Safety culture is a critical aspect of any organisation’s success, yet many businesses struggle to evolve past basic compliance and reactive safety practices. This plateau often stems from a lack of appreciation of what true safety leadership takes. Safety maturity scales, such as the DuPont Bradley Curve and others, are valuable tools that help organisations assess and improve their safety culture. However, these scales also reveal a harsh truth: most businesses get stuck in the lower stages of safety maturity. Let’s explore some of the most recognised safety maturity models and uncover why safety leadership—not just management—is the key to unlocking a true culture of safety.
The DuPont Bradley Curve: A Popular Benchmark
The DuPont Bradley Curve is one of the most well-known safety maturity models. It illustrates the journey from a reactive safety culture to an interdependent one, where safety is deeply ingrained in every aspect of the organisations culture. The curve consists of four key stages:
- Reactive: At this stage, safety is managed through corrective actions after an incident has occurred. There is planning but, on the ground, work is conducted in a reactive way, The organisation often responds to issues, even if they have anticipating them. Near misses are mostly hidden.
- Dependent: Here, safety programs are in place, and compliance with rules are policed. Safety management is largely driven by safety professionals, with a focus on procedures and regulatory compliance. Success is often measured by actions rather than results. Near misses are often underreported.
- Independent: Employees mostly take personal responsibility for their safety. They follow rules not just because they are told to but because they believe in them. Safety still largely depends on individual actions rather than being an embedded organisational value. There are more cheerleaders for safety than champions.
- Interdependent: This is the ideal stage where safety is a shared responsibility. Safety is mostly owned and driven my operational management more than the safety manager. Teams work collaboratively, look out for each other, and engage in proactive behaviours that prevent incidents. There is a high level of trust so near misses are reported often allowing the organisation to learn. Safety is not just about following rules; it’s about a collective mindset.
The Hudson Safety Culture Ladder
Another widely used model is the Hudson Safety Culture Ladder, which outlines five stages of safety culture maturity:
- Pathological: Safety is seen as a necessary evil. The organisation cares only about getting caught rather than truly valuing safety.
- Reactive: The organisation takes action after incidents occur. The mindset is, “We take it seriously when something goes wrong.”
- Calculative: Safety management systems are in place, with plenty of rules and procedures. However, the approach is still very much about managing numbers rather than creating a culture.
- Proactive: The organisation begins to anticipate safety issues before they arise. Employees are involved in safety processes, and there is an emphasis on learning and prevention.
- Generative: Safety is an intrinsic value and not just a priority that can shift. It’s embedded in every decision, every action, and is everyone’s responsibility.
Heinrich’s Accident Triangle and Beyond
Although mostly out of favour due to evidence-based study, Heinrich’s Accident Triangle is another classic model that underscores the importance of addressing unsafe behaviours to prevent more serious incidents. The model suggests that for every major injury, there are numerous minor incidents and even more near misses—highlighting the need to focus on all levels of safety incidents. Unfortunately, none of these seems to impact more severe incidents like fatalities.
Why Most Organisations Get Stuck at Reactive and Compliance Stages
Despite the clear path laid out by these scales, most organisations struggle to move beyond the reactive and compliance-driven stages. Here’s why:
1. Focus on Safety Management, Not Leadership:
Organisations often emphasise safety management systems, processes, and compliance with regulations. While these are crucial, they don’t automatically translate into a safety culture. Safety leadership, on the other hand, is about inspiring, influencing, and engaging people at all levels to prioritise safety because they truly value it, not just because they are told to.
2. Lack of True Engagement:
In many organisations, safety is seen as the responsibility of safety officers or managers, not something that involves everyone. Moving to higher stages of safety maturity requires engagement from every level of the organisation, particularly from front-line employees.
3. Leadership Disconnect:
Senior leaders may express the importance of safety, but if their actions don’t align with their words, employees quickly notice. Authentic leadership, where leaders model the safety behaviours they wish to see, is often missing. More importantly maybe, is what senior leaders focus on, talk about and tolerate.
4. Psychological Safety Is Overlooked:
A true culture of safety is not just about physical safety measures but also about psychological safety. Employees need to feel safe to speak up about hazards, suggest improvements, or admit mistakes without fear of retribution. For example, how is it possible that an organisation with self-proclaimed safety excellence manages to create a toxic culture of bullying?
5. Short-Term Focus:
Many organisations are trapped in a short-term mindset, focusing on quick wins like reducing lost time injury rates rather than investing in long-term cultural change.
The Missing Ingredient: Safety Leadership
To truly transform safety culture, organisations need less safety management and more safety leadership. Safety leadership involves:
- Vision and Values: Clearly articulating a vision for safety that aligns with organisational values.
- Modelling the Way: Leaders demonstrating their commitment to safety through their actions.
- Empowerment: Creating an environment where employees feel empowered to take ownership of safety.
- Communication: Open, honest communication that builds trust and encourages the sharing of safety concerns and ideas.
- Recognition and Feedback: Acknowledging safe behaviours and providing constructive feedback that reinforces positive actions.
A Final Thought
Safety maturity models like the DuPont Bradley Curve and the Hudson Ladder provide valuable frameworks for assessing and improving safety culture.
The truth is the leap from compliance to a true safety culture requires more than just management—it requires leadership.
“In twenty years of working with biggest and best, few truly managed to accomplish the vision they have for safety. Maybe the vision is too difficult in today’s kill or be killed environment?”
“I still believe that by focusing on engaging employees, including psychological safety, and demonstrating vulnerability and authentic safety leadership, organisations can move beyond compliance. Most organisations only know their true nature in how they react to an incident. Being committed to safety is, sadly, not enough”
“Operating Without Harm is our best programme to support leaders transform their organisation’s safety performance. The results are truly amazing”
