY PERFORMANCE
(in the form of good safety performance). At the team vision, values and strategic direction, and be designed
level, rewarding effective safety behaviours builds the from the top down—beginning at the executive level P.5
crew’s sense of collective efficacy and contributes to and working down to crews.
a positive group safety climate. Recognising is a core
safety leadership competency. Third, organisations need to provide structured
training that is supported by ongoing coaching and
Active caring moves beyond the foundation of support. Mentoring may also be an option, if strong
transactional leadership behaviours by considering safety leadership talent exists in-house. Training must
the nature of the leader’s relationships with individual be closely integrated with the safety leadership model,
employees. Across multiple interactions, leaders send and include both knowledge and skill-development
cues to subordinates that may build trust and perceived opportunities. Techniques such as demonstration,
support. In turn, employees experience increased group discussion and role-play are invaluable learning
safety motivation and seek out opportunities to tools in this context. Finally, training transfer (the
become more involved in activities that help the leader application of skills and knowledge on the job) will
perform their duties. Active care may be as simple as be maximised if budding safety leaders are given
‘management by walking around’—activities that bring ample opportunities to practise their newly learned
the leader out onto the shop floor and prompt regular strategies, and they are supported by ongoing
and meaningful interactions with workers about safety discussions and guidance from subject matter experts.
and production matters19. Caring leaders may also External coaches can be valuable resources for leader
show a genuine commitment to crew well-being by development given their third-party perspective,
seeking out and considering the needs of individuals considerable ‘troubleshooting’ experience, and
within the team, managing workloads in response to professional distance from the organisation. Together,
employee capabilities and preferences, and explaining these strategies ensure safety leadership success.
the need for compliance with safety procedures (in
terms of what the employee stands to lose through CONCLUSION
non-compliance). In demonstrating these active care Over time, the management of safety has been
behaviours, safety leaders convey a sense of genuine characterised by incremental improvements in incident
concern and interest in their team. Consequently, safety rates as scholars and practitioners unearth further
leadership emphasises the importance of mastery over knowledge about their root causes. The largest gains
soft-skills such as interpersonal communication and in safety were made when organisations adopted
relationship-building. an ‘engineer-it-out’ philosophy: failsafe systems,
protective barriers, high-reliability componentry and
Given these domains of behaviour, the question other ‘human-proof’ innovations significantly reduced
remains of how best to build employees’ safety safety risks across industry. Next, organisations
leadership capabilities. Organisations should begin considered the human element, which saw the
by selecting (and modifying, if required) a safety domination of behavioural and attitudinal interventions.
leadership framework that is grounded in theory However, progress in safety performance has once
and supported by empirical evidence. Without these again stalled. To break through this second plateau,
features, the model may not be appropriate for your organisations must dig deeper than traditional
specific context, or could fail to produce the desired approaches and foster genuine ownership of safety
results in safety performance. across all levels of their business.
Next, succession planning and employee development Safety citizenship represents the next level of
processes must be closely examined. Employees safety performance, and a point of significant
should be selected for leadership roles based on competitive advantage if done well. Yet, safety
interest, motivation and pre-existing supporting citizens can only be grown and cultivated
attributes (e.g., knowledge, skills, and disposition) through effective leadership. The road certainly
rather than technical skill alone. Further, employee won’t be easy as good safety leadership can be
development should be facilitated by a competency hard to find. However, with the right recipe, a
model that maps out the various levels of performance little elbow grease and effective tools, home-
and concomitant behaviours that should be grown safety leadership beats store-bought
demonstrated at each level. Such competency models every time.
should include organisational language, align with
© Sentis Pty Ltd 2012 sentis.net

6. THE SAFETY LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE: BUILDING SOFT-SKILLS FOR EXEMPLARY SAFETY PERFORMANCE
P.6
TRISTAN CASEY
Currently completing a Doctoral degree in Organisational Psychology, Tristan is an experienced and skilled
applied researcher. Tristan’s primary research interests include: safety climate, safety leadership, training
transfer and evaluation, and online survey methods. Tristan is passionate about synthesising and translating
empirical state-of-the-art for the purposes of practical application.
is a global business dedicated to creating sustainable organizational change in the world
around us. Our mission at Sentis is to assist individuals and organizations change their lives for the better and
we do this through the application of psychology to safety, leadership and well-being in the workplace.
BRISBANE OFFICE PERTH OFFICE DENVER OFFICE
Building 2, Level 1 Level 2 6205 S. Main Street
747 Lytton Road 327 Cambridge Street Suite 260
Murarrie QLD 4172 Wembley WA 6014 Aurora, Colorado 80016
PO Box 303, Morningside QLD 4170 PO Box 82, Wembley 6913
Tel: +61 7 3363 5900 Tel: +61 8 9318 5100 Tel: +1 720 226 9550
Fax: +61 7 3363 5999 Fax:+61 8 9318 5155 Fax:+1 720 226 9589
REFERENCES
1
Hetherington, C., Flin, R. & Mearns, K. (2006). Safety in shipping: The human 11
Podsakoff, P. MacKenzie, S., Moorman, R. & Fetter, R. (1990).
element. Journal of Safety Research, 37(4), 401 – 411. Transformational leader behaviours and their effects on followers’ trust
2
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2009). in leader, satisfaction, and organisational citizenship behaviours. Leadership
Work-related injuries, Australia, 2009-10, 6324.0. Quarterly, 1(2), 107 – 142.
Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6324.0 12
DeGroot, T., Kiker, D. & Cross, T. (2000). A meta-analysis to review
3
Australian Safety and Compensation Council. (2009). The cost of work- organisational outcomes related to charismatic leadership. Canadian Journal
related injury and illness for Australian employers, workers and the of Administrative Sciences, 17(4), 356 – 372.
community: 2005-06. Retrieved from http://safeworkaustralia. 13
Bass, B. & Avolio, B. (1994). Organisational effectiveness through
gov.au/AboutSafeWorkAustralia/WhatWeDo/Publications/Pages/ transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
SR200903InjuryAndIllness2005To2006.aspx 14
Barling, J., Loughlin, C. & Kelloway, E. (2002). Development and test of a
4
Idrus, D., Wahab, S., Shah, I. & Rees, C. (2009). model linking safety-specific transformational leadership and occupational
How far is transformational leadership relevant to safety performance. safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 488 – 496.
Malaysia Labour Review, 3(1), 74 – 97. 15
Kelloway, K., Mullen, J. & Francis, L. (2006). Divergent effects of
5
Cialdini, R. & Goldstein, N. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and transformational and passive leadership on employee safety. Journal of
conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591 – 621. Occupational Health Psychology, 11(1), 76 – 86.
6
Zohar, D. & Tenne-Gazit, O. (2008). Transformational leadership and group 16
Badawy, M. (1995). Developing managerial skills in engineers and scientists:
interaction as climate antecedents: A social network analysis. Journal of Succeeding as a technical manager. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Applied Psychology, 93(4), 744 – 757. 17
Bono, J. & Judge, T. (2004). Personality and transformational and
7
Organ, D. (1988). Organisational citizenship behaviour: The good soldier transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington. 89(5), 901 – 910.
8
Neal, A., Griffin, M. & Hart, P. (2000). The impact of organisational climate on 18
Mullen, J. & Kelloway, K. (2009). Safety leadership: A longitudinal study
safety climate and individual behaviour. Safety Science, 34(1), 99 – 109. of the effects of transformational leadership on safety outcomes. Journal of
9
Hofmann, D. & Morgeson, F. (1999). Safety-related behaviors as a social Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 82(1), 253 – 272.
exchange: The role of perceived organizational support and leader-member 19
Luria, G. & Morag, I. (2012). Safety management by walking around
exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2), 286 – 296. (SMBWA): A safety intervention program based on both peer and manager
10
Conchie, S. & Donald, I. (2009). The moderating role of safety-specific participation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45(1), 248 – 257.
trust on the relation between safety-specific leadership and safety
citizenship behaviours. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
14(2), 137 – 147.
© Sentis Pty Ltd 2012 sentis.net