Counter Errorism

Get to know Clive Lloyd:Profile: linkedin.com/in/clive-lloyd-gystEmail: [email protected]: gystconsulting.com.au Clive's Book: Next Generation Safety Leadership: From Compliance to CareShoutouts:     Podcasts:          Brene Brown and Adam Grant's: The Curiosity Shop     Books:          Psychological Safety Workbook - Minette Norman & Karolin Helbig          Psychological Safety Workbook for Changemakers - Minette Norman & Karolin Helbig          The Fearless Organization - Amy C. Edmondson          The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety - Timothy R. Clark---------------In this episode of the Counter Errorism podcast, Clive Lloyd explains why trust is the primary lever for organizational performance and safety, breaking down how leaders can measure, build, and repair it.1. Trust is the Foundation, Not a "Soft" OptionThe Trusting Alliance: Building a "trusting alliance" with the workforce is a leader's very first job. Trust is not a "soft" concept; it is the essential bedrock of any safety or improvement effort.Frameworks Fail Without Trust: Whether an organization adopts HOP, Safety-II, or Resilience Engineering, workers will treat even the best-designed corporate safety initiatives with cynicism and suspicion if underlying mistrust isn't addressed first. Once trust is established, human-centric frameworks thrive naturally.2. The Three C's of Trust & The "Trust Tax"Care, Character, and Competence: Building and maintaining trust requires consistently demonstrating three distinct elements:Care: Showing workers that leadership genuinely has their back and operates in their best interest.Character: Demonstrating integrity, honesty, and personal alignment between words and actions.Competence: Proving operational capability and being a "safe pair of hands".Two Out of Three Isn't Enough: Having high competence and character without showing care (or vice versa) still causes trust to break down. Any time a leader fails to demonstrate one of the C's, they pay a "trust tax" in the form of reduced workforce trust.3. Psychological Safety Centering on "Voice"Psychological Safety vs. Interpersonal Trust: While trust exists interpersonally and across groups, psychological safety primarily exists at the team level and centers on voice—whether workers feel safe to speak up, share concerns, or admit mistakes without fear.Dropping the Psychological Mask: Leaders foster psychological safety by modeling vulnerability first, signaling to workers that it is safe to stop "play pretending" and drop their own psychological masks.How Leaders Respond Matters: True safety requires leaders to manage their reactions when hearing difficult truths. Getting angry or defensive when a worker raises an operational issue destroys the willingness of the entire team to speak up again.4. Repairing Broken Trust Requires Data and HumilitySuperficial Fixes Don't Work: Generic team-building exercises (like trust falls) do not repair broken trust. Effective repair requires objective data (such as the 3C survey) to pinpoint the exact historical source of mistrust, such as broken management promises or past character breaches.Humility and Ownership: Rebuilding trust requires leaders to have "reparation conversations"—taking full ownership of past missteps, admitting when things went wrong, and following through with transparent action.5. Fear-Based Leadership Creates Hidden Risks"You Can't Fix a Secret": Leading through fear or public humiliation creates compliance driven by anxiety rather than commitment. When workers fear punishment or public shaming, they hide near-misses and errors. Because an organization cannot fix a secret, unvoiced risks inevitably escalate into serious incidents.6. Conducting Safe Assessment InterviewsSetting Clear Boundaries: When conducting organizational assessments or 1-on-1s, practitioners establish safety up front by defining confidentiality, thanking workers for their time, explicitly explaining how data will be used (theme-level reporting rather than naming names), and letting them stop or ask questions at any time.Focusing on What Works: In addition to asking about operational concerns, asking "What is working well and what must stay the same?" protects psychological safety and ensures valuable practices aren't lost during change.   --------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeNot Just Another Damn Safety Podcast with Steve Scott Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff

Get to know Rob Fisher:Profile: linkedin.com/in/rob-fisher-8105293Email: [email protected]: improvewithfit.comRob's Book: Understanding Mental Models: Practically Applying Performance Modes, Systems 1&2, and GEMS--------------------ShoutoutsProcedure Professionals AssociationFITonline Microlearnings: https://online.improvewithfit.com/"Stew" on this: linkedin.com/in/stew-dunivan-36480834Walking with "Wallace": linkedin.com/in/barry-wallace-1ab38b7Taking it to the "Matt": linkedin.com/in/matt-schlapfer-262b7729Follow this link to find some: Robservations--------------------NOTE: Yes, this episode could've been broken up into two or three episodes, but I'm hoping this is the easiest way for you to absorb this conversation. Rob was super generous to give us so much of his time AND to let us know where he was going to give us some coaching and when we should potentially pause (you'll hear it) the recording or editing... While I do edit some unrelated content out for time saving purposes, I think everyone who listens has the potential to learn right along with us in these types of conversations. We thank Rob for his professional candor and efforts at keeping us feeling psychologically safe. --------------------In this conversation on the Counter Errorism podcast, Rob Fisher shares actionable strategies for improving procedure usability, capturing institutional knowledge, and transforming how leaders engage with frontline workers.Here are the key lessons we learn from his approach:1. Evolving Perception of the "Geometry and Physics of Risk"Changing Workforce Experience: Workers entering industry today often lack the mechanical background of previous generations (such as fixing bicycles or changing car tires). They lack an intuitive grasp of physical hazards and energy transfer.Avoid "Farming Out" Risk: Organizations cannot assume new hires or contractors automatically understand workplace hazards. Relying on quick classroom orientations or passing high-risk tasks off to third-party contractors ("stand the man in the van with his son") without diligent verification contributes to rising fatality and serious injury rates.2. Work as Written vs. Work as AdaptedUsability Over Technical Accuracy: Procedures are frequently technically accurate but practically unusable. When workers struggle, leaders often assume they just "refuse to follow procedures" rather than recognizing that the documentation is flawed.Bridging the Gap: Fisher reframes "work as imagined vs. work as done" into work as written vs. work as adapted. Leaders need to understand where and why workers must adapt written guidance to execute tasks safely and effectively.Removing Procedure Error Drivers: Vague phrases like "if applicable," "as needed," or ambiguous terms like "check," "ensure," and "verify" introduce confusion and drastically increase error rates.3. Leadership Engagements via the TEDs FrameworkReplacing "Why" with Curiosity: Asking "why" puts workers on the defensive. Instead, leaders should use the TEDs framework to hold constructive engagements:Tell me (what doesn't make sense)Explain to me (what is different than expected)Describe to me (what makes this task more difficult)Show me (how our systems increase risk)Separating Engagements from Observations: Leaders should separate behavioral observations (watching workers) from true engagements (two-way conversations about system conditions and values). This removes the "policing" atmosphere and allows leaders to learn about operational reality.4. Verbalized Point and Touch (VPT) vs. Outdated ToolsThe Flaws of STAR and Peer Checks: Traditional tools like STAR (Stop, Think, Act, Review) or peer checks often fail in practice; peer checks can inadvertently introduce four new error traps: distraction, time pressure, stress, and overconfidence.Slowing the Brain Down: Fisher advocates for Verbalized Point and Touch (VPT). Speaking the action aloud and physically pointing to/touching the component forces the brain to slow down to the exact speed at which the body performs, filing the action into memory and reducing error rates significantly.5. Capturing Institutional Knowledge (TNRM)Preserving Expert Wisdom: As senior workers near retirement, organizations should not try to cram decades of rationale directly into procedures, which makes them overly complex.Training and Reference Materials (TNRM): Instead, pull experienced workers off-shift to create micro-recordings explaining how to execute complex steps. These recordings are stored in Training and Reference Materials (TNRM), capturing individual expertise so the organization doesn't lose critical knowledge.6. Redefining "Level of Detail" and "Skill of the Craft"Newest Qualified User: Procedures should be written to the standard of the newest qualified user—meaning anyone who reaches baseline qualification should be able to complete the task as written with little or no supervision.Misuse of "Skill of the Craft": "Skill of the craft" should never be used as a catch-all excuse to skip written guidance on high-hazard tasks involving hazardous energy or excavation.7. Life-Preserving Principles vs. "Safety Clutter"Re-Framing Rules: Instead of throwing away life-saving rules or decrying them as "safety clutter" without evaluating their intent, organizations should remove punitive termination clauses and reframe them as life-preserving principles.--------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeNot Just Another Damn Safety Podcast with Steve Scott Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff --------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeNot Just Another Damn Safety Podcast with Steve Scott Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff

Get to know Todd ConklinProfile: linkedin.com/in/todd-conklin-64b8a8aEmail: [email protected]: https://preaccidentpodcast.podbean.com/Click here for a little about bear schoolUnexpected love and shout outs to:Clive Lloyd (future guest) and Steve Harvey (ep.6), The Punk Rock Safety fellas (Ben Goodheart ep.2, Ron Gantt ep.9, and David Provan ep.20) - Podcast title courtesy of the brilliant Gareth Lock (ep.7) - Psyche Safety guru, Amy Edmundson (maybe future ;) guest?) HRO Wildfire guru, David Christenson (Human Performance Tools Podcast co-host from many years ago starting ep.10) - and even the recently late Queen of Sweetness, Dolly Parton.According to AI, the official "Pre-Accident Investigation Podcast" started in April 2015.Creator: Todd ConklinLaunch Date: April 12, 2015 (Episode 1)Focus: Human performance, systems safety, and workplace safety culture--------------------Strange info from the intro:Click here for the true story of the cocaine bearClick here for the false story of the diver dropped on a wildfireNavajo Dam and Reservoir SpecsNormal Operating Depth: 381.6 feet at the dam.Maximum Structural Height: 402 feet (123 m).Maximum Lake Depth: Reaches approximately 396 to 400 feet when full.Current Water Level: The reservoir level fluctuates based on seasonal use and inflows (sitting around 74.5 feet below full pool).For more info on the CHOL (Community of Human and Organizational Learning) click here.And now......Todd Conklin outlines how organizational reliability and human performance depend on how leadership perceives operations, reacts to failure, and approaches learning.Here are the key lessons we learn from his approach:1. Leadership Transformation is the Primary LeverThe Ultimate Gatekeepers: Real organizational change cannot succeed unless time, energy, and resources are invested in changing how leaders think. Leaders act as the primary gatekeepers to creating a sustainable culture of safety and reliability.The Enemy of the Question is the Answer: Leaders face two main obstacles: busy schedules and the assumption that they already understand the issues. The moment a boss believes they already know what the problem is, their necessity to learn vanishes, and they immediately shift into "fixing" mode.Trust is Leadership's Responsibility: Sharing an anecdote about a chocolate company whose workers lacked trust in management, Conklin points out that workers distrusting senior leadership is not a worker problem—it is a leadership problem that only leadership can fix.2. Shift from "Worker as Problem" to "Worker as Solution"A Fundamental Philosophical Shift: The single most important transformation an organization can make is moving away from seeing the worker as a problem to be fixed, and instead recognizing the worker as the essential source of solutions.Language Reflects Culture: The language leaders use to describe their workforce reveals whether they view workers as failure points or as operational experts.3. Separate Investigating from Fixing (Learning vs. Corrective Action)The Investigation's Job is to Learn: An investigation's sole purpose is to learn, explain, and describe how an event occurred—not to rush out solutions. Rushing to fix creates confirmation bias, leading investigators to "fall in love" with a pet problem rather than understanding the full context.Judgments of Need: Drawing on Department of Energy (DOE) practices, investigations should issue Judgments of Need (identifying weak areas or lack of risk control) and let programmatic and operational owners design the corrective actions. Forcing solutions down on operational teams from an ivory tower is insulting and ineffective.Eliminating "Safety Clutter": Rushing to fix events results in administrative clutter—such as mandatory procedure retraining or adding signs—which rarely stops recurrence and adds unnecessary procedural burden.4. Focus on Extent of Condition Over "Cause""Cause" is Made Up: Labeling a cause (e.g., "spark plus fuel caused an explosion") merely describes the laws of physics rather than operational reality. The richer question is asking how the system put workers in a position where sparks and fuel were exposed to each other.Extent of Condition: Organizations should evaluate where else across the facility similar conditions exist (e.g., high production pressure, turnover, untethered equipment).Eliminate the Need for Risk: In a rail shop fatality investigation involving cranes lifting heavy wheel assemblies 19 times, asking "why do you lift these?" revealed they had cranes simply because they were installed years ago. By switching to rolling the assemblies on tracks using an existing dolly, they eliminated the lifting hazard entirely.5. Replace Culpability Matrices with Curiosity and CandorThe Flaw of Culpability Matrices: Flowcharts and culpability matrices are popular because they promise an easy algorithm to remove hard human decisions, but they inherently assume culpability/guilt from the start.The Substitution Test & Psychological Candor: Rather than using rigid flowcharts, enlightened leaders rely on the substitution test ("Would a reasonable worker given the same context, time, and conditions do the same thing?"). This requires psychological candor—the willingness of workforce members to speak painful truths without fear.Relentless Curiosity: Quoting business scholar Amy Edmondson, Conklin stresses that true learning organizations are defined by relentless curiosity. When curiosity leaves an organization, learning stops and risk increases.Welcoming Differing Professional Opinions (DPOs): Advanced science-forward organizations strengthen investigations by actively encouraging alternative theories and peer reviews (or Differing Professional Opinions) to challenge assumptions before finalizing reports.--------------------For those extra curious: Nuclear Power typically uses a "Corrective Action Review Board" for higher order Causal Analysis to ensure CAs reflect best effort to fixing problems:Core Responsibilities of a CARBReviewing Event Evaluations: Assessing Root Cause Analyses (RCAs) and Apparent Cause Evaluations (ACEs) for quality, depth, and accuracy.Approving Corrective Actions: Ensuring proposed fixes directly address the underlying causes of a problem to prevent recurrence.Monitoring Station Trends: Identifying adverse performance trends or recurring failures across different plant departments.Enforcing Accountability: Holding department managers accountable for the timely completion of critical safety and maintenance actions.Typical Board CompositionThe board is comprised of senior station leadership to ensure cross-departmental alignment and authority.Plant Manager / Director of Operations (Often serves as the CARB Chairman)Operations ManagerMaintenance ManagerEngineering ManagerRegulatory Affairs / Compliance ManagerPerformance Improvement / CAP ManagerKey BenefitsNuclear Safety Culture: Reinforces a conservative decision-making approach by subjecting problem-solving to multi-disciplined peer review.Resource Prioritization: Ensures plant resources are directed toward fixing the most risk-significant issues first.Regulatory Compliance: Demonstrates to oversight bodies, like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the US, that the utility effectively self-regulates and corrects its own deficiencies.--------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeIllusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff --------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeNot Just Another Damn Safety Podcast with Steve Scott Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff

Get to know Danielle Ford: linkedin.com/in/danielle-ford-cptd Email: [email protected] Danielle's publication: Rhythm and Revelation In her conversation on the Counter Errorism podcast, Danielle Ford shares how organizations can bridge the gaps between training, procedures, and investigations. She challenges conventional safety responses and offers a highly practical roadmap for embedding continuous learning into normal operations. Here are the key lessons we learn from her: 1. Stop Defaulting to Retraining When an incident occurs, organizations frequently default to "we need to retrain the worker" because it is the fastest, easiest way to satisfy regulators, boards, or executives. Ford argues that retraining is rarely the correct answer. Instead, she advocates for using a task-focused approach, like the Systematic Approach to Training (SAT), to isolate the specific failure point. By partnering with the frontline workers who perform the task daily and asking, "Why didn't it work for you today?", organizations can design far more effective, lower-burden solutions—such as improved signage or targeted job aids—rather than forcing employees through redundant training programs. 2. Leverage AI to Safeguard Training Resources To stop the constant cycle of immediate retraining requests, Ford’s organization has started using Microsoft Copilot to build an AI bot. The bot walks operational partners through a standard series of questions to help them determine if retraining is actually necessary. By immediately flagging alternative solutions (like updating a procedure or a job aid), the bot acts as an automated filter, saving the training department from spending hours upfront proving that retraining is not the right tool for the job. 3. Normalize Presence to Build Psychological Safety To get workers to honestly share operational risks before an incident occurs, leaders must actively build trust. Ford explains that "managing by walking around" is one of the most effective ways to establish psychological safety. When a supervisor's presence in the workspace is normal and routine, employees stop viewing visits as "gotcha" moments. Instead, it opens the door for informal, casual dialogues where real risks and potential failures naturally bubble up and can be proactively solved. 4. Transition from a "Courtroom" to the "Normalization of Excellence" Human nature naturally draws us to focus on the negative, but Ford emphasizes that you cannot build a learning culture if every mistake is treated like a courtroom trial. Leaders must redirect conversations toward the "normalization of excellence". This means having regular, supportive conversations with workers about what makes them high performers, how they execute work consistently, and how they successfully avoid the challenges their peers face. 5. Institutionalize Learning via Forums and Special Projects To prevent hard-won operational insights from getting lost in the shuffle, Ford recommends using quarterly operational "forums" to share high-performance practices across shifts (such as sharing day-shift insights with the night crew). Her organization ensures these learnings are actually implemented by tasking an administrative "special projects" team to track the progress on a 30-60-90 day schedule. These tracked learnings populate a centralized dashboard, allowing the organization to revisit, update, and refine best practices as new nuances arise. 6. Practice Radically Transparent Leadership When the frontline brings innovative ideas to a learning forum that management cannot implement due to budget, regulatory boundaries, or strategic roadmaps, the worst thing a leader can do is ignore them. Ford advises that leaders must be completely transparent about the organization's guardrails. When a leader honestly and candidly explains, "This is a great idea, but we cannot do it today because of these specific parameters," workers accept the feedback and feel valued because they were genuinely heard, preventing post-meeting resentment. 7. Lead with Emotional Intelligence (EQ) Post-Event When a major incident occurs, a worker's immediate fear is often that their career is over. Ford highlights that leaders must use their emotional quotient (EQ) to support the worker's psyche and self-worth. Rather than immediately standing them down—which feels like a punishment to the worker and signals to the rest of the team that they should hide their mistakes—leaders should focus on helping the individual recover and ask what they need to show up and function safely. 🤖 It is fascinating to contrast Danielle’s practical use of an AI bot to filter training needs with Bob Latino's warnings (from Episode 23) about AI's severe blind spots in Root Cause Analysis. Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love: Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina Poole Were We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve Smith The Safety Bros with Brad and Dan Ruiz Punk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron Gantt Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth Lock How Did It Make Sense? with Gareth Lock The HOP Nerd with Sam Goodman A HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt Florio Health & Safety Conversations with Tom Bourne Pre-Accident Investigations with Todd Conklin Safety on Tap with Andrew Barrett Hop Into Action with Brent Sutton The Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew Rae Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe Encarnacion Be Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel (Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff --------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeNot Just Another Damn Safety Podcast with Steve Scott Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff

Get to know Joe Hauglie (pronounced "Hoag-Lee"): linkedin.com/in/jhauglie Email: [email protected] An article about Joe: https://www.wellsaid.io/resources/blog/arizonas-largest-electric-utility-significantly-boosts-safety-training-engagement-with-wellsaid Joe Hauglie emphasizes that human and organizational performance is fundamentally a profession built on shared knowledge. Rather than relying solely on our own experiences and making every mistake ourselves, we must proactively learn from the mistakes of others to recognize error traps before they lead to failure. For example, traditional power plant operators have decades of shared knowledge to rely on when a gauge fluctuates, whereas technicians in newer fields, like renewable energy, might only have a handwritten checklist from the previous shift to guide them. To help frontline workers systematically identify and manage these error traps, Hauglie advocates for using tools like the "energy wheel" during pre-job briefs and two-minute drills. Instead of relying entirely on an individual's imagination to spot danger, the energy wheel prompts teams to systematically identify various forms of hazardous energy—such as chemical, electrical, or even unexpected sources like sound. Furthermore, it forces teams to re-evaluate their environment when returning from a break to see if changing variables, such as sudden rain, have altered their risk profile. When discussing hazard detection and prevention, Hauglie warns about the double-edged sword of modern technology and automation. Tools like blind-spot sensors in cars or artificial intelligence are increasingly taking over the responsibility of detecting hazards for us. While this can free up our attention, relying too heavily on automated systems inadvertently creates new human vulnerabilities. If a worker becomes accustomed to technology acting as their detection system, they may lose their baseline situational awareness and face a dangerous new error trap when that technology is absent, modified, or fails. Ultimately, Hauglie challenges leaders to consider where technology gives us a lift, and what type of hazard detection human workers still need to actively own. Finally, Hauglie highlights the importance of integrating these safety and performance principles beyond traditional field operations and into everyday corporate environments. Whether it is catching administrative software settings that cause scheduling errors or running a pre-job brief for a corporate volunteer event, taking the time to pause, ask what could go wrong, and adjust systems based on recent missteps allows an organization to continuously learn and improve from normal work. Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love: Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina Poole Were We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve Smith The Safety Bros with Brad and Dan Ruiz Punk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron Gantt Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth Lock How Did It Make Sense? with Gareth Lock The HOP Nerd with Sam Goodman A HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt Florio Health & Safety Conversations with Tom Bourne Pre-Accident Investigations with Todd Conklin Safety on Tap with Andrew Barrett Hop Into Action with Brent Sutton The Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew Rae Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe Encarnacion Be Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel (Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff --------------------Please check out the amazing people doing amazing things on these podcasts we listen to and love:Leading Safely Podcast with Georgina PooleWere We Lucky, or Were We Good Podcast with Steve SmithThe Safety Bros with Brad and Dan RuizPunk Rock Safety with Dr. Ben Goodheart, Dr. Dave Provan, and Dr. Ron GanttCounter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving with Gareth LockHow Did It Make Sense? with Gareth LockThe HOP Nerd with Sam GoodmanA HOP Podcast (With No Name) with Andrea Baker and Matt FlorioHealth & Safety Conversations with Tom BournePre-Accident Investigations with Todd ConklinSafety on Tap with Andrew BarrettHop Into Action with Brent SuttonThe Safety of Work with Dr. David Provan and Dr. Drew RaeNot Just Another Damn Safety Podcast with Steve Scott Illusion of Safety with Allison Short, Joshua Russell, and Gabe EncarnacionBe Empowered with Dr. Santoshi Billakota and Dr. Shahla Moghbel(Not HOP-related, but an AMAZING untold history podcast) The Missing Chapter Podcast with Philip Horrender and Phil Schoff