Select Page

Ergonomics Meets Human Factors: Building Safer, Smarter Workplaces with Dr. Era Poddar

Ergonomics Meets Human Factors: Building Safer, Smarter Workplaces with Dr. Era Poddar

LISTEN TO THE EPISODE: 

ABOUT THE EPISODE

In this week’s episode of The Safety Guru, we’re joined by Dr. Era Poddar, who shares her extensive expertise in ergonomics and human factors to explore what these principles are, why they matter, and how organizations can proactively integrate them into workplace design to transform safety outcomes, boost productivity, and build safer, smarter workplaces. She discusses the wide-ranging benefits of integrating these principles, including better decision-making, reduced cognitive load for employees, fewer errors, a lower risk of serious injuries and fatalities, and measurable returns on investment (ROI) through improvements in quality, productivity, and overall safety performance. This insightful discussion also highlights how leaders can champion ergonomic improvements, leverage emerging technologies that are reshaping workplace design, and foster a culture of continuous learning and improvement. Tune in to discover how ergonomics and human factors work together to build safer, healthier, and more productive organizations. Don’t miss this episode!

READ THE EPISODE

Real leaders leave a legacy. They capture the hearts and minds of their teams. Their origin story puts the safety and well-being of their people first. Great companies ubiquitously have safe yet productive operations. For those companies, safety is an investment, not a cost for the C-suite. It’s a real topic of daily focus. This is The Safety Guru with your host, Eric Michrowski, a globally recognized ops and safety guru, public speaker, and author. Are you ready to leave a safety legacy? Your legacy success story begins now.

Hi and welcome to The Safety Guru. Today, I’m very excited to have with me Dr. Era Poddar. She has a PhD in industrial ergonomics, an MBA from UBC, does a lot of consulting work in the ergonomic space, and is also an adjunct professor at the University of British Columbia. Era, so happy to have you with me today on the show.

Thank you, Eric, for the introduction. And I would like to just— mini-MBA.

Mini MBA?

Yeah, it’s not the full MBA at length, but I will reflect on that a little bit. Okay. Why I mentioned that. Yeah, thank you. I’m really glad to be talking to you today.

Absolutely. So, tell me a little bit about how you got started in ergonomics and the passion you’ve gotten for safety and ergo.

Right, it’s a very interesting question, and I, I have been asked about this for so many times. I remember talking to in one of the platforms in my previous employer, some people were talking about different epiphany happened to them, and that’s what they came. To be very honest, I never had such, such incidents, or I would say positive incidents, but what I had in the— I first, to, to be very honest, I learned about the subject when I went to the university to do my master’s program. And so, it’s a human physiology master’s from University of Calcutta. They had a specialization in ergonomics and human factors. So that’s where first I came across the subject. No one knew about this. I was pretty intrigued about the subject because it has direct implications on human life. Like, of course, industry to design and everything. So eventually, I got to love the subject, and I became passionate about it.

And it’s taking you all around the world. And so that gives you fairly unique perspectives as well in terms of how you’ve applied ergonomics in that space. Maybe let’s start with what is ergonomics and why is it so important?

Right. I should go back to a little bit because I had to also touch base on things which, which intrigued me to be part of this subject. One was like, I started my career in a design project, a mining scenario, and I thought that would be pretty interesting for the audience. So, this project ran for 1.5 years, and then we, we redeveloped or redesigned, uh, certain equipment’s, over 10 of them. And during that time, I realized this subject has a different application and we need to pursue more. That’s where I started doing PhD and all that, all the things. Uh, but as you know, life happens, things change, and I, I started my career in a university setting teaching after completing, uh, my PhD. So, while teaching, there are different design applications from physical product design to interaction design and all that. Stuff. So then, as usual, things change, uh, and I followed my husband to Middle East, and that’s where, uh, it’s a different, uh, scenario of ergonomics kind of came into my understanding because it’s a business side of it. That’s when I started my business because there was less scope of applying in the education domain.

Sure.

And before that, I lived a little, uh, time teaching in Nepal, one of the universities, medical school. So, all these things and, uh, kind of intrigued me to apply different domains of this area as well as leaving my comfort zone, I guess. So, in Dubai, we kind of, uh, what we did was, as I said, there’s less education apply— like application or courses. However, there was a scope, uh, to represent companies who had multiple offices across Middle East to help them in their ergonomics initiatives. So, you could call it a beginning of a mini-MBA for me, hands-on practice, and which I wouldn’t have done otherwise if I wouldn’t be leaving my secured career path. And that’s where it’s a different approach which, which is taken from there. And then onwards, I lived in the US and practiced, and then it came back to Canada at one point. So, through all this journey, which why I, I wanted to mention that I— it gathered to me, one is I understood the local practices, standards, and all that.

Sure.

It also did an interesting thing to me. I became more and more open and like it grew empathy to me more. And that is one of the key factors we practitioners in ergonomics do. And it’s really one of the key important factors to be successful in this field. Right. And coming back to your question, what is human factors and ergonomics? Is essentially reducing the mismatch between product or system and the user. So, in one word, however, there are several, um, definitions you could find. That is, it’s a science of work design, science of workplace design, and so on and so forth. But we always emphasize on one important aspect aspects of ergonomics and human factors, two different words. Yeah, coined together, they actually mean the same according to International Ergonomic Association. Uh, the overall— I mean, uh, the definition is, is like human factors or ergonomics is concerned with the understanding of interactions among humans and other elements of a and this profession applies theory, principle, data, and methods to design and optimize human well-being and overall system performance. So, we always focus into the system level, uh, changes so that it affects in an effective way for long term.

So yeah, in one word, it helps, uh, I think, reduce any mismatch between any system and product. And improve productivity.

And so why is it so important for businesses to look at that combination of ergonomics and human factors? And what’s the ROI that comes from it? 

It is a very interesting question. And we still, I mean, it’s proven, understood that it’s a business-friendly concept.

Sure.

Why? As I said, it reduces mismatch in very different ways. From building design to the product design, even for software design. So, there is a coin word called usability. That’s actually how you reduce the mismatch between human and the software or any interface design. So, over the years, it has been shown to be kind of helpful for the business. And why it is helpful? It reduces error, less time, and sometimes the processes are improved in, like we call them, ineffective time. How you reduce them? All this together, as well as a different reachability and use— usability, or ease of usage of any, any such product. Or given— I will just give you some examples.

Yeah, that would be good.

Yeah. Like for, uh, suppose a company who has a production line who produces certain products. Now if the workstations are higher compared to who are operating and there are a lot of reaches, like you move your hands pretty quickly and there’s long reaches. Now if we do it once or twice, that’s fine, right? And if you do it throughout 8-hour shift, sometime industry have 12-hour shift. To. Sure. So, these are the different aspects. One is size-wise, one, one is process-wise. And suppose you have kept certain products or so stored certain products in a different section. Now the employee has to go bring them. So, there are different touch points and different level of postures which is happening, which could have avoided with a better design.

Sure.

When the industry is built or when the workstation— yes, when the workstation was designed. So that’s where if we incorporate these issues, like how this whole process works, where, where people has to interact, and who will be the person who will be interacting. It is a range of people, not every— like, for even given, uh, different genders, there are sizes. And suppose, giving example, 95% percentile stature, people may not be having 95th percentile hand length or arm length, right?

Right.

So, all these challenges kind of available, or it is there within any workstation workplace setup. So, the more we kind of accommodate these requirements since the beginning, you definitely kind of benefit. And end of the day, product quality also improved. So, this whole span of activities, if we consider it effectively, we will save on time, we will reduce injuries, and the injuries will be less fatal, as well as there will be less error. As a result, you will get a product which is quality-wise better and more product. So, it’s an overall win-win for both employees and the employers in a way. I hope I understood.

No, no, absolutely. Yeah. So, and it’s something, as you talked about, it can mean how I design a plant for how the workers are going to work in. But I could also retroactively drive some improvements. So, there is less movement that’s unnecessary, less lifting, bending, stretching, overreach occurring throughout the day.

Also, less decision-making.

Sure.

Because more and more workplaces becoming automated.

Yeah.

And people are even in regular manufacturing settings; we see employees has to interact with machines where they have to put input and given that the cycle number and what is the output number and all that. So, these— all these interactions are happening at like simultaneously.

Sure.

So, there are cognitive demand as well as physical demand. I, I just gave you a very simple industrial scenario. So, there are complex scenarios like pilots interacting with machines, or we are driving a car. There are so many distractions these days, from external to internal to phone and displays and stuff. So yeah, it makes more sense to incorporate through the design at the beginning. However, it could be applied in every stage.

Sure. Yeah, to drive improvements, to improve the work practices, but also the cognitive load that you mentioned before in terms of the decision-making. I like your example of the car as well. So very, very beneficial. As you said, there’s a The ROI is really because it’s helping, one, the workers, but it’s also helping productivity directly. If you have less distractions, you have less complexity in your decision-making and less movement to complete the task. Is that fair?

It is fair. And I should also add where it is, most of the time, the ergonomics or human factors concepts are applied towards later phase, like when you have an injury, right? And this is not that proactive, more reactive approach. Unfortunately, in— especially not even only in Canada, I have seen in the US or even in the Middle East, that’s where we are called as a practitioner. So, when everything is all set, you have a process set, you have a design set, and there are also different teams working together, not including one of, like, human factors or ergonomics professionals within. So, what it does is there’s always a gap remaining. So, end of the day, which we see, there is an incident, and most popular incident which relates to ergonomics, human factors, that’s musculoskeletal injuries.

Yep. 

And that’s where people think that’s what ergonomics is, which is not at all, uh, right directions. But that’s where most of the time we are called in. So as there also huge number of dollars are lost every year, if we see the recent statistics even through WorkSafe BC locally. It’s over $2 billion of cost. 

Sure.

And over the year, like recent years. So that is something has to be definitely seen as one of the ROI where we could control this cost.

And ideally done proactively, right? So, as you mentioned in the plant design, or even at a later stage to drive improvement.

Yeah, true. Unfortunately, that is not always done that way. 

Yeah, unfortunately not. Yes. Yeah, unfortunately, sometimes you need an event to realize it wasn’t designed the right way. So, one of the things I know when we first connected that you touched on, which I thought was very interesting, is around changing workplaces. And there’s a lot of changes in the current workplace. How does that impact the space of ergonomics and human factors.

This episode of the Safety Guru Podcast is brought to you by Propulo Consulting, the leading safety and safety culture advisory firm. Whether you are looking to assess your safety culture, develop strategies to level up your safety performance, introduce human performance capabilities, re-energize your BBS program, enhance supervisory safety capabilities, or introduce unique safety leadership training and talent solutions, Propulo has you covered. Visit us at propolo.com.

Few things we have to understand. Since World War II, when the subject evolved, many organizing factors, there’s very less understanding across other disciplines about the breadth an application of the subject. So, when, uh, the workplace changes considerations came into play, especially in Canada with the Inclusive Act and all that thing, uh, the concept remained pretty old. Like, it’s not that new, right? Uh, so the changing workplace has been— we see, just giving you an example, if we visit, even you come to any public place or any workplace, you will see different variations of populations coming from different cultures, background. So how does it affect the workplaces? Uh, one is size, like your anthropometric measurements. You have a different language spoken throughout like when growing up. So, you are learning a different language, you are getting instructions through different languages. As the same— at the same time, we have different, uh, equipment’s incorporated into the workplace, more like recent AI. And over the years, we have seen a lot of more automation happen. So, employees are interacting with various different as I mentioned earlier as well, the physical, like manual material handling to giving input to the machine to do a proper setup speed.

Sure. And the production. At the same time, you are getting information through your handle devices.

Yep.

And you are also interacting with some of those displays. And there’s a workplace changes happen through the age. We have older work curse, who has limited ability to interact with digital devices, right? So, these are a complex scenario where you have different, different genders, you have different background, you have different language, culturally different thinking. We don’t have enough time to talk about that stereotype things, but it is there. We think differently, we perform, understand differently. So, these vast and different sizes, as I mentioned, we incorporate this whole group of population within a particular workplace. Right. So, definitely there will be repercussion on that. Yeah. Unless it is really designed well or it is accommodating all this requirement. And at the same time, you have differently abled people who have limitation like moving or different level of cognitive abilities. So, there are so many different challenges within that place. So, when we say the accessible or universal design concept, so we, we talk about all of these people is welcome in that workplace or any space, and they can easily interact with all these different things. And how we make those things user-friendly for them. So that’s when we talk about different level of accessibility or universal design.

Which really means a lot more flexibility in terms of how you would interface with equipment, the technology, potentially very different sitting position, if in that scenario, you’re talking about, where there’s flexibility of adjusting depending on what’s right for that particular individual.

Yeah, I can provide you another simple example. Suppose you are accessing, uh, like an ATM machine, right? Right. So now, for people like you and me, I will go walk, park the car, go walk and access. It’s not a big deal. We know these are bigger buttons and everything. Now consider this person who cannot move, who is on the wheelchair.

Yeah.

Now there are different level of accessibility they need. So, he has to access the building first. There has to be certain ramp where they can access. And then there has to be certain reach so that they can see it, still see it, and interact with the machine, right? Not only physical buttons, but there are also digital buttons. 

Sure.

So, then there are all these requirements. So, you have a person who will operate this machine standing, there’s a person who may come on the wheelchair, there’s a person who may come in differently, other way of different, and there is person who cannot see. And also, the language-wise, so people may read English well, some may not, some may come from suppose Mandarin They speak Mandarin, reads Mandarin or Japanese.

Sure.

So, consider a world where all these people live together and interact with the machine. So that’s where the usable or universal design or accessibility come.

And bringing that to workplaces as well, because the same example, it’s how do I design a work environment, whatever that work environment might be, to have that flexibility in terms of interaction.

That’s right.

Excellent. And I know one of the themes we also touched on is around now that we’re hearing more and more about exoskeletons. How does that play into these human factors and ergonomics space?

That is another interesting area of time. Anytime we talk to colleagues, they come up with this question. So, I was recently listening to one of the webinars done by— I don’t remember the organization, but the person who was presenting, Dr. Christopher Reed from Boeing, he was reflecting on many such research and applied within the Boeing scenario. I will refer some of her— some of his topics. So, exoskeleton is, of course, related to ergonomics. It’s not like insects and others. So, it’s an external structure which helps us to support while working. 

Sure.

So, we call them industrial exoskeleton. And there are different types. Some are automated. I mean, they are more advanced these days. But essentially, it is built to support while working.

Right, sure.

So, few, a few different types. I’m very broadly, I’m touching this. One is made for postural assist system, like when someone is working within an environment or very concise space where you cannot do any engineering changes, where you cannot implement those changes. So that person has to work in a certain position, suppose electrician, in that space. You cannot bring in any other equipment. So continuous working within that space and having those shoulder and arm muscles in the, like, over above shoulder level. So that’s when this type of exoskeleton helps. Like, it’s a postural support where hands and shoulders and— sure, other, other part is supported. There is other type of where you have full body support, like especially doing manual material handling where any other engineering changes or equipment could be provided in such certain scenario. It seems that quite a few other companies, including Boeing, is using them while making the airplanes, not— I mean, after it is done, so before that part. So since employees are using them, I had also interacted with few local clients Sometimes, uh, some of the workers like it, some don’t.

Of course.

So, some of them— I, I was amazed to hear this— the— my contact person who was saying that 2 or 3 of them didn’t like it, so they never would wear them.

Sure.

So, there are 1 or 2, it happened that they wouldn’t open it. Without that, they cannot perform. So, there are different varied level of acceptance. Sure, there’s definitely different types of acceptance level as well as, uh, I mean, the type of work people does. Depending on that, this is effective. So, it’s always the first thing we as a professional suggest. If there is option, engineering changes is better options. In any day. However, there is no, I mean, opening to incorporate such changes, then explore this. Still, there’s a lot to— yeah, there is a lot of research has to go in. It’s still developing.

Yeah, absolutely. I think for me, the first example I saw of this was, I’m going to say it’s almost a decade ago, and it was in Japan with baggage handlers, and it was around how do we reduce the lifting and switching that’s happening when they’re moving bags, which sounded very interesting if you think about the repetitive motions and the— you don’t even know how heavy a particular bag is going to be, which adds a lot more risk as well to that equation.

Yeah, you’re right. And also, I remember mentioning I think 6, 7 years back, uh, still the COVID at the beginning of COVID or before that, there were, uh, we ordered some furniture’s and people came to deliver. Some of the company who was contracted to do that, so the employees, their employees were using those exoskeletons to move those furniture’s. Yeah, so I have seen, it’s interesting, few companies adopted them pretty well. And then sometimes, as I said, it’s, yeah, not always accepted.

And as you talk about change, I think one of the things that makes good sense to transition to is what’s the role of a leader in driving that change, right? So, they can— we talked about your role coming in and assessing, but how can a leader support change?

It’s a Very important and interesting topic, and that’s one of my other passion area these days— how to incorporate human factors ergonomic concept within the strategy, right? So, we all know this concept is old enough. However, it’s less accepted amongst the senior leadership.

Sure.

One main reason is the language we speak. So, language has to be such so it is acceptable to the senior leadership. And senior leadership, one and important part which I realized over the years is, of course, they have to be trained in certain aspects. So, we as a professional has to be able to speak that language which caters to that group. At the same time, leadership has to be a little bit open towards these new concepts coming in, right, which is beyond the conventional, okay, they have— there are standards, engineering standards, and we— sure, we have it, then it is all done. It is not always the case because at the end of the day, users are human, right, right. And or whoever is using it, they are the one who is manipulating with the system.

Right. 

So, the leadership’s main, I think, the initiative would be understanding, like keeping a little open mind, one. Second is putting a human factor economics concept as a strategy goal, which is actually part of their business decisions. Then if you have a budget, allocated already, then it’s much easier to implement at the design stage than at the level when an injury already happened.

It really touches the whole space of safety by design, even in terms of if you, if you do things right at the front end, and you’re putting in the time and the effort, you’ll be much better off later.

Exactly. And also, we always say this, you have as a company, every company has their standard operating procedure or SOPs. So, it is always smart to align the programs, including safety, ergonomics, and other programs, to that, right? It’s, it’s much— it makes a lot more sense. And if you remember, I touched upon briefly on a certain point that we have various departments within a company. Unfortunately, some of them, they don’t always interact, or there’s less, less scope, or whatever may be the reason, that interaction is very important. And leadership can bring in that interaction so that same things are simultaneously done but not applied effectively. I have seen that in my practice. That quality team had come up with an idea which is not fully applicable because of the other challenges, However, there was another department have developed a newer idea and applying them within the team which others didn’t know. So again, the communication, communication, and allowing this communication to happen free flowing among different departments without a bias. So that is another leadership role I, I think would be very helpful in such initiatives.

Sure, absolutely. And so, if somebody wants to get in touch with you, what’s the best way to do so? And maybe share a little bit about the type of work that you do to help organizations in this space. 

Right. So best way to reach me through LinkedIn. Also, we have our website, www.argoera.com. You can and definitely click to that website and see our services.

Yep. 

We do offer different types of services. We do offer the program support where the corporations can— an ergonomist like us or others can work together to come up with a plan or aligning their SOPs, which is more long-term. And I think we focus more into that. However, as I— excuse me— as I said, there are a lot more focus into risk assessment or management. So that’s where a lot of business come through that area. So, we do, of course, cover that risk assessment. It could be your industrial risk assessment to corporate. At the same time, we also do worker compensation. Kind of support. I mean, you do need that kind of risk assessment as well, and all, uh, different types of workshops, being it the executive workshops to strategy level workshops, and also participatory ergonomics.

Makes sense. Excellent. So, Era, thank you so much for joining me today. Appreciate your time.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for listening to The Safety Guru on C-suite Radio. Leave a legacy. Distinguish yourself from the past. Grow your success. Capture the hearts and minds of your teams. Elevate your safety. Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their safety leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance. Begin your journey at execsafetycoach.com. Come back in two weeks for the next episode with your host, Eric Michrowski. This podcast is powered by Propulo Consulting.

ABOUT THE GUEST

Dr. Era Poddar is a Canadian Certified Professional Ergonomist (CCPE) and safety specialist, with broad international experience across North America, the Middle East, and Asia. Her expertise covers industry, academia, corporate, and government sectors. She holds a Ph.D. in Industrial Ergonomics, a NEBOSH International General Certificate in Occupational Health and Safety (practical applications), and a mini-executive MBA from the Sauder School of Business, UBC.

With more than twenty years in consulting, coaching, training, and research related to ergonomics, human factors, workplace accommodation, and safety, Dr. Poddar helps organizations meet goals in health and safety, ergonomics, and MSI control. She currently sits on the Board of Directors for the Canadian College for the Certification of Professional Ergonomists (CCCPE) and actively contributes to the International Ergonomics Association (IEA) Health and Safety Technical Committee, where she leads a group advising on ISO 45001: Guidelines for Ergonomic Processes. Additionally, she is part of the Canadian Mirror Committee (CMC) to the ISO Ergonomics TC 159.

Era is the founder director of Ergoera Services Inc. (https://ergoera.com), which provides customized ergonomics and occupational health and safety services and training. She also serves as an Adjunct Professor at the University of British Columbia, guiding master’s students and professionals in industrial ergonomics, injury prevention, design ergonomics, human-centered design, and user research.

Known as an innovative entrepreneur, leader, and public speaker, Era balances her roles as consultant, educator, researcher, and mentor. She has successfully managed multicultural teams globally, including in North America, Asia, the Middle East, and India. Her work involves leading excellence initiatives, promoting accessibility and universal design, developing safety and ergonomics strategies, and implementing quality improvement programs. Throughout her career, Era has spearheaded ergonomics programs, risk assessments, participatory projects, gap analyses, and process improvements in sectors like manufacturing, mining, food processing, government, corporate environments, and healthcare. Her evidence-based, user-centered approach supports healthier, safer, more functional, and productive workplaces, reflecting her commitment to “Design for All.”

For more information: https://ergoera.com/

RELATED EPISODE

STAY CONNECTED

The Safety Guru with Eric Michrowski

More Episodes: https://thesafetyculture.guru/

C-Suite Radio: https://c-suitenetwork.com/the-safety-guru/

Powered By Propulo Consulting: https://propulo.com/

Eric Michrowski: https://ericmichrowski.com

EXECUTIVE SAFETY COACHING

Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their Safety Leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance.

Safety Leadership coaching has been limited, expensive, and exclusive for too long.

As part of Propulo Consulting’s subscription-based executive membership, our coaching partnership is tailored for top business executives that are motivated to improve safety leadership and commitment.
Unlock your full potential with the only Executive Safety Coaching for Ops & HSE leaders available on the market.
Explore your journey with Executive Safety Coaching at https://www.execsafetycoach.com.
Executive Safety Coaching_Propulo

Making Systems More Resilient: Elevating Situational Awareness and Critical Thinking with Craig Clapper

Making Systems More Resilient: Elevating Situational Awareness and Critical Thinking with Craig Clapper

LISTEN TO THE EPISODE: 

ABOUT THE EPISODE

Join us for this thought-provoking conversation with Craig Clapper, a seasoned systems engineer and founder of Reliability 4 Life, as he explores what it truly means to make systems more resilient. Craig explains why human error is an inevitable part of complex work and shares how organizations can strengthen situational awareness by helping people recognize where to focus their attention, identify the signals that matter most, and apply critical thinking in complex and safety-critical environments. Drawing on real-world examples from a variety of industries, including healthcare, Craig shares practical strategies for managing risk, improving recovery processes, and building organizational resilience. He also highlights the importance of fostering a culture of continuous learning to create safer, stronger workplaces. Don’t miss this insightful conversation and dive into how to build robust systems and elevate situational awareness and critical thinking within your organization. Tune in to learn more!

READ THE EPISODE

Real leaders leave a legacy. They capture the hearts and minds of their teams. Their origin story puts the safety and wellbeing of their people first. Great companies ubiquitously have safe yet productive operations. For those companies, safety is an investment, not a cost for the C-suite. It’s a real topic of daily focus. This is The Safety Guru with your host, Eric Michrowski, a globally recognized ops and safety guru, public speaker, and author. Are you ready to leave a safety legacy? Your legacy success story begins now.

Hi and welcome to The Safety Guru. Today I’m very excited to have with me Craig Clapper. He’s a systems engineer, founder of Reliability for Life, or R4L, and we’re going to have a really interesting conversation today around systems, healthcare. It will be fascinating. So, Craig, welcome to the show. Very excited to have you with me.

Good. Thanks for having me with you today.

So, let’s get started with your background and how you got passionate about safety, because it was quite an interesting journey.

Excellent. Yeah, I got into this business as an engineer, and I was doing failure analysis work in nuclear power. And I noticed an interesting effect. We had a lot of repeat events, sometimes the same equipment failing for the same reasons.

Right. 

So, in an effort to improve reliability of nuclear power, is I got into this business, which is more about human reliability and systems. I didn’t know at the time, but it kind of took over my professional career. So, I worked in nuclear power, then power in general, transportation, manufacturing, and then for the last 25 years in healthcare.

And so, one of the things you’re looking at is, is essentially why would smart people repeat the same problems, right?

Yes, and repeat other people’s problems as well. I think both are important, us learning over time, but then the shared learning of learning from each other.

And so, tell me a little bit more about this theme around smart people making the same mistakes, or as you said, making some— the same mistake that somebody else did.

Excellent. Yeah, is that we know that, you know, people when they go to work or when they’re at home or at play, for that matter, is that their intent is always to do well.

Right.

Human error is a natural byproduct of people, and when we work in complex systems, that byproduct shows up even more frequently. Right. I think Jeff Raskin said it better than I. He said that everybody is human first and then either an expert or a novice second, but there is no such person that never experiences a mistake, or more accurately, an error.

Yes, an error, right? I think I only met one person who admitted in their mind they had never made a mistake. He was a tax accountant, but he was corrected by his CFO who questioned his assertion.

Yeah, so maybe even saying that was a mistake on his part.

That would be one of them for sure. And so, you talk about systems. Phil, so first, what are systems? We’ve talked about this topic quite a few times on this podcast. And why are they becoming so complex?

You bet. I think the fastest way to kind of smooth over the controversy is that when some people say process, they’re probably talking more about a work system. Sure. Systems are made up of everything, you know. So, when you talk about systems thinking, we say they’re made up of things. And together those things provide functions.

Right.

So, everything that we point to is a work system.

Mm-hmm.

So, we say aviation is a work system, nuclear power is a work system, a power plant is a work system, and then it gets even a little smaller and more granular.

Sure.

But I think what’s different is that it takes us away from processes, which makes us think everything’s linear, right, to thinking more about the nonlinear effect of real work. And over time, you know, technology becomes more complex. The needs of the system to perform become more complex. So, complexity is always increasing around us. And that makes it difficult for us as individuals because we can’t see everything that we’re doing. So, we’re reliant on other people and trying to grasp that situational awareness in the moment to see where we’ve been and where we’re headed.

Yeah, and I think your point is— so definitely there’s a sense that systems are getting more complex. You talk about technology. I remember I had an MIT professor join the podcast a little while back, and his analogy was talking— you might have heard about this one about Ford Mustang from the 1960s versus a Ford Mustang today, and how many engineers does it take because of the complexity of everything that’s engaged and involved. But even when you think about healthcare in terms of way back when, we didn’t have the fields of expertise to the degree we have now. And something like cancer treatment is no longer the domain of one doctor. It’s a domain of multiple different doctors that are essentially speaking different languages.

Oh yeah, that’s an excellent point, both on the car and the healthcare analogy. And everybody becomes hyper-specialized to deal with all that complexity. And then there’s creases, the number of handoffs and the number of people involved. I really relate to the auto example. My first car was a 1970 Chevy Impala, and my dad taught me how to do a lot of the work on it. And now when I open the hood, it’s just— I might be looking for a UL code so I can call somebody that actually knows how to fix it. Right.

It’s impossible to— tweak it like you could way back when.

Yeah.

And so, you talk about the complexity that comes in, um, that brings— I like the expression you use, that, that systems become very brittle. Um, so tell me, what are some of those things that we can do to make systems more resilient?

You bet. Yeah, because, uh, resilient means they’re tough and can bounce back. And sometimes we use the word resilient to mean like after an event. But you can also talk about resiliency in the middle of event or even at the very beginning to prevent events outright. Sure. So, in complex systems, safety comes from resiliency. And I think the best thing to do when you start on this aspect of your safety journey is to think, you know, systems can be simple. Where the knowledge and skill and the tools kind of rule the reliability.

Sure.

But then they can be complicated, like assembling a jet aircraft.

Sure.

You know, a plane is a very complicated machine, yet we want it to be the same. So putting it together just requires standard work. So standard work is our best friend. 

Yep.

But when we get to complexity, is that things aren’t always the same and they’re not predictable, and some things that are unknown are unknowable. So, what makes reliability in complex systems work is our ability to think as an individual, but think together as our team, as a team. 

Sure. 

And then to extend that to resiliency is that you have to think, I believe situational awareness is the root of all resiliencies.

Sure.

Somebody realizes that something is different, and they can think together and then they have an adjustment that they could make. So, they make the adjustment and then they get back on track. In fact, David Woods, you know, from Ohio State, the cognitive psychologist, he had observed that we really don’t have safety events because people make mistakes. We have safety events because they don’t perceive the need to make an adjustment. So, they don’t adjust.

Sure.

And I paraphrase that. I’m sure his quote is better than that.

And so that makes a very interesting perspective as well, because it’s what you talk about, the situational awareness. You see it very regularly in terms of something changes in the environment, the conditions, but we’ve done the same routine work many, many times and we don’t notice. We may have a blind spot to changing conditions. We may not realize that a new risk is introduced or that new risk could be a small change that’s happening in the system. And so, when you talk about resilience, you also talk about this element of learning and bouncing back. And then there’s also this element of a better recovery. Tell me a little bit more about what that entails.

Sure. Yeah, it’s in Eric Hollnagel’s work in resiliency engineering. He includes learning as one aspect of resiliency. And I think that was very insightful. Is that, you know, we learn from our past experiences. So now we know what to look for. And when we perceive that, then the sensemaking is both faster and more accurate. Plus, we have ideas on what adjustment that we’ll want to make. Sure. So, I think that learning aspect, you know, is very important. And earlier when we touched on shared learning, I think it becomes even more important because I’ve also come to realize in doing this work is that we don’t have a lot of foresight. Usually what we call foresight is actually somebody else’s hindsight.

Yeah.

And we recognize that because we heard it from a colleague or we read about it in a report or we heard it on your podcast. Right. So suddenly why it’s novel, it hasn’t happened to us, is that we have some insight because we’ve learned from you, perhaps.

Right. And the element of better recovery. So, there’s the element of how we learn, but what about better recovery?

Yeah, I think the recovery aspect is both like traditional and well understood and still at the same time poorly understood. Remember that television show MacGyver? I think there’s even a reboot on MacGyver.

Yes. 

Yeah, so each generation can relate to MacGyver. And his recoveries were all improvisation, which is nothing what safe systems look like. Right. In safe systems, recovery is more preset. So, we’ve anticipated to this, we’ve written some instructions, we may be trained in simulators. So at least we have a plan B in place. So now when we perceive the need, we can invoke the plan, and we can perform reasonably well. But to kind of add to that is I’d worked with a physician. He was the chief medical officer. He was the ED physician who received the patients who came from the hotel, the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Kansas City, when their walkway collapsed. 

Oh, right. Yeah.

That was a very well-known event in the engineering world. And what Bill told me was none of our pre-planned stuff worked. You know, we had all of these things in place, and we had done the drills, but really what worked, what gave us that resiliency was getting people to the ED that knew both about the patients as well as the ED as well as how the hospital worked. There, the thinking together with the people, that’s what made the resiliency work in his mind. I believe that as well, because I’ve not been in the Technical Support Center on many real nuclear events. I was in one alert, but I’ve also been in many, many drills. The thing I remember most about the drills is the NRC people controlling the drills Nothing that we had ready to go ever worked because they wanted to test us. They wanted to test and see how resilient we were when our plan B didn’t work and what was our plan C as in Charlie and D as in Delta.

Interesting.

So, I’ve become a big believer in both is, you know, get prepped, be ready, have things to go, but then also be prepared to be there and make adjustments so that your adjustments work.

It’s very similar to pilot training. What you’re describing in terms of putting different scenarios where we know things have not go per plan and then having that complexities go into different additional scenarios to see how you respond to those events.

Yeah, that’s an excellent example. And, you know, not being a pilot is, you know, we get to see a lot more about aviation safety than I think other people get to see of things like nuclear safety or patient safety.

Sure.

But, you know, to your example, Eric, I think Al Haynes, who was the captain of that United flight that lost all their hydraulics and was able to land in Sioux City, a good example of with all the preparation work in air transportation, that was still something that was outside of their experience and training.

Correct.

Yeah. To circle back to our earlier point though, is after that event, you know, changes were made, both in procedures as well as training. And I think even there was some hardware changes that were made to give them additional capabilities when they lose hydraulics.

Yeah. The sad part on that particular one is from a system design standpoint, there was the engineer, one of the engineers that designed the hydraulic system for it, for the DC-10, allegedly. So he wrote a book afterwards, allegedly had Escalade raised the concern that there wasn’t a failover if the hydraulic line was cut, but it was ignored as a very low probability risk at the time, and struggled living with himself afterwards and trying to deal with the aftermath, knowing that he saw something, but whether he pushed far enough to drive the change.

Well, my, my hope is he came out okay. Yes, in the long run after that.

Exactly.

I think to touch on another aviation event, there was a large airliner for one of the Japanese carriers that they had a structural failure and lost their tail.

Oh yeah, yep, Japan Airlines.

And remember, the engineer who designed the repair actually took his own life, so he did not work through that.

He didn’t. It helped. Exactly. Yeah. So, so this element you touched on as well in terms of situational awareness. Is that something you can train, and how do you do it in a context like healthcare?

Yeah, that’s an excellent question. I follow the work of Micah Ensley quite closely on situational awareness. So oftentimes when I speak, I’m talking directly from the Ensley model. Remember that she was the chief scientist for the United States Air Force. When she developed that. If I was the chief scientist for the United States Air Force, I’d tell everybody. In fact, I would lead the podcast with that. But as 3 elements, there’s the perception first, and then there’s the sensemaking, and then there’s the projection part. And I think we really have to talk as we go and as we train and as we educate the new folks on what do we look for and why and what’s good and bad look like. And that’s part of that learning aspect. That you were touching on is that you can teach people what to look for. In fact, back to Hall Nagel, his first step of the 4 is knowing what to look for. So, I think that’s one of the overlooked parts of situational awareness is getting people to understand where they should be looking and what they should be looking for and what the good and bad look like.

But if you can get that first step, the perception, then you have a good chance to do that second step, which is that cognition, and think about, okay, what does that mean for us in the moment?

And so, in a scenario like this, because it assumes that the scenario is knowable, or is there ways of even sensing if you don’t know that the particular scenario could occur?

Yeah, yeah, a good point is that, you know, things that have happened before, we tend to have a little more collective insight into, but then we want to be prepared for things that we haven’t seen before. And I think to touch on another book, the Wyckoff and Sutcliffe book about high reliability organizing, they call it managing the unexpected. Sure. So, we have managing the expected Hey, this is a known event. But then we also need to be prepared for what happens when things look like they’re not known events, or maybe even it’s an event that’s unknown to everybody.

Sure.

So, in James Reason’s work, he talks about situational surprise. Hey, this happens. I just didn’t think it was going to happen today. Yep. But then there’s fundamental surprise where we never thought this would ever happen. And maybe in that United flight with the loss of hydraulics, they viewed that as a fundamental surprise. That one engineer mentioned that maybe we should prepare for this. And they said, oh, that hasn’t happened and will never happen because we have 3 independent and redundant hydraulic systems. You know, the probability that we would lose all of the hydraulics. Even though on that United flight, Their American Flight 191 had lost all hydraulics takeoff at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport.

Right.

So, they had a chance to realize that one assumption was poor and maybe even make some adjustments in those few years they had between the American flight and the United flight. Keep in mind, I’m not an aviation safety expert, but when you’re into the safety business like yourself, is you tend to look at aviation events and power events and bridge failures and dam failures. And here’s a traffic, you know, situation. And there’s a lot of commonalities in how and why we experience these safety events.

Yep. And I know when we spoke, you had some very powerful examples from healthcare, from some of the work from healthcare that illustrate systems, how they can be brittle, but also how you can increase resiliency. I’d love if you could share some of those stories and examples.

This episode of the Safety Guru Podcast is brought to you by Propulo Consulting, the leading safety and safety culture advisory firm. Whether you are looking to assess your safety culture, develop strategies to level up your safety performance, introduce human performance capabilities, re-energize your BBS program, enhance supervisory safety capabilities, or introduce unique safety leadership training and talent solutions, Propulo has you covered. Visit us at propolo.com.

Sure. Yeah, you know, so the system that’s brittle fails suddenly without warning. So, brittleness is the opposite of resiliency.

Sure.

So resilient systems are a little tougher. And if you like trees, you can say oak is a little more brilliant or brittle.

Yep.

And the palm tree is a little more resilient. It bends over in the wind.

Sure.

I actually prefer the candy analogy a little better. So, there’s the toffee, which snaps. It’s brittle, but the caramel, you know, is a little more resilient.

Yes.

And in healthcare, we need to be a lot more like the caramel.

Right.

And the idea is that They’re both made of the same basic ingredients, but the caramel is prepared at a different temperature. So, the sugar molecules are a lot longer and they’re more connected.

Sure.

And in healthcare, when we’re more connected with each other is that we team better and it makes us more resilient. And you know, that’s a good lesson. So, in healthcare, there’s many medication errors where it happens all at once and it’s over.

Right.

But then there’s also examples of where we have good second chances. If we monitor well after the patient receives the med, we realize they’re in distress and maybe there’s a reversal agent or maybe there’s some longer-term treatment. I think the best healthcare event to know in terms of resiliency happened in the Pacific Northwest. There’s actually an equipment failure a catheter malfunctioned in an open-heart procedure and burned a hole through this patient’s heart.

Oh wow.

And they realized, hey, this is trouble. How do we bounce back from this? So they, they kept him alive on a mechanical heart, an assistive device.

Sure.

And then they looked for a transplant, and they found a donor, and he received a heart transplant. And he wakes up weeks later at another medical center to hear quite a story about how they saved his life.

My goodness.

So that, that in my mind is like the Apollo 13 resiliency story showing up with our healthcare providers. 

And also, a failure that is likely not on the radar of the average surgeon that’s performing. You’re not expecting the equipment maybe to malfunction, but also then to burn, to cause a burn.

Definitely. So, so we don’t know if that was situational or fundamental surprise, but I’m positive that when they were doing their procedure, they weren’t thinking that, hey, this Swan-Ganz catheter is going to get hot as a firecracker and burn a hole right through this man’s heart. And then what would we do?

Right. 

And as far as I know, that, that was the first time that healthcare ever encountered something like that. So that was them managing the unexpected.

No kidding. Any other examples of the work that you do in terms of healthcare space to make the system more resilient?

Yeah, yeah. Our thinking is that, you know, if we practice good safety science, we should be able to reduce those harm events in healthcare by 80% every improvement cycle. So for big hospitals, that’s about every 2 years. Sure. In practice, most people see more of a 50% reduction.

Still substantial.

Still, still good enough. And we look for that both in patient safety as well as workforce safety. Mm-hmm. I think the difficulty in resilience engineering is that it’s not something that you can buy. It’s an emergent property of the work system.

Sure.

So, for systems to become more resilient, you have to get healthcare leaders to understand what makes us brittle, what makes us resilient, so they can jealously guard the things that they have while they work on adding more. So, you know, people who can think, like strong critical thinking skills, including questioning attitude.

Yep.

Getting response teams together. In healthcare, almost everybody has like a rapid response team or a medical response team.

Sure.

But then also, I think the untapped part is with technology and information systems. Can we use what we know in the electronic healthcare records to create more situational awareness among the caregivers and providers?

Sure.

Remember that show House? Another TV show. I have a kind of a TV show theme today. House seems to be the most opposite of all the healthcare television shows. Because they have one patient with a group of doctors that has nothing better to do but sit around and talk about their one patient. And in my experience is that it’s, there’s many patients and everybody has to split their time among many patients, but they’re never sitting around with their other doctors talking about one patient. Sure. But then the healthcare record, if we can use, uh, AI perhaps, or, or other, uh, more straightforward technologies to tell us what’s going on with our patients. So, I hold out a lot of hope for things like automated global trigger tools.

Sure.

And how the triggers can set situational awareness and maybe even create a central nervous system for a hospital where instead of having safety huddle for 15 minutes in the morning, we have more of a control room for the hospital, where we have people that can watch over populations of patients and do that perception in the Ensley model.

Interesting. When you were touching on that, you started out by talking about people becoming critical thinkers. How do you help people improve their critical thinking skills? Because it’s so important in the system view, right? 

Yeah, so important. I don’t think it matters which industry you look at, that the thinking errors are the single largest contribution to the severe loss events. In healthcare, it’s 40%. 40% of the acts leading to serious patient harm are critical thinking breakdowns. And then as you go to other industries, you know, the numbers can come up and come down, but it’s the single largest bit.

Sure.

The experts in talking about thinking are split. Some of them say that it’s a talent and others say, no, it’s a skill. And I’m firmly in the skill family. Is that not everybody can be great as a thinker, but everybody can become a little better. Sure. I think the best way to teach thinking is to create a vocabulary so you can talk about it. And then through the context of job experiences, share how you think and think differently. The nuclear power operators and the physicians I work with both say the same thing. In our training, there are a lot of technical details. We have to learn the right answers, but we also learn how to think differently. They’re a little more structured in their thinking. They have more discipline. They use logic more like the physician’s differential diagnosis. 

Sure.

In fact, if you want to get started, I’d recommend two well-known books, especially for your healthcare listeners. How Doctors Think by Jerome Groopman. He uses case study method and it’s an easy read. Better by a nurse, Gay Rubenfeld. Critical Thinking Tactics for Nurses. Now, she’s a nurse and a nurse educator and researcher, so she wrote it from a nursing perspective. She could have easily entitled her book Critical Thinking Tactics for Everybody on the Planet. She does a good job in saying, here’s what we mean when we say critical thinking, and here’s how to get started with some skills. But that might be the best answer, you know, to your question is that You know, human performance in general and culture and even the bigger picture, 3-step approach. Define a behavior as an expectation, something like questioning attitude.

Sure.

Then enable them with the knowledge and skills so they can do that if they choose. So now I have somebody that knows what to do and knows how to do it if they choose. And then step 3, that habit, that accountability is that big step where they actually practice that skill that they know as a habit. And that’ll give you that human reliability and to a large degree, that resiliency that you’re looking for.

And you touched on this element of questioning attitude and that struck me in any nuclear operation I’ve worked with. Is how embedded that mindset, or even the terminology around questioning attitude, is in everyone. And it turns into habits, rituals that occur daily. You would think that that’s something you can easily transpose in any environment as well.

Yeah, I think transpose, yes. And then when you said easily, that one didn’t strike me as strong, but that might be that questioning attitude that you talked about is that, you know, growing up in that environment, I was, I was 22 and right out of college when I worked in a nuclear power plant. So, I grew up in that environment, and it’s surprising how much, how sharply they think and then think with each other.

Yes.

So, in a nuclear power plant, you don’t make any bold assertions because now you have the entire room, you know, kind of picking apart your thinking, right? You get out into the rest of the, the world especially like on social media, is that the critical thinking not nearly as sharp. And people don’t question assumptions and they don’t really look for the logical fallacies. But I think you’re exactly right with those reactor operators, pilots on the flight deck, is those operators that are at the sharp end tend to have a very keen questioning attitude. Cause it might be, you know, the saying, which I heard it from a reactor operator, but maybe it was also a pilot saying, is that there’s old pilots and there’s bold pilots, but you don’t see too many old, bold pilots.

They haven’t made it. I think there’s an element as well to get to that questioning attitude. I’ve observed definitely within pilots, there’s a sense of once you’re in the air, it’s an unforgiving environment. So, you don’t want to be in that scenario, that situation. There’s also this, I call it a healthy paranoia. Others have created other terminology that’s probably more eloquent around it, but there’s a healthy degree of expecting something could go wrong. And I see very similar characteristics in nuclear because the consequence is huge, you know, it’s unforgiving. And so, there’s this paranoia, healthy paranoia, which supports questioning attitude. You expect things to not go necessarily per the plan.

Yeah, yeah, excellent point. I would probably frame that around the preoccupation with failure, which is one of those 5 Wyckoff and Sutcliffe HRO principles, is, you know, that to have a preoccupation with failure is you have a very healthy skepticism and you attend to all of the little things that you need to go right in an effort to have nothing go wrong. Maybe what James Reason called the dynamic non-event. So, I think preoccupation with failure is very misunderstood, especially in healthcare. They make it sound like we just sit around with this anxiety that things are going to go horribly, horribly wrong. But no, no, it’s that you know that you have to be focused on a lot of important details to give yourself some assurance that it’s okay. So, it can add up to success.

Correct.

And, and so the way you had framed that, I think, is, is very accurate and very helpful in advancing that in the positive about what we should be doing.

Yeah, because if you assume, if you have an overconfidence bias, assume a positive outcome, you’re more likely to miss some of those early warning signs that something is happening in the system.

Exactly. Yeah, now to add to that point is, you know, in a nuclear power plant, the one that I worked in most recently was worth $4.5 billion. And if we made a mistake, we could turn a $4.5 billion asset into a $500 million liability.

Right.

Plus, we all would lose our jobs and maybe we would spread radioactive contamination apart. Across the eastern United States. That, that could all happen, right? But I thought in healthcare, where there was a living person in your hand and you had the ability to either make them better or to harm them and maybe take their life away, that seemed to be even a closer link to safety in my mind.

You think so? Yeah.

So, I’ve talked to some of my clinician colleagues about this, and they said, “No, I still think that the airline pilot and the nuclear power operator have a bigger responsibility.” But having worked in those industries, I wonder if it’s back maybe into the caregivers and providers in healthcare. I think like a perfusionist who is running a machine that has the blood from their patients circulating and becoming oxygenated. Right. They are literally controlling the life of that patient. Absolutely. And it’s not like being on the flight deck of a 787 to say like, well, if this happens, then this might happen. And then if this goes bad and we don’t recover here and you go through like 8 things, is then we can have an event. I mean, I think it’s a more direct linkage. Sure. I would maintain that everybody’s job and safety is important. Absolutely. And I think it’s an element of how you see your role and the ownership you take in that direct call. Yeah, yeah.

Especially that idea of that risk sensitivity, that what you’re doing at the moment is, is very important. And if it goes wrong, here’s what happens. And then how do we know that it’s go wrong? Because there’s usually a story behind it. Sure. Where here’s what happens.

And Craig, you’ve authored books, um, and you help organizations improve the resilience of their system. Um, tell me about your books and tell me a little bit about how somebody can reach out to you if they want, um, your to carry this conversation forward, or also think about how I could make my system more resilient.

Exactly. Well, thanks. Yeah, I think the best way to read about our work in healthcare is through Zero Harm. Sure. So, it talks about safety management systems in healthcare and improving both patient safety and workforce safety. If you wanted a more compact form, I wrote a chapter with our chief executive officer, who’s a nurse, Tammy Strong. And that shows up in the Healthcare Quality book. It’s Chapter 5 on safety science and high reliability organizing. So given the opportunity, read a whole book or read a chapter. I think a lot of people go for the chapter. And I admire that, you know. But I like to talk to leaders, especially who are safety minded. And the easiest way to get a hold of us at Reliability for Life is through our website. Or we have a strong LinkedIn presence, and you could either look for the company Reliability for Life, or you can look for me, Craig Clapper, PE.

Excellent. Well, thank you so much, Craig, for joining me today and sharing your thoughts around systems, uh, how we can make them more resilient, how individuals can become better critical thinkers and, and surface, uh, potential brittle systems. Or items within a brittle system. Excellent.

Thank you for having me. Excellent.

Thank you so much. Take care.

Thank you for listening to The Safety Guru on C-suite Radio. Leave a legacy. Distinguish yourself from the past. Grow your success. Capture the hearts and minds of your teams. Elevate your safety. Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their safety leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance. Begin your journey at execsafetycoach.com. Come back in two weeks for the next episode with your host, Eric Michrowski. This podcast is powered by Propulo Consulting.

ABOUT THE GUEST

Craig Clapper is a founder and the chief knowledge officer of Reliability 4 Life, a consulting group specializing in improving human performance in complex systems using evidence-based methods derived from high-reliability organizations. Craig has more than 30 years of experience improving reliability in power, transportation, manufacturing, and healthcare. His expertise includes failure analysis, event analysis, systems thinking, system reliability improvement, and safety culture transformation. Craig has led safety culture and high-reliability organizing (HRO) transformations for Duke Energy, the US Department of Energy, ABB, Westinghouse, Framatome ANP, Sentara Healthcare, Sharp Healthcare, Banner Health, and many others. Prior to Reliability 4 Life, Craig was the Chief Knowledge Officer of Healthcare Performance Improvement (HPI), the Chief Operating Officer of HPI, the Chief Operating Officer of Performance Improvement International, Vice President of Failure Prevention Inc (FPI), Systems Engineering Manager for Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Station, and Systems Engineering Manager for Palo Verde Nuclear Generation Station.

For more Information: https://reliability4life.com/

RELATED EPISODE

STAY CONNECTED

The Safety Guru with Eric Michrowski

More Episodes: https://thesafetyculture.guru/

C-Suite Radio: https://c-suitenetwork.com/the-safety-guru/

Powered By Propulo Consulting: https://propulo.com/

Eric Michrowski: https://ericmichrowski.com

EXECUTIVE SAFETY COACHING

Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their Safety Leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance.

Safety Leadership coaching has been limited, expensive, and exclusive for too long.

As part of Propulo Consulting’s subscription-based executive membership, our coaching partnership is tailored for top business executives that are motivated to improve safety leadership and commitment.
Unlock your full potential with the only Executive Safety Coaching for Ops & HSE leaders available on the market.
Explore your journey with Executive Safety Coaching at https://www.execsafetycoach.com.
Executive Safety Coaching_Propulo

The Debrief Culture: Human Factors Leadership for Accountability and Learning with Brandon Williams

The Debrief Culture: Human Factors Leadership for Accountability and Learning with Brandon Williams

LISTEN TO THE EPISODE: 

ABOUT THE EPISODE

We welcome back Brandon Williams, former fighter pilot and seasoned expert in human factors and safety leadership, for another profound episode of The Safety Guru that you won’t want to miss! In this intriguing conversation, we explore The Debrief Culture, a powerful approach rooted in the debriefing method and mindset of elite fighter pilots that transforms organizational performance and builds a culture of continuous improvement. Drawing on his experience in high-stakes aviation environments, Brandon shares insights on creating a structured debrief culture that can be applied across industries to drive consistent accountability, clear communication, continuous learning, and sustainable growth. Tune in for a contemplative discussion on human factors leadership for accountability and learning, as Brandon unpacks actionable, practical strategies to help leaders build an effective debrief culture that fosters a high-growth mindset, combats complacency, and drives learning from both wins and missteps. Join us!

READ THE EPISODE

Real leaders leave a legacy. They capture the hearts and minds of their teams. Their origin story puts the safety and well-being of their people first. Great companies ubiquitously have safe yet productive operations. For those companies, safety is an investment, not a cost. For the C-Suite, it’s a real topic of daily focus. This is the Safety Guru with your host, Eric Michrowski, a globally recognized ops and safety guru, public speaker and author. Are you ready to leave a safety legacy? Your legacy success story begins now.

Hi and welcome to the Safety Guru. Today I’m very excited to have with me Brandon Williams, who’s back for a second episode. He’s a former U.S. air Force fighter pilot with over two decades of experience leading teams in complex high-risk environments. He’s now a captain with a major airline and is a safety and human factors expert. Brandon, really happy to have you back with me. Our first episode, I think got a lot of interest, so would love to continue the conversation today.

Awesome. Well, Eric, again, thanks for having me back on the podcast. Like you said a few years ago now, but it was, it was a great talk. I remember we had a lot of good discussion there. And as always, I love talking about, you know, anything safety, human factors related because as I’m sure we’ll get into it and as you know, critically important and high reliability in these churches. But really anything you do; human factors is always at play. And so, for leaders, understanding that is so important. So again, thank you for having me on.

Absolutely. So, so maybe let’s start there. I want to make sure we spend a lot of time today on Debrief Culture. But before, let’s do a bit of a recap in terms of what is human factors. I know we talked about it in our first episode, but let’s start there. 

Yeah. Well, anyone in the safety world, most people probably know about human factors, right? Typically, it’s associated with an engineering concept. You know, the idea of engineering technology for the human to interact with it. So, you know, these laptops were on the chairs we’re sitting in the desk, we’re sitting in the cars we drive, the airplanes I fly, you know, everything had all those pieces of technology, had some human factors designed into it, how the humans going to interact with that. And so, it takes into account all of our human factors and human errors that we’re prone to. You know, for example, from the flying world, you know, a red light goes off or master warning caution. Why is that bright and yellow right in front of my face? Because that’s going to get my attention right away. Right. Same thing in your car. Right. I mean, why don’t we have, you know, the, the, the modern cars now with the sensors on the front and the back, which will alert you to you’re about to hit something, and a lot of them now will even start braking for you if it says you’re going to hit this type thing.

So that’s how far we’ve come in human factors, you know, engineering, design and technology. Well, what I’ve taken from that, you know, a few years ago when I came up with this idea of human factors leadership was, hey, look, we talk about human factors all the time in, you know, how we design things, how we design procedures. But I said we don’t really always consider it. When we think about our teams. Sure. I don’t think. Or how we had signed our teams, or how leaders have to understand human factors of their people. And when we talk safety, obviously that’s a huge idea. I mean, human factors really have become, you know, what aviation safety is all about. You know, understanding that when someone shows up to work, a professional, no one shows up saying, hey, I’m going to make a mistake today. I’m going to make a bad decision that’s going to result in a bad outcome. I mean, nobody shows up. I don’t show up to my job, you know, as a major airline pilot, saying, hey, I’m going to miss a switch or I’m going to do this. No, but it’s because of those human factors, right, that drives us there, that, you know, our limitations as humans.

But hey, that’s okay because that’s what makes us human. At the end of the day, you know, my talks always like to say, you know, raise your hand if you’ve never made a mistake.

And I do the same. One person is their hand once.

There’ll be a few people that don’t. And I like to, and I always like to kind of point say, congratulations, this is amazing. You’ve never made a mistake. That’s phenomenal. But, but it’s so true. But that’s what makes us human. Right? And I think there’s. This is another conversation, but I think, you know, that human factor, I think that’s actually going to become more important in this world we’re in now as AI starts to become way more involved in what we do. That human touch, if you will, I think it’s going to be even more valuable in so many other industries. But that’s another conversation. But the human factors, like you said and like we’re talking about, is really why we as humans make decisions in certain environments. Right. And so, from a safety standpoint, just a pure technical safety standpoint, that’s critical in understanding how we design our procedures, our process, as, you know, our safety gaps, you know, in the system. For example, me as a, again, major airline pilot, I think there are four areas where I check my flap settings required to before we even take off. Why? Because that’s such a critical feature.

And in the, you know, many, many years we’ve had airplanes with flaps, we’ve had pilots take off within proper flap settings, unfortunately, some that have resulted in accidents. And so that’s a critical feature which we have many checks and balances, I call it, in the system that requires us to. To check that in in many different areas. So just an example how you design a process. Right. But as leaders, it’s also critical to understand, you know, these things like fatigue, mental and physical complacency, you know, normalization of deviance, which I know people in safety understand what that is. But, you know, we. This idea that we cut corners a little bit. A little bit. A little bit, A little bit. And then what happens, you know, this cutting the corner becomes the norm, and now there’s a set procedure that’s been knocked out, not because we, you know, we’re not. We want to willfully disregard rules, but because we thought we were doing something good to make something better. But in actuality, we’re deviating from a standard procedure, right. In our brain, it says, hey, I’m doing something more efficient. But the problem is we’re missing gaps or checks and balances supposed to help us, you know, do something.

So human factors really go back to, again, Eric, understanding why we as humans make decisions in certain environments, but also as leaders designing our teams and processes to help our people, you know, mitigate those human errors and those human factors. So, we do ultimately drive better performance. Because at the end of the day, you know, better performance, whether its safety is what, you know, no mishaps, you know, no injuries, no damaged equipment, machinery. But also, for any team, performance is critical. Right. So, at the end of the day, it’s all about driving better performance.

And to get to that better performance, one of the pieces you’ve written lots of articles, lots of blogs on, is the debrief concept. That’s really, really key in. In aviation fighter pilots. And I want to get to a debrief culture. But before we go there, maybe if you could share a little bit about what a debrief is.

Right, absolutely. And. And I’m glad you brought that up because you’re right, there’s a few different parts of what I talk about when you talk about this, human factors, leadership. But the debrief, I think is probably, in my opinion, the most powerful piece of this. And it’s kind of what I finish on when I do my keynotes, because it’s a really great idea to finish on. And debrief is all about the debrief. At the end of the day, all it’s, its whole entire purpose is to, like I said earlier, is to drive better performance for the team, period. Dot. I mean, that’s, that’s what it’s all about now, how you get there and what’s involved in that debrief. There is a structure that we have and there’s a way you do that, but at the end of the day, you know, that’s what it’s all about. And so, you know, when we talk about safety, when we talk about, you know, whatever industry you’re in, what are we trying to do? You know, if you’re trying to make better safety metrics, you’re trying to design better, safer processes, you’ve got to find a way that really pulls out those gaps in the system.

Right. You’ve got to find a way that is going to bring this to light.

Sure.

Now, any good safety system, any good reliable safety program has what a very open, you know, reporting system or should some way that, that, you know, your frontline leaders, frontline people can report, hey, here’s an issue I see. Here’s a gap in the system I see. Right. You’ve got to have that. So that’s one piece of it which can be incorporated into debriefs. But the other piece of that is debriefing after tasks, projects, you know, whatever, whatever you’re doing. So immediately after that we can talk about some, some things maybe that didn’t go right or some things that did go right. That’s a key piece of debrief. We debrief after everything, even, especially after things go right, because we discover near misses. We want to get best practices out of that. Right. But the whole point of that debrief is to set an environment where we can get open and honest. That’s the key piece there. Open and honest, a tone of accountability, I call it open and honest inputs from that so that we can ultimately drive better performance, get lessons learned out of that and drive that back. Now, I know a lot of people are saying, well, we do this, we have after actions or we have Debriefs or we, you know, we have, you know, team huddles or we do this after, you know, this or that and that.

And I think it’s great that people are, are leaning towards that way. You know, I see that a lot in healthcare. I work with a lot of hospitals, and I’ll ask them, hey, do you debrief after this? Like, well, you know, after code blues or maybe after major procedure surgery or after this, we’ll talk and I’ll ask them, okay, well, how do you do that? You know, and, and a lot of times, well, we get the team together and I’m like, who runs the debrief? Like, typically it’s the, you know, the attending physician or the surgeon or, you know, you know, whatever, or the lead nurse or, you know, whatever, whoever was in that, that task. And I’m like, okay, would you get honest feedback? You know, does it go well? Typically, you know, whoever’s leading it would just say, hey, here’s what happened, and anybody got anything? And you know, maybe sometimes someone will say something and, okay, great, you know, let’s, let’s go about our day and, you know, maybe they’ll learn something out of that and then we’ll move on. So, which the good. The part of that, I mean, it’s great they do that and there is learning that happens in those.

And that’s important. But I think the key piece and what makes the debrief, the fighter pilot debriefs, which is where I got this idea from, so different than anything else you’ve ever heard that’s similar to this is how you set that tone of accountability. Okay. How you set that tone where we bring down those barriers to communication and everyone, all the way down to the most junior member on that team feels like they can speak up. And it’s this mindset that we’re not trying to. It’s not a. Don’t think of it as an individual evaluation. Right? What I always say, we’re trying to get away from that blame and train feel that we, I think we’ve, we’re so accustomed to, in, in the professional world, to a learning and growing mindset, right? It’s not about evaluation. It’s not about individual performance. This is purely about what happened, why it happened, and how we’re going to make things better for the team next time. Not just our team, but anyone in our organization. Maybe there’s things we need to change. Maybe there’s things we need to take back to leadership, some processes and some learning that’s going to happen out of that.

But that’s the key, you know, the key difference, I think, in anything else that, you know, you’ve seen when you, when you talk about what happened and why it happened. But it’s. You’ve got to have that, like I said, open, honest tone of accountability type, type environment.

And so how. How do you go about introducing this in your culture? Right, because this is through and through aviation.

Right.

Probably at least Since World War I, from what I’ve, I’ve heard in, in terms of the history, it’s ingrained. But how do you start building that into a culture? You talked about healthcare as an example.

Right, right. And that’s a great question, too, because that’s one of the biggest, you know, questions I get from teams that I work with. And they say, well, you know, this is great, Brandon, but I mean, how do you, how do you get people to be open and honest, you know, talk about their missteps or missteps of their peers or even leaders sometimes in these. And I said, that’s a great, great question. And like you said, your kind of just alluded to one. And actually, just so you know, the fighter pilot debris kind of goes back to the Vietnam era, is where we trace this back to when, when we realized fighter pilots were realizing that, hey, if you make it through 10 missions, these young fighter pilots coming over, they made it through 10 missions, their chance of survival exponentially went up. Why? Because after 10 missions, you. That’s experience you’re gaining, right? And so, they said, how can we accelerate that learning? How could we get every ounce of learning out of combat and training missions? So, we kind of simulate this first 10 missions. And so first it was, hey, we’re going to make our training as realistic as we can, which we learned from that.

And then things like Red Flag out Nilis, that all came about. But the other key piece was the debrief. You know, how do we accelerate learning? And we’re going to debrief; we’re going to reconstruct what happened and we’re going to find the root causes. And that’s why we as fighter pilots hold it so near and dear, because we said the real learning always happens in the debrief. I mean, yes, you got to have experience, but when we learn what happened and why it happened, that happens in the debrief. So that’s the first piece is you’ve got to do it. It’s got to be part of. That’s why I call it a debrief. Culture, it’s got to be part of how you do things. Because as we know as humans, the more we do something, what happens? The better we get at it, the better we. More we get used to it, right? I mean, you know, again, going back to the Air Force as a fighter pilot from day one of pilot training, you know, brand new, never many times, a lot of us, hardly any aviation experience whatsoever. We go out, we fly that first man.

What do we do when we first come back? We debrief. And then from there on out, every single sortie you do as an Air Force pilot, you will debrief. So literally thousands of debriefs I’ve done just as a, you know, fighter pilot in my time. So that’s the first thing, is making it how you do business, right? And it doesn’t even have to be this thing where we go and shut the door and sit down and, you know, talk for an hour or 30 minutes. I do this a lot with. Sometimes I work with sales teams, and I do this all the time. I say, hey, look, you can debrief after a sales call. Just sit down. If you had another team member you and. Or maybe you went and had a sales pitch, sit down, you know, take. Go to a cup of coffee, sit down, 15, 20 minutes, just talk about it. You know, what happened? Why did this happen? What could we do different next time? You know, so it’s. It’s this idea of ingraining it and how you do business, you know, ingraining it in a tool for your. For your teams to use.

So that’s the first thing is making it part of your culture, like you said. And then the second thing, you know, the second major part of this is, is like most things, I mean, shockingly, guess where it starts is, is with leadership, right? With. With team leaders, with organizational leaders. Because you as a leader have to do what. You have to show your own transparency and accountability. And if you are involved in a debrief, you’ve got to be one of the first people to speak up and talk about your missteps and talk about things, you know, you’ve done or you could have done better for the team. You know, the. The Blue Angels debrief that I’ve. I’ve talked about. There’s one. The reason I show. It’s about a minute and a half clip that I show my keynotes a lot of times, and I know I’ve given you access to that, so you can go watch that. But I think the key part of that is before they even start talking about their execution and, you know, watching the tape and trying to. What they could have done better and what they need to improve on.

They go around the room, they call it a safety. And each one of them, each member on that team fesses up to some things they, you know, didn’t do well that day or they could have done better. Like they were off air speed, their power control wasn’t good. They did this, they did all the way up to the team leader. The boss says that, you know, what they could have done better. And what’s the whole purpose of that, Eric, is purely just to bring down those barriers to communication. Right. I mean, we’re talking the Blue Angels, right? So, like, best of the best type A individuals, right, that. That, you know, essentially the best at what they do. And so. But I think it’s so powerful. The one key thing I pass on to my clients and people I work with is, hey, especially leaders, again, going back to this, what you have to have in organization is leaders that are transparent, leaders that hold themselves accountable, and leaders that bring down that, you know, those barriers, communication by, again, things I could have done better for you as a team. And I know you’ve probably been part of teams where you’ve seen this and how powerful that is when you have a leader that can do that.

And then also how extremely demoralizing it is when you. That. That can’t do that or even worse, you know, will kind of point out the errors of their team members, you know, without, you know, talking about their own. Their own missteps. So that. That’s the Q2 key pieces, though, is making it part of your culture, how you do it, you know, so people get used to it. But also having that tone of accountability within your organization, starting at the top.

And it does require very high growth mindset. Right. Because people have to recognize that, yeah, I’ve done this a million times, but I can do this better.

Right.

In aviation, there’s really this mindset of it’s an unforgiving environment. Once I’m up in the air, if something goes wrong, I need to know as much as I can.

Right.

That mindset of growth, and that can always get better isn’t always present in every organization. So how do you overcome that?

Yeah, that growth mindset, I think that goes back to, you know, again, realizing what you do. Right. And. And kind of like you said, you know, we always say, like you said, I love you. You talked about aviation’s unforgiving. You know, it’s the Famous quote is. I’m not even sure who said it, but we talk about all the time is aviation itself is not inherently dangerous, but it’s incredibly unforgiving, you know, incredibly unforgiving. What does that mean? Just like you said, you know, if you ever get into that complacent mindset of, I know it all, I’ve seen it all, you know, aviation has a way of throwing things at you that you never in a million years would have trained for, it would have thought for. I mean, there’s. You go back and look at so many incidents, so many. I don’t know if you remember back in the. Was it late 80s, the Sioux City DC10 with engine failure and how they had to. Or, sorry, the flight controls where it burned through the hydraulics, and they basically controlled the airplane with the power. Now, unfortunately, there was some loss of life, but they saved a lot of people, too.

And there’s so many things that came out of that, you know, crew coordination, how they did that working, you know, just so many things. But the point of that is, like they said when they. When that first happened, and the captain, he’s talking to, you know, back to his operations center, and they’ve got the engineers on the line and like, well, that can’t happen. And he’s like, well, I’m telling you, this is what’s happened. It severed our lines. We have no idea. They’re like, well, that can’t happen. It’s not designed that way. You’re like, well, this happened. So, it just. Aviation has a, you know, an incredibly sick sense of humor, of humbling you. And even the thousands and thousands of hours you have throwing things at you, whether it’s decision making, you know, aircraft issues, you name it, of throwing something at you. So, I think to you. To you. Back to your question is this idea of, you know, always say, you know, the number one enemy of all this stuff of. Of situation awareness, as we call it, of getting better is always complacency. And I think it’s. It’s. It’s a natural human instinct to be complacent.

I mean, that’s where we want to be. We. We. Our human mindset goes back to, you know, comfort, right? Once we get everything solid, we have food, we have water, we have shelter. Okay, now I can relax a little bit, right? It’s what you want to do. So, I think what I always tell people is this constant. I use this term, healthy paranoia sometimes, because it’s this idea that I got, again, I got from aviation, you Know what could go wrong? What have I not thought about? I mean, you’re not always paranoid, but you are in the back of your mind, little mind, that little thing of, what have we not done? What if? What have we not thought about? Hey, if I’m flying along here, if this engine does fail, where’s my closest piece of concrete I’d set this airplane down at, right? And so, I think that’s what it goes back to, is leaders having that heightened sense of situational awareness and also passing on to our people of, hey, what have we not thought about? Are we getting complacent? Because that’s a key part, again, of human factors, is again, we want to be comfortable, we want to be complacent.

Unfortunately, it’s where our mindset goes. But it’s this idea of never falling into that trap of getting completely complacent because as we know, that’s where mistakes are going to happen, right? That’s where this human error is going to seep in. That’s when something’s going to happen. So, I think it’s always going back to understanding. We haven’t. We don’t know everything. We haven’t seen everything. You know, like, just like your example earlier of, hey, I’ve done this thousand times. We’ve never had anything bad happen. Why would it happen now? And that’s when something’s going to happen, which I know you’ve probably seen this your world, but that’s one of the main reasons people would argue against, you know, safety programs. Like, we’ve done this for so long and nothing bad has ever happened. Which, as we know, that’s never a. It only takes one bad incident to, you know, unfortunately hurt someone or, you know, lose money or lose your business. So, I think it’s this idea of combating that complacency and thinking, you know, what have we not thought about and what do we need to learn? Where do we need to grow?

This episode of the Safety Guru podcast is brought to you by Propulo Consulting, the leading safety and safety culture advisory firm. Whether you are looking to assess your safety culture, develop. Develop strategies to level up your safety performance, introduce human performance capabilities, re-energize your BBS program, enhance supervisory safety capabilities, or introduce unique safety leadership training and talent solutions. Propulo has you covered. Visit [email protected].

It’s interesting you bring up Sioux City, because recently I came across, I was looking at the Japan Airline mass decompression on 747. That happened a couple years before and apparently one of the pilots, I believe they were deadheading on the flight, or they might have been a passenger had been studying. Exactly. And run multiple scenarios on the 747 where they had lost the rotors, go stabilizers and so forth. He right away came to give some advice because he had run 50, 60 simulations of how I would handle the same scenario of mass decompression, loss of hydraulics.

Yeah.

And that plane I think was flying for 32 minutes with very limited control, with no hydraulics.

That’s interesting. Yeah. There was a pilot who came up and helped and assisted with the power. He was like you said, I think he was just as. Or I know he was just a passenger, but yeah, you’re correct. I didn’t know that about that. That’s awesome. Unbelievable. 

But that, that’s, it’s incredible because it shows you’re expecting something to go wrong. Nobody’s expecting that. You have total loss of your hydraulics.

Right, right. And a key part of my, you know, outside of the debrief, but that’s why I incorporate in my planning model kind of that last piece. I always say the what ifs, you know, what are the what ifs? And now you could sit, you know, you could sit here all day and talk about what ifs. Right. I mean, what if, what if zombies come back and you know, But I, I say, you know, just take a few minutes. It’s a way for the team to re cage after you’ve been so involved in this planning process and say, okay, let’s step back, let’s think about what, you know, what have we not thought about? What could be the one thing that throws this, you know, a curveball. One of the most common things is what if our, what if someone on our team puts in their two weeks’ notice tomorrow, you know, or something like that, or what? You know, just things like that that you don’t think about. You’re like, that’s a good idea, let’s talk about that. But that’s my key piece is always, you know, take a minute and just think about, let’s think about some major what ifs here which helps us become.

What helps us become more proactive versus reactive to those changes.

Interesting. One of the things, because some people work alone you talk about is also you can do a self-debrief. Tell me a little bit about what that would look like.

Absolutely. Well, you know, debriefing implies that the team should be involved and a lot of times you do need someone else to, you know, point out some Errors or missteps for the team. But let’s be honest, a lot of times we know, whether we want to admit it or not, we know our own, you know, mistakes we did or maybe a way we could have done something better. I mean, think about it, you know, as humans say, you have a negative interaction with a, with a co-worker or, you know, another person, and later on you’re thinking about that, it may even be that night, and you’re like, you know what? Probably could have handled that a little differently. I probably should have done this and said this, and it probably wouldn’t have blown up. Or I probably should have said it like this. Or maybe they got what they wanted, and you were in a bit of a minor negotiation. You’re like, you know, what if I would have done this, then probably would have ended a little better. So, we all do that right after the fact. Why? Because it’s again, this goes back to human factors.

That survival mechanism in our, in our brain always wants us to win. So, it’s always trying to find ways we could have done something better. And so I turn that into, I say, look, you know, even after, you know, minor interact, things like what I just talked about, interaction with co-workers, a task you’ve done on your own, you know, you can do this with your, you know, things around the house, projects you’ve done and just self-debrief, you know, be honest with yourself, hey, here’s what happened. Here’s you know, why it happened and really dig deep, you know, whether it’s the five whys technique of asking why five times and trying to get to that. We call that really deep level, prop, root cause, causal factor, as I always say, and really find down to that root. So, we can do that and then take that back and say, you know, next time, here’s how I could do that. You know, next time, here’s some things I can take back. And again, this can be done, you know, in your personal life, in your professional life. There are so many different areas. And I do this all the time.

I mean, after a keynote, you know, with it, with a client, I always love to say, if they had any video of it, I always say, can I get a copy of that? And what I do is I sit down, I’ll watch it, kind of go through it one time first just to kind of see big picture. Okay, here’s how it went. And then I’ll go through it and stop and say, okay, take notes. Okay. You know, my hand motion was, was poor. Here I Need to stress this word more. My voice inflection or I was talking too fast at this point or change this to this. This sounds. Probably sounds better. Relook at how you tell this story or just. And every time I do that, I find little bits and pieces on how I can make it better. And so even though if a keynote goes well and the great client loves it, there’s always ways, you know, I can improve and, you know, drive my better performance. And that’s one way I do it. So, I think, you know, debris with a team is always the best or someone else that you can deeper foot.

But I think solve degree boosts are incredibly valuable for people.

And I think really like what you’re talking about. It’s, it’s really about learning not just from failure, but from success to say, how can we get to continuous improvement? I think your tagline is learn, adapt, improve around the debrief checklist.

Totally.

But it’s very much this mindset, we can always get better.

Absolutely. And I think that’s. That goes back to everything. Right. You know, I mean, I always say in my thousands and thousands and thousands of flying, I would have never had the perfect flight. So, I don’t think I probably ever will. But we, we strive to get there. Right. It’s like the Vince Lombardi quote I love kind of defines us. It’s like perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence. Right. So, you’re always trying to, to, you know, find that perfect flight. Always trying. You probably won’t get there, but in that pursuit, we’re making ourselves better. And that goes in any industry. Anything you do, I think is 100% right. That mindset of growth and performance improvement and as safety professionals especially, why I love working with these teams is because, I mean, let’s face it, in safety, you’re always trying to improve, right? We’re always trying to drive better. You know whether it’s metrics you’re concerned with or you’re just trying to find, you know, drive better safety outcomes, better ways to do things, better processes that incorporate safety, but without, you know, harming the business and things like that.

So, I think that’s, you know, just as that inherently that’s what you’re always doing in that role.

So, one of the quotes you, you talk about in your speeches on debrief is this concept of artificial harmony versus respectful truth. Tell me a little bit about the difference between both.

Well, yeah, so I talked earlier about that, that tone of accountability as I called it. So, remember, you know, where do we, as humans typically live? We want to avoid conflict for the most part, right? And so where are we typically at in that artificial harmony? You know, think about it. You know, when you, you know, I just talked about this with my, my kids the other day. We were talking about different cultures, and I’m like, you know how we say, hey, how are you doing? You pass someone on the street or, hey, how’s it going? I’m like, do you really honestly care, like, if you don’t know, especially, like, now? Sometimes we do. Maybe you call a family member or friend and they’ve been sick, hey, how you doing? Like, and you can tell with the body language and voice, but when we say, hey, how you doing? I’m like, I talk to my kids. I’m like, do you really honestly think we care, like, how they’re doing? I mean, it’s reading almost like it’s like saying, hi, we’re being nice and respectful and kind, but it’s a greeting. I said, you know, in other cultures, I was saying for a journey, for example, I said, when someone asks you how you’re doing, they’re honestly wanting to know, like, how are you doing?

Like, as other cultures, they really, they don’t just use it as a, as a, you know, as a greeting. So, so going back to that, that’s kind of that, you know, artificial harmony, right? Think about a cocktail party, you know, where you ask people and I talk, I tell my kid, you know, how to win friends and influence people, right? Type thing of. What do you always do? Ask. You ask them how they’re doing; you ask people about them. You know, you’re trying to build that rapport, right? So, it’s, where do we try to be? We try to avoid that conflict. So that’s that respectful or sorry, that’s that artificial harmony. Some or manufactured harmony we try to make a lot of times, right, just getting along, just trying to avoid conflict, you know, nothing critical here. Let’s just move on. Well, in a debrief, that’s not a great idea. And why? Because then you’re not going to get what I call the truth data out, right? Because if someone thinks that they saw an error or misstep, they don’t want to speak up because they don’t want to. I don’t want to accuse you of anything.

I don’t want to look like that. Especially a new person in an organization, right? What do they do? They just keep that in and say, well, it’s not Going to be a big deal. I’m just not going to say that, well, we’re never going to improve that way.

Correct.

We’re never going to get better. Right. If this stuff is not put out there. And so, you have to have what I call that respectful truth, which is that tone of accountability, which again, it’s not, it’s not investigation. We’re not trying to assign blame again, we’re getting away from the blame and train right, to learn and grow. But it’s about how we could have done better as a team. And so how do you establish that respectful truth? That’s why the first step in my model, I say set the environment and keep. Part of that is setting the tone. And it’s your job as the team leader of that debrief to set that tone. And just like the Blue Angels video I talked about, the first thing you have to do as the team leader is said, hey, here’s some things I could have done better today for the team. And you’ve got to do that part because if you don’t, everyone else is going to, you know, just keep all this stuff inside. Because after you do that, then you go around there and say, what, Eric? What. What could you. What do you have for me?

What could I have done better? And you try to give them to give you some, some inputs and feedback. Now what has that done that’s take down some of that barrier. Right now, people say, okay, we’re in a, you know, open, honest environment here. The team leader can speak up. Then I can definitely speak up and talk about my own shortcomings or maybe some things we saw that the team did other way, good way to do that is as you’re talking about your missteps, not saying, hey, Eric, you didn’t do this, versus saying, hey, we as a team, we missed this. And I think Eric would have done this if we would have done this for him or we would have provided this for him. So, you know, it also goes back to how you, you angle things with that respectful truth. But that’s the key part of that, is that artificial harmony is great, like I said, for cocktail parties, for happy hour, for, you know, just hanging out and small talk. But not great for debriefs, not great when we’re trying to improve. Right? Because that’s where you, that’s the whole purpose of improving, is finding where we had some shortcomings and where we can do better.

I’m really hearing about this is a consistent thing. We’re doing it Good or bad. We’re constantly trying to hold ourselves accountable. Not each other like you talked about blaming each other but holding each other accountable to the best level, understand system dimensions. What are the things that are occurring that maybe we aren’t aware having as a leader, the humility to. Humility, vulnerability to explore that I’m not perfect so that you have that respectful truth occurring across the board. But it’s really about embedding deep learning day in and day out from good and from bad.

Absolutely. Yeah, it is, it’s, it’s, that’s why I call it a debrief culture, right? Is because it’s this cycle of constant improvement. You know, no matter what, you know, process improvement model you adhere to, or people look at, almost all of them have some sort of at the end of it, you know, how do we improve, how do we improve? How do we go back and make this better? And that’s where the debrief serves to do that. And like I said, it really is a debrief culture and I call it a culture because of all things you just said. It takes leaders at the top that, that are vulnerable, takes leaders that are transparent that hold themselves accountable. You know, one of the things I talk about in my talks, this idea of mutual support, which is another key layer of this debrief culture and a building block of it. And mutual support is really deep level peer accountability, right? I mean it’s the kind of accountability that, that peers, we hold ourselves accountable and not of this, you know, this accountability thing. When I hear it, I always think of, I think we may have talked, talked about this on our first podcast, but you know, when I hear accountability, it’s always a negative connotation.

Like I always think of my, my, my assistant vice principal when I, in elementary school, you know, like the enforcer of the, when you got in trouble, you know, who you were going to go see. And so, but accountability I think gets that conn a lot of times, like it’s a bad word, like do this or else or you’re going to get fired or job action or whatever. And, and, and when I talk about it, I say I, I call it mutual support because that’s really what it is, right? Is, is peer level accountability is mutual support. And it’s not that I’m backing you up, Eric, because if I don’t, you know, something bad’s going to happen to me or job action, but it’s because I want you to look good when you’re leading a project. I want you to look good. I want the team to look good. You know why? Because I know you, I know you got a family, or I know what’s going on with you. And its that human connection going back to human factors again, right? And so that’s another thing you have to have with an organization I think to be a high performing team and ultimately to set up this debrief culture is that mutual support, you know, deep level camaraderie within a team with an organization making everybody human. 

And in this idea that we’re there to drive the team better. And that goes back to how leaders lead their teams, how they incentivize their teams, all kind of things, things again. But that’s a key part of that is that mutual support mindset. And like you said, I mean at the end of the day it’s how you do business, right? It’s leaders admitting their own shortcomings and showing where they could have done better. So then that, that filters down kind of, kind of through the teams and just on that, you know, I, because I hear this a lot of times like well Brandon, you know, I work in a team organization where not a lot of, you know, no name, no rank culture within my team or my leader really doesn’t. He’s not going to adhere to this. He’s not a, you know, big accountability person. So, what do I do? And I said Well influence where you can, right? I mean, because everyone is a leader in some sense. Everyone. And so, influence where, whether it’s just self-debriefs, whether it’s you and, and two or three other co-workers you can debrief on a project you’re doing, I mean influence where you can, right? 

And then that will slowly build hopefully from out to other people like that. And if there’s leaders you have that just aren’t going to embrace it, I mean there’s nothing you can do about that. But if you show, if you can do it within your own world, in your own little bubble, then you will see improvement.

And so last quick closing thought you talked about the debrief. There’s some organizations talk about after action reviews from the US Army. You also talk about the SEAL framework. Are there really differences between the different pieces? Are there things that we need to get that we can approach different ways or is really something unique about the debrief checklist?

Yeah, like you said, the deeper checklist, the model I came up with, I used a SEAL acronym, scald and that, that is a, that is a tick of the hat to I’ve worked with some other special operators before, so Navy SEALs and they use very similar type culture of what they do. High performing military teams, obviously, same reason, firepower, right? Because literally it can mean loss of life. They don’t improve in those type of environment. So, I do, I did come up with that acronym to kind of help. The S is for set the environment. Right. Just really quick, which is what we’ve talked about, you know, setting that tone of accountability. Why is that? First, because if you don’t do that, then you can forget about, you know, getting the rest of the brief working. The truth data, all the things we’ve talked about. Next is execution. So, what are you really looking at there? What was your objective? Right? Was it a clearly defined objective, first, and how did we do to measure up to that? You know, what were our results? And then from that, what is going to be what I call our debrief focus points.

Because, you know, when you look at a result, you could probably look at several things you want to talk about, but in the interest of time, you want to kind of narrow that down to maybe the two or three top areas we want to focus on. This is for major big projects, right, that you want to look at. And why don’t we have that, that even that step of execution? Because just like in the, if you watch the Blue Angels video, they’ll go through and watch the tape and just like I told you earlier in my keynote, I’ll go through and watch the tape. That’s the actual truth data, right? And that’s important because we all want to be on the same page of what actually happened before we start analyzing. Because I’m sure we’ve been in, you know, similar meetings where we’re talking about what happened and there’s a lot of assumptions and people are like, that’s not really what happened. So, we all got to be on the same page first before we start analyzing. Then we go into the analysis, which is the, the meat of that debrief, which is the a, which is really looking at, hey, what happened?

You know, what were some contributing human factors. Contributing factors, I call it, you know, whether it’s, you know, task saturation, overload, fatigue, lack of communication, we look at all those things. But what we’re really trying to get down to is that root cause or what I call that probable cause or that causal factor, sorry, which is say you, you know, something happened, and you really dig down. Yeah, but why did that happen? Why did that happen? So, you know, I use Example, the special, you know, special challenger, right? And so, I’ll ask people, why did that accident happen? They’re like, well, the O rings, you know, okay, that’s the active thing that you’re right. But let’s go back to why. And you keep asking why. I keep. And what it comes down to, you know, and this is what the investigation found too, is NASA didn’t have a solid go, no go process. I mean, at the end of the day, that was a root cause, plenty other contributing factors, right? And we talk about, you know, how they made those decisions, the influences they had, money, shuttle program. But the end of the day, they didn’t have a solid go, no go process that they used.

So, you want to dig down, like I said earlier, the five why is a great technique, but you’re just trying to get to that deep level why things happen finally. L is the lessons learned, which is after we know those root causes now, what are we going to change? You know, what are we going to get better? What are we going to implement within the organization processes, behaviors, patterns, you know, things we need to take back to leadership potentially? What are things we’re going to, we’re going to change, basically. And if you note in that checklist, one key piece I have there is you’ve got to assign, again, accountability to who’s going to oversee that change, right? And that’s a key piece of that. So, I gave you that overview. But to your question, yeah, I always tell people this all the time, look, you don’t have to take everything back, you know that I, that I tell you that I use and redo everything, but if you can just pull a few things out of here, if they can just pull out that, setting that tone of accountability piece out, you know, how you do that, I mean, that’s, that’s critical.

Or just how you analyze mishaps and really getting down to that deep level root cause or analyzing projects or tasks, I mean, if they can just take a few parts of it, that, that’s what I always say. That’s the key part of this. But having an understanding that at the backdrop of this is again going back to human factors, right, that go into that debrief, knowing that, hey, look, we know none of us made these mistakes or errors on purpose. None of us showed up here saying we’re going to do this, so let’s really get down to the deep level root cause. You know, what were the human factors at play? Maybe we didn’t have great communication. You know, like I said earlier, maybe we were mentally and physically fatigued. Maybe we’re running that revving the engine too high here. You know, there’s things that are going to come out of that that you’re going to, you’re going to really need to take step back and think about. So, I think that’s that all those pieces combined, it’s a great framework. But if you can just take a few pieces out of that, I think you’ll definitely see improvement both in how you run debriefs and then how you run your organization as well.

So, Brendan, thank you very much for coming back on the show. You’re a very engaging speaker. You talked last time about some of the elements of human factors. This time you went deeper on the debrief culture. I think it’s a hugely important piece. You also do keynotes, you do workshops. Somebody’s interested in, in tapping into some of your thinking around human factors, continuous learning debriefs. How can they get in touch with you?

Absolutely. Thanks for bringing that up, Eric. And again, thank you for having me on the show. It’s just a great time. I love talking this stuff, as you can tell, hopefully. But yeah, brandonwilliamsspeaker.com is my website. Go in there and you can reach out to me through there and find all kind of information as well. LinkedIn Brandon Williams, Speaker Just search that up and you should be able to find me. I’m also on Instagram, Facebook, leadership speaker pilot on those, if you search those and then [email protected] is my, is my email as well. So, feel free to reach out. And like I said, I love to give people, you know, the guides, free stuff all the time, things like that, because I think they’ll see how credibly valuable, useful it is when they do get it. So, thank you for bringing that up though.

Perfect.

Thank you for listening to The Safety Guru on C-suite Radio. Leave a legacy. Distinguish yourself from the past. Grow your success. Capture the hearts and minds of your teams. Elevate your safety. Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their safety leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance. Begin your journey at execsafetycoach.com. Come back in two weeks for the next episode with your host, Eric Michrowski. This podcast is powered by Propulo Consulting.

ABOUT THE GUEST

Brandon Williams is a highly sought-after speaker, airline pilot, and human factors professor with over two decades of experience leading teams in some of the world’s most dynamic, complex, and high-risk environments. A former U.S. Air Force Fighter Pilot, Lieutenant Colonel, and Safety Officer, Brandon brings a unique blend of military precision, safety expertise, and real-world leadership to organizations striving for excellence in high-reliability industries.

As a recognized expert in Human Factors and organizational safety, Brandon equips leaders with the strategies and tools to build High-Reliability Organizations (HROs) and High-Performance Teams across sectors including transportation, healthcare, energy, construction, and manufacturing. His powerful keynotes and training sessions are grounded in military aviation principles and safety science, offering actionable insights into system-level thinking, human error mitigation, and decision-making under pressure.

Brandon’s approach is both practical and transformative—he helps organizations understand the critical role of safety culture, Just Culture, and situational awareness in preventing incidents and enhancing team performance. Through compelling storytelling and proven methodologies, he empowers leaders to navigate uncertainty, manage complexity, and create resilient teams that thrive in high-stakes environments.

With his deep expertise and engaging presentation style, Brandon Williams is the go-to expert for organizations looking to elevate their safety leadership and operational excellence.

For more information: brandonwilliamsspeaker.com

Email: [email protected]

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/brandon-williams-speaker/

RELATED EPISODE

STAY CONNECTED

The Safety Guru with Eric Michrowski

More Episodes: https://thesafetyculture.guru/

C-Suite Radio: https://c-suitenetwork.com/the-safety-guru/

Powered By Propulo Consulting: https://propulo.com/

Eric Michrowski: https://ericmichrowski.com

EXECUTIVE SAFETY COACHING

Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their Safety Leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance.

Safety Leadership coaching has been limited, expensive, and exclusive for too long.

As part of Propulo Consulting’s subscription-based executive membership, our coaching partnership is tailored for top business executives that are motivated to improve safety leadership and commitment.
Unlock your full potential with the only Executive Safety Coaching for Ops & HSE leaders available on the market.

Explore your journey with Executive Safety Coaching at https://www.execsafetycoach.com.
Executive Safety Coaching_Propulo

The Safe Summit: Everest Lessons to Elevate Safety and Reach New Heights with Alan Mallory

The Safe Summit: Everest Lessons to Elevate Safety and Reach New Heights

LISTEN TO THE EPISODE: 

ABOUT THE EPISODE

In this inspiring and unforgettable episode, Alan Mallory shares his remarkable journey to the summit of Mount Everest, unpacking countless connections to workplace safety and powerful leadership lessons gained with every step toward the peak. Drawing from his record-setting ascent, Alan reveals how to confront blind spots, overcome complacency, and navigate adversity to safely reach the summit of the world’s highest mountain with his team. He emphasizes the importance of increasing awareness, embracing continuous learning, and building strong team relationships to help keep ourselves and others safe. Don’t miss this gripping conversation packed with real Everest lessons to elevate safety and help you reach new heights. Tune in now!

READ THE EPISODE

Real leaders leave a legacy. They capture the hearts and minds of their teams. Their origin story puts the safety and well-being of their people first. Great companies ubiquitously have safe, yet productive operations. For those companies, safety is an investment, not a cost for the C-suite. It’s a real topic of daily focus. This is the Safety Guru with your host, Eric Michrowski, a globally recognized ops and safety guru, public speaker and author. Are you ready to leave a safety legacy? Your legacy success story begins now.

Hi, and welcome to the Safety Guru. Very excited to have with me, Alan Mallory. He’s an Everest Mountain climber, an engineer by trade with also a master’s in psychology. I’m looking forward to a very exciting conversation today. Allan, maybe tell us a little bit about your story and how you got to Mount Everest.

Sure. Well, it’s a pleasure to be on the show, Eric. I’m an engineer by trade. I have a technical background, but I grew up in a very adventurous family, and my father really got us into a lot of outdoor activities and adventure activities from a young age. We did a lot of whitewater canoe trips and winter camping and that thing. He actually got my siblings and I into mountaineering as well. When each of us were 19, he took us to climb one of the seven summits, the highest mountains on each of the seven continents. In my case, it was McKinley here, Denali. That was my introduction to it, and it was no cakewalk. That was a dangerous, difficult mountain as well. It takes two weeks to climb. And then this would have been about 2006 when we first started talking about Everest. And my father originally started those discussions, and the more I think, each of us looked into it, this is my brother’s sister and I, it became, what do I say, morphed into a personal dream, that thing. I like putting myself or doing things that prove to myself that I can. That’s the intrinsic motivation is all about.

And so that’s how the idea of Climbing Everest came together. We were two years in the planning beforehand. And then, of course, once the actual climbing begins, you’re climbing for two months straight. And it was a harrowing, exciting, yet crazy journey.

Tell me about some of the lessons you talk a lot about that and the connections to safety. Tell me a little bit about your experience reaching new heights, but also in terms of how it connects to safety and leading safety.

Sure. Well, it’s a relatively dangerous expedition. I mean, people die every year. There are three people died at camp four while we were there. And that’s the typical, even just on the south side. And some years are much worse. Now, a lot of the deaths, or I would say the majority of the deaths are human error when you look back. There have been natural disasters, and that’s when we’re doing risk management, you have to look at, well, what can you avoid? Then what can you transfer in terms of risk? We use an outfitter to do that. Replacing the tents and things that get destroyed, replenishing our food surprise, that thing. What can you mitigate? And then what’s left is what you’re accepting if you want to take on something like this. And these are those unknowns, like avalanches that can happen at any point. But having said that, I mean, most of the deaths are human error. Climbers that don’t take the planning seriously. They try to deviate too far from their schedule because they have that dream to reach the summit. And so when you’re functioning on a third mental capacity because of the of oxygen to your brain, you basically get what is an amygdala hijack, where your emotional side of you suppresses the rational to some degree, and so you make poor decisions. 

Sure. And we made mistakes as well. But I think the fact that the four of us there, we were able to run things by each other. And so, the risk management is a huge thing for Everest mountaineering. And it was particularly important in our expedition because we were an unguided team, it was even hard to find an outfitter that would support us because they didn’t know who we were and they’re trying to run their business.

There’s a bigger risk for them. Sure. They don’t know who you are.

We had a bit of a hybrid where we needed the logistical support from one of these larger outfitting groups, but we wanted to be in control when we climbed and when we didn’t and making our own decisions. We were able to find a few that were open to the negotiation, and that’s eventually what came to. And part of it was they wanted to have two of their Sherpas. They were local Nepalese climbers with us. So really, there were six of us. But they weren’t… We weren’t part of… Because they also had more of a structured group that was working together. And then there was us, which were our own team within this larger umbrella. And so why it was so important to us is because in a typical expedition on Mount Everest, you are transferring They’re offering all of the risk over to a guide because they’re making the decisions of when you climb and when you don’t and all of that. If they make a mistake, though, it’s your life. We wanted to be in control of that. That’s why it mattered so much in our case to understand the risks and so on, because we had to do the scheduling ourselves and figure out when we climbed and when we didn’t, and when we might be pushing too far into the altitude and risking getting cerebral or pulmonary edema, for example.

Anyway, so we had two years to try to research and figure that out. But it’s also very much, what would I call it, an agile project when you’re there. You’re having to learn from Every time you make a push into the altitude. But if you stay there, you run the onset of getting that acute mountain sickness, which leads to edema. So, you come back down and you’re informing your next iteration or next push into altitude by what you’ve learned. And so that’s a key aspect in safety, right? 

Yeah, absolutely. This continuous learning that you’re trying to build into your practices.

Sure. And from my engineering background, I’ve seen how that can really be problematic when people are so reliant, let’s say, on procedures and processes that they turn off the learning element of their mind, blindly follow the procedures. There’s obviously a place for procedures, so you have consistency, but you also have to be aware. That awareness in mountaineering is particularly important because it allows you to make those adjustments that are needed in order to be able to survive in such a volatile environment. Everything is just changing so quickly.

It’s interesting because when you talk about different guides, I’ve used many times a case study of a guide or even two guides that had gone many years ago up, and one of them in terms of the decision making, how they were trying to push to get to the summit and weren’t really looking at the skills and the capabilities on their team. It resulted in multiple fatalities, pretty serious outcomes. Flip side, though, is you have somebody who’s done it before, who’s bringing essentially the lessons learned and a lot of the safety rules are based on learnings of others who’ve gone some way. How did you compensate for some of those?

Well, I think that was the… How we compensated. I mean, I would say, why did we… I guess the question would be, why did we feel like we were competent enough to take on something like that? Because you make a good point. Someone who’s there all the time would certainly have their own… There’s a major benefit in that. We were combining the knowledge and skills and everything we’d learned on these other expeditions because each of us had… It’s not like we were going into this green and we didn’t have a mountaineering experience, but we didn’t have experience in the high altitude and the Himalayas in particular. That’s where I would say the knowledge and experience from the outfitting group that we were part of. We tried to, especially the lead of that in the years up before the climb, we tried to, what I say, extract as much information from his mind and experience as possible so that we could use that to inform our own decisions. You’d call that bringing in a subject matter expert when making decisions. Then also having those two Sherpas was at first it wasn’t clear that benefit, detriment, because it’s different culture, different language, a lot of different differences.

And now you’re trying to, in a relatively short time, build relationships that need to be deep enough that you’re putting your lives in each other’s care. Between my siblings and my father and I, we had that bond already established. But with our Sherpas, it wasn’t so much the case. But early on, we tried to break down those barriers between us and them. I would say how we did that was… I saw a lot of the other climbers there. They don’t particularly They treat the Sherpas very well. A lot of climbers tend to be people who’ve reached the upper echelon of whatever sphere they’re in, businesspeople, that thing. Everest is almost hardwired in us to reach the top of whatever endeavor we’re in. And so, they’re used to pretty good service. I don’t know. I just saw that treating the servants, that thing. And we tried not to do that. We tried to… When What we were involved in, even at some of the… At one point, we had to go down below base camp to one of the little villages, and we were playing pool and cards and telling jokes. And it was like the six of us.

We really built a good relationship. We tried not to have it be us and them. Because they want to reach the summit as much as we do. If you’re a Sherpa and your resume doesn’t say summit, you’re not nearly as marketable. It’s critical. And many of, I would say most have I’ve never been to the summit. Because there’s a lot of Sherpas working behind the scenes and only one or two would be those high altars.

I see. They go all the way to the top.

Yeah. And the success ratio when we were there was only 29% historically. So, 70 % of clients are turning back. And so that means if you’re a Sherpa, you only have the chance of making it one every three years. And so that’s that relationship with them. And so, they weren’t really involved in… We would run things by them, is how I would say it, and really respect. They’ve been up there before. I can think of a few times when they really did have a really good insight. When we were on their way back down from the summit, we’d been climbing for about 30 hours straight right through the night, and we’re delirious. We’ve got the altitude problems. We just gotten down the Hillary Step section, which is a rocky, pretty treacherous area. And there was a little plateau, and I was just so exhausted and tired. And I thought, well, I’m just going to flop over on my side here for a second and just rest for a few seconds or maybe a minute. It seemed at the time like the logical thing to do. And I can remember Zangpo, one of our Sherpas. As soon as I did that, almost immediately, he was there.

He’s, I don’t recommend this. I don’t recommend this. And he was right, and I knew it was right. If you ever seen any of the Everest movies, everyone does that. They just end up there forever because your body just shuts down. But anyway, I just wanted. So, yeah, immediately we just forced ourselves to our feet and just kept going. If you keep moving, you stay alive. Or that’s the hope anyway. The percentage of summiteer’s that perish is actually relatively high. Overall, I think it was about two and a half % fatality.

And it’s much, much lower than it used to be. It’s gone much, much safer.

Yeah. And maybe that was, I think, when we were doing it. It’s probably even lower than that now. Yeah. So, it’s not… But anyway, that still makes it the most dangerous adventure activity when you compare it to scuba diving and sky diving and all of that stuff.

Some of the themes you talk about when you’re building rapport with Sherpa is what comes to mind is also creating psychological safety because you need a brother, sister, keeper. Somebody is looking out for you. And so really investing in making sure you have that relationship because we know that there’s been some examples. If I go to aviation where captain is flying the plane, they’re running out of fuel, first officer or a flight engineer realizes that there’s no fuel, doesn’t feel comfortable speaking up in that environment. Whereas we know this is not a good outcome. If you have no more fuel, you need to do something. That psychological safety becomes so key if you want somebody to speak up at those key moments.

Yeah, no, and I can remember that example from aviation. Yeah, exactly. So, keep the communication. And there were some challenges there because they could speak English, but it was broken English. But a lot of times we’re using nonverbal cues to communicate well and rely a lot on that. And yeah, so I mean, we just became friends over the two-month period more than anything. And that was a major advantage. When you have friends, you look out, you do things for them and work together to make it a reality. Because for almost the entire two months, one or more of us was so sick or weak or, let’s say, cognitively not there, that the others had to step in and pick up the slack. So that was key.

This episode of the Safety Guru podcast is brought to you by Propulo Consulting, the leading safety and safety culture advisory firm. Whether you are looking to assess your safety culture, develop strategies to level up your safety performance, introduce human performance capabilities, re-energize your BBS program, enhance supervisory safety capabilities, or introduce unique safety leadership training and talent solutions, Propulo has you covered. Visit us at propulo.com.

How do you manage this risk assessment on an agile basis? Because what you’re describing is you’re going to new areas that you’ve never explored. It parallels from a mission standpoint. If you’re thinking about a lot of non-routine tasks and functions, there’s similar parallels where you’re going to an area that’s uncharted. Maybe there’s not necessarily the learnings to capture because you’re going alone. Tell me a little bit about how you did those risk assessments.

Yeah, well, I’ll talk about the iterative approach second. Beforehand, though, in the two years, that was just doing the research. When you haven’t been there, you’re going to have to just learn from those that have documented what they went through. We We’ve basically made a list, a register of what we’d be up against. We’re doing qualitative risk assessment here where we look at the relative impact and likelihood. If the relative impact is high or catastrophic in the case of death, that’s where you have to focus your mitigation strategies. And so, for things like avalanches and areas that we knew were volatile, like the kombu icefall we have to go through, where there’s about 50 of these crevasses in the ice that are hundreds and hundreds of feet deep, and we’re crossing them on aluminum ladders, tight end-to-end. And you go through that section six times. How we would mitigate that section, for example, is by the time of day we would go through. The Kumbu Icefall moves at 4 to 6 feet per day. These huge chunks of ice that are basically a frozen waterfall you could think of as this glacier, the Western Kum glacier, breaks off between two mountain peaks.

And so, it’s just a rubble of ice, except some of these ice chunks are the size of apartment buildings. It’s volatile, it’s volatile. It’s dangerous. And on the south side of Everest, it’s claimed a lot of lives from falling, seracs, or what they call those ice avalanches or those ice chunks. And so, we would go through it. If we wake up at one o’clock in the morning, try to get through all the way or the majority of the way before the sun, even at the ice, because the majority of that movement of ice happen when the sun hits it and you get expansion of the ice. And so that’s a way that we’d call that a mitigation strategy. And we tried to have those types of mitigation strategies for a lot of the other risks, falling risks. Make sure you’re clipped in. Make sure you have some redundancy when possible and in place. So that’s the upfront, how we might approach it. So now you’ve got this… Once you reach base camp, 17,000 feet, now you’ve got to start doing an up and back approach. So that’s when you make the push through, you’re noting even the mistakes you make, right?

So that you can learn from it on the next go around. The first time we climbed through that Kumbu Icefall, we were 13 hours getting up to camp one, and we barely crawled in. I mean, we were just completely spent. And one of the mistakes we had made is we had some nice to haves in our pack. We thought, well, when you get to Camp 1, it’d be nice to have an extra pair of socks, an extra pair of long John’s. Things that at the time seemed logical. Well, we learned our lesson. If it’s not critical to your safety and success, eliminate it because you can’t have any extra weight going through there. And so that’s the type of thing. We make the adjustment. We just cleaned house and made sure we just had the bare minimum we needed for safety and success. And then the same goes for how we navigate and approach some of those. There’s lots of vertical ascents and vertical repels in the icefall as you’re clamoring over these huge ice seracs. And also, just the technique in crossing these ladders. Because over that two-month period of climbing, we’re probably crossing at least Well, we’re going through six times, so 300 ladders.

And so, we would learn, we would work together a little bit to try to… When there were the loose safety ropes, the person crossing, it doesn’t give you much leverage side to side. But if one person held the rope as tight as possible from the side, it gave the person crossing a little bit of stability in terms of back and forth. And so, we developed these strategies that made things safer. And that’s the key to an iterative approach, is you take the feedback and the real-world experience from the iteration you’re in, and then you use that to make adjustments. And the adjustments are the key, because just noticing it doesn’t do much. And a lot of organizations want to seem agile, and so they break things down into small little phases. If you’re not making adjustments, you’re not You lose the benefit of an agile approach, an iterative approach in particular.

Here you have the advantage of it sounds like, doing it then going back down. You learn and then you go in again. But in business, you don’t always have that opportunity to try something, go back, and then go for real.

Well, it depends on the approach you take. I mean, the idea… I’m very much an advocate of an agile approach. And so, when I work with organizations, often we’re trying to figure out how we can Incorporate iterations, even on a smaller scale. Maybe it’s a little prototype you can put up. Maybe it’s getting an idea or something you’re rolling in front of a small user group before you invest all the time and energy into developing the full product. That’s the idea of iteration when it comes to a business environment. 

Yeah, makes sense. Now, a lot of the themes, because you were going it alone with the Sherpas, obviously, the one thing you should have less is complacency, right? Because complacency is the risk when I’ve done it too many times, they start getting comfortable with a particular task or function, so my risk awareness starts diminishing. What’s the right balance, right? Because you experience is good. Having been there before is good, but then that complacency can set in. In this case, you had probably no complacency, probably heightened awareness risk.

No, I think complacency was still a major They’re a risk and challenge for us. If you talk about crossing those ladders, because we’re crossing so many, it becomes old hat. And I can recall even at times being, well, because it takes energy to grab the rope and clip in all of that. And I’d say, well, it’s a short little cross. Maybe I should just try it without the rope. And I’d have to catch myself and say, well, you better just clip in here because, well, you need something. Should something go awry? And so, I would say it’s not like you’re always faced with complacency. What I thought of complacency, I think it’s tied in some way to the way our minds categorize things to save mental computation power. This is actually how bias arises. We don’t have the cognitive capacity to fully process everything that we’re taking it through our five senses. What we do is we take a cursory glance; we attribute the characteristics, so we don’t have to mentally process it. It’s tremendously beneficial in saving, what would you call it, cognitive processing power for us because we just don’t have the ability.

That’s what the complacency is, I would say. And so, your mind’s always trying to do that. We simplify things, glance at the latter, look, let’s just automatically do what we did the last 50 times. And so, then it’s up to the rational side of your mind, I would say, to make that analysis and say, oh, no, I better just devote the cognitive Sure. Capacity here because otherwise it can run into challenges. I guess that’s a long way of just saying, well, you’re always faced with that challenge of complacency, and you almost have to be complacent in some things because otherwise you’ve used your limited capacity in thinking about them. In the ladder example, it might be, well, I don’t think much about the integrity of the snow before the ladder, because otherwise, if I spend too much time-wasting capacity in thinking about that, I won’t have the capacity with the ladder, something like that. It’s a balance.

You talk blind spots, essentially, in terms of where we start minimizing the information, making some shortcuts in terms of our decision making. As you said, I mean, our brain uses a huge amount of energy on a good day. You’re in an environment where there’s a lot less oxygen, which means your cognitive abilities also get diminished. A lot of the case studies where things went horribly wrong on Everest were around blind spots starting to set in, whether it’s overconfidence or a desire to reach the summit that starts… You start getting task focus on reaching the summit, even if there’s maybe changing conditions in front of you. Tell me a little bit about how you managed some of the blind spots in this environment.

Yeah. Well, because in the end, your approach ends up being a hybrid between that which you spent two years of laying out and developing. And so that might be what we call the processes that you’ve established and the evaluation of the real-world risks and challenges that are ahead of you. And getting that balance right, it’s hard to… It would be hard to come up with a rule-based approach to which one you should put more emphasis on because it’s in the moment you want to be making sure you’re considering both because either too much emphasis on one or the other can be fatal if you Would you just focus on the heat of the moment and ignore everything you’ve learned and studied, that’s led to all kinds of disasters and vice versa. So how did we make sure we noticed those blind spots? Some of that I would say, I don’t know if I can be hard to articulate it. I would say those teams that were successful, they had enough experience with other adventures and challenges in life that they naturally notice things before it was too late. In some ways, that’s also the… 

That’s how you build resilience. Our lifestyle was one of a lot of different adventures and challenges. Now, they weren’t the same as the challenges were faced on Everest. But when you’re trying to problem-solve or even notice risky situations, your mind thinks back, mostly subconsciously, and extrapolates from those ways that you solved other complex problems. Maybe it was winter camping or whitewater canoeing. It’s not the same as you’re faced in the moment, but you can extrapolate from that. That’s not something, per se, you can just learn in the moment. That’s just, you might say, the advantage, if we bring it back to the workplace, that’s the advantage of someone that has worked in in a dangerous industry for 10, 20 years, where they can, if they don’t allow themselves to become complacent about it, they have enough of those data points from the past that it brings it to their attention quickly.

Tell me a little bit about how you bring these stories of Everest to the workplace, because you talk on agile workplaces, you talk about safety. Obviously, here we’re really talking about Everest and the connections to safety. Tell me about how you help bring those connections with different audiences.

Yeah. Countering is an analogy for overcoming challenges in life or in work or business on the way to accomplishing something of value. It really is a great analogy for exactly that. And so that’s what I do when I do my programs. If you just do a program on the, let’s say, the safety aspects or the agile aspects, you see your audience glaze over, right? It could be a little bit dry. I found to keep it engaging and to be beneficial and so people can remember it, you have to tie it to some story or emotional incident that people can remember. And so that’s how I use my family’s Everest story. And it’s really quieted an emotional exciting story. And so, it keeps people captivated and drawn in. And there’s just so many parallels to the industry that in general, I use a short mountaineering example of why it’s important to empower people or maintain a future mindset or how we resolve conflicts. And then I bring in more of the technical aspects, graphs and things that people can apply in their own work. I think as humans, that’s how we learn. We learn when we can make an emotional connection to the story.

We remember, at least.

We remember it, yeah.

Yeah, that’s worked great. I don’t just bring in my mountaineering ventures. I went through my own mental health journey in my younger years. I have the engineering stories. And so, whatever is most applicable to the audience or the theme or what they’re trying to learn, that’s when I bring in those examples.

Thank you. Alan, you’ve got a book as well that you’ve published. Tell a little bit about your book.

Yeah, well, two of them now. My first one is just called The Family That Conquered Everest. It’s got sections from each of my other family members as well. And so, it’s quite a, let’s say, crazy adventure story with a lot of life lessons. But For folks, my new book, it’s called Summits of Self, the Seven Peaks of Personal Growth. And that one’s really more of a deep dive into yourself in psychology. There’s a psychological safety aspect to that. It really has a deep mental health focus. In my younger years, I had quite a severe social phobia and anxiety disorder, which is known as generalized anxiety disorder. And that plagued me for a lot of years. And what got me so interested in the human mind and psychology, all of that. And I would say surprisingly so, because my background is a technical background. It’s pretty odd that I would even and go down that psychological path. But I started studying the human mind and I started developing and reading about and developing my own strategies. And then some of them worked. Now, it took me a long time of trying different things, but Some of them were cognitive games, I would call them, of how I would think back to situations and rewrite the ending, view things in a different light, for example.

And they seem silly at first, but then I would notice when I would If I were to think of those situations, I wouldn’t have the same negative emotional response. Then I doubled down. I was excited and motivated to continue on that path. I still am. I just love reading about strategies and trying to better yourself in your mind. So that’s what that book is all about. I go through seven internal summits. The summit of self-motivation, the summit of self-resilience. And so, you got to like psychology a little bit and taking a deep dive into yourself. But I’d say on that book, I get more when I get emails or people that there’s feedback from folks. For me, I’ve just realized, well, this is pretty… I thought I was the only one that had these sorts of challenges with anxiety and so on. And the more I do programs in the mental space, the more I realize this is the internal summit that so many people struggle with, and you just don’t see it.

And if somebody wants to get in touch with you, if somebody wants you to come present or talk about any of these topics, specifically around safety, how can they do that?

Probably my website would be the best. I got lots of good information on there. It’s just allanmalary.com, A-L-A-N. There are a few different ways to spell Alan, but I’ve got a bunch of videos and things on there.

Excellent. Well, thank you so much for joining me, Alan. Really appreciate you coming on the show.

My pleasure. Thanks, Eric.

Thank you for listening to The Safety Guru on C-suite Radio. Leave a legacy. Distinguish yourself from the past. Grow your success. Capture the hearts and minds of your teams. Elevate your safety. Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their safety leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance. Begin your journey at execsafetycoach.com. Come back in two weeks for the next episode with your host, Eric Michrowski. This podcast is powered by Propulo Consulting. 

ABOUT THE GUEST

Alan Mallory is an international speaker, author, and performance coach who is passionate about reaching new heights in all that we do. He has a degree in Engineering from Queen’s University and a Master’s in Psychology from Adler University, giving him a well-balanced approach to the inner and outer challenges we all face. Building experience through a lifestyle of adventure and challenge, Alan embarked on the journey of a lifetime and set a world record on Mount Everest along with three members of his immediate family. He believes in empowering people and embracing an agile mentality focused on relationships and results.
For more information: https://alanmallory.com
Alan Summit-Ridge
Both-of-Alans-Books

RELATED EPISODE

STAY CONNECTED

The Safety Guru with Eric Michrowski

More Episodes: https://thesafetyculture.guru/

C-Suite Radio: https://c-suitenetwork.com/the-safety-guru/

Powered By Propulo Consulting: https://propulo.com/

Eric Michrowski: https://ericmichrowski.com

EXECUTIVE SAFETY COACHING

Like every successful athlete, top leaders continuously invest in their Safety Leadership with an expert coach to boost safety performance.

Safety Leadership coaching has been limited, expensive, and exclusive for too long.

As part of Propulo Consulting’s subscription-based executive membership, our coaching partnership is tailored for top business executives that are motivated to improve safety leadership and commitment.
Unlock your full potential with the only Executive Safety Coaching for Ops & HSE leaders available on the market.

Explore your journey with Executive Safety Coaching at https://www.execsafetycoach.com.
Executive Safety Coaching_Propulo