【24h】

IS SAFETY CULTURE STILL A THING?

机译:安全文化仍然是一件事情吗?

获取原文

摘要

Safety culture has been a theme in human factors research and practice for more than two decades. The concept has resulted in a mass of research and practical interventions, both small and large, in many industrial sectors. Recent thinking has, however, been increasingly critical of the concept and the value of safety culture research and practice. Criticisms of safety culture include the accusations that safety culture is inherently contradictory (Walker, 2010), that the links with systems thinking are not evident (Reiman and Rollenhagen, 2014), that there is insufficient integration with macroergonomics (Murphy et al, 2014), that culture talk can also obscure uncomfortable, yet crucial social phenomena (Szymczaka, 2014). There is also a concern that safety culture, or facets of it such as 'just culture', may be rooted in a traditionalist safety paradigm (Safety-Ⅰ) and conflict with the emerging paradigms (Safety-Ⅱ, see Hollnagel, 2014). At the same time, practitioners' experience on the ground is that the concept remains useful and relevant for various practical and political reasons, and should not be discarded. The middle ground may be that our ideas about safety culture need to adapt, both theoretically and practically, in several ways. This should be of interest to many human factors specialists, both for research and practice.
机译:在过去的二十多年里,安全文化一直是人为因素研究和实践的主题。这一概念已导致许多工业部门进行了大小不一的大量研究和实践干预。但是,最近的思想越来越批评安全文化研究和实践的概念和价值。对安全文化的批评包括:安全文化与生俱来就相互矛盾(Walker,2010),与系统思维的联系不明显(Reiman and Rollenhagen,2014),与人机工程学的整合不足(Murphy等,2014)。 ,这种文化交流也可以掩盖不舒服但至关重要的社会现象(Szymczaka,2014年)。还有一种担忧是,安全文化或诸如“公正文化”之类的方面可能植根于传统主义安全范式(Safety-Ⅰ)并与新兴范式(Safety-Ⅱ,见Hollnagel,2014)相冲突。同时,从业人员的实际经验是,由于各种实际和政治原因,该概念仍然有用且相关,因此不应丢弃。中间立场可能是,我们对安全文化的想法需要在理论上和实践上以几种方式进行适应。无论是研究还是实践,许多人为因素专家都应该对此感兴趣。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号