1. Introduction
In recent years, the interest of Prevention specialists to increase their knowledge of behavior towards worker Safety has experienced an interesting growth. These professionals need to better explain the causes of unsafe behavior, because this behavior is attributed an important responsibility in the occurrence of occupational accidents. It should be noted that the information available on the results obtained, when comparing different prevention strategies with behavioral interventions, supports the interest shown by preventionists in obtaining greater knowledge about human behavior.
To contribute to this goal, Psychology and other sciences have studied human behavior since its inception. It is known that at the moment of birth, the person brings with him a very limited set of behaviors together with an unlimited potential for development. Among the few behaviors of the newborn, by way of example, one can point out, cry, scream, suck, breathe and a few other behaviors. Later, the child will learn from sitting, walking or talking to other behaviors of interesting complexity, which will gradually be incorporated into their behavioral repertoire throughout their lives. This continuity points to an important point that should be highlighted: people do not stop learning until the last day of their lives.
Regarding the process of incorporating new behaviors, it should be noted that this is gradual and occurs within the framework of the relationship between the person and their environment. This statement is shown simply because without an environment there is no learning, that is, the incorporation of new behaviors, as in the case of children abandoned in jungle places, only reaches the limit of behaviors that that environment allows, that is, a level subhuman. The following statement is derived from this: people's behavior is a function of the consequences that the environment provides.
Therefore, the study of the relationship of the behavior of workers with the work environment is an objective of the greatest interest to the preventionist, because this is, as has been seen, a relationship of constant and continuous learning. This means that workers behave according to the work environment in which they are inserted, in such a way that if we reconfigure the work environment with the objective of Safety and with the resources of Behavioral Psychology, the behavior of people is it will direct towards the purpose that interests the preventionist.
Therefore, if we want to increase safe behaviors we need to create an environment that supports safe behavior, that is, that provides positive consequences for safe behavior. If we want a creative work team or proactive people, we need to establish an environment conducive and directed to support creativity or proactivity, and so on.
But in this task, words are not enough, since people's behavior is sensitive to the consequences coming from their environment and not only to words, which, moreover, are sometimes visibly in contradiction with the actions of the person. emits them.
For example, if we want our child to study at home at certain times, behavioral psychology teaches that we must recognize that effort when it occurs. It also tells us that proceeding the other way around, that is, only getting angry or scolding him when he is not studying, is a mistake that is made frequently and that it will not change the behavior in the desired direction.
Also, if a worker does not use eye protection in the grinding section, the usual practice is to scold him, call his attention or even ignore him when he does not use his protection (by the way, and although by the way, this last situation can be valued by the worker as a support to his unsafe behavior "not wearing glasses"). But what behavioral psychology warns us is that if we want people to use their safety glasses, what we need to do is support them when they actually use their protections, that is, recognize their safe effort instead of paying attention only and preferably unsafe behavior. This change in the environment that the Preventionist or Supervisor makes, favors, in turn, the modification and consolidation of this safe behavior,because it is based on natural learning processes that have already been extensively studied with the necessary scientific rigor.
Although some people may be concerned that to explain human behavior we must refer to the different forms of conditioning or observational learning, the truth is that the data and the results obtained confirm that adequate management of these natural learning processes, by the preventionist, produce with certainty, the expected results in Work Safety. In addition, its capacity has been proven in multiple investigations and practical interventions that we have carried out in different companies in different countries and continents, as well as the work of other specialists. Everywhere, behavior is a function of consequences that come from the environment and consequently,human behavior responds to intervention based on learning processes, such as those outlined below, which at the outset allows us to rule out hackneyed cultural elements. These elements actually seem to be used more as an excuse when the expected changes are not achieved with traditional intervention methods for the modification of unsafe behavior.
Therefore, we speak of motivation or motivated behavior when we refer to a behavior product of the use of certain tools widely studied by physiology, psychology and neurosciences since the late nineteenth century. We are not talking about theories. We refer to the experimental study of the role of learning in human behavior, which was first started in university laboratories and later led to highly successful applications in organizations, with the technical name of Applied Behavior Analysis.The process of dissemination and knowledge of these applications has still been slow and the resulting methodology is used in a very small number of first-level companies globally and some in our country. It should be noted that only in 1978, the psychologists Beth Sulzer-Azaroff and Judith Komaki, published in the USA, separately, the first controlled results obtained in Work Safety in companies. In 1980, in the magazine Prevention of the Association for the Prevention of Accidents (APA) of Spain, the first report on the Psychology of Behavior Applied to Work Safety was published in our language. (López-Mena, 1980). Most of the advances made later are published in technical journals, Journal of Applied Psychology;Journal of Organizational Behavior Management and also in Professional Safety magazine.
As has been indicated and despite the success of these techniques to achieve results, their dissemination has still been scarce, for different reasons that we will not explain in their entirety given the limited space of this presentation. It is enough to point out that the knowledge obtained by Behavioral Psychology must compete with the good marketing of training programs, which offer attractive solutions but difficult to fulfill.
Also, the knowledge of behavioral psychology must compete with the widely held beliefs in our environment about supposed internal states of the person and with the belief that, most if not all the behavioral problems of people in organizations, they are solved only with training. Finally, the knowledge arising from the experimental work must deal with the difficulties of a program that requires constancy of purpose over time.
It will be convenient to briefly summarize some of the knowledge achieved by Behavioral Psychology that are directly applicable to Safety:
• Human behavior is a natural phenomenon, of frequent occurrence, observable and measurable, which makes it an object of scientific study.
• Human behavior is directly related, in a methodical and predictable way, with events in the environment. The study of the relationship between the behavior of people and their environment, based on observation and a systematic record of behavior data, constitutes the center of interest of behavioral psychology, because this study allows the prediction and administration of behavior. human behavior.
• The natural relationship of behavior with its environment, indicates that people learn safe behavior, but also indicates that they can learn unsafe behavior. Hence, it is necessary for the preventionist to know the natural processes of human learning, in order to use this knowledge to reverse unsafe learning.
In our professional work in preventive psychology, we have grouped the resources provided by behavior analysis into different methods for motivation towards safety.To function correctly, these methods require observable and measurable behavioral data that allow us to establish, for example, what is the average use of a certain element of protection by the workers who must use it. We know that the graph that represents this behavior simply does not exist in most companies, despite its obvious usefulness as a starting point for change and improvement of behavior. In reality, generally, one only works with anecdotal impressions or traditional beliefs about the causes of the behavior of the workers. Carrying out a preventive intervention, or a course on occupational safety, without a known starting point, can lead to any result or none, without the possibility of comparison before-after, that is,without us being able to know what is the result or the change that we have produced in the target behaviors of the intervention. This way of working, without prior behavioral data, has several drawbacks, in addition to being unprofessional. Among the most frequent inconveniences is the fact that we do not know the result of the preventive effort, we cannot establish a causal relationship, much less a cost / benefit relationship, of our professional efforts. On the other hand, if before starting any type of intervention we have a graph that shows the current state of one or more target behaviors for change, we will know with certainty the level of change achieved. And not least, we will know what we can do to continue improving. All of these actions are possible when a behavior chart is available.
In general, the purpose of Behavior-Based Safety Motivation is the identification and evaluation of unsafe behaviors and conditions in the work environment and the use of behavioral technology to a) increase the repertoire and frequency of presentation of safe behaviors and b) change those conditions that favor the occurrence of unsafe behaviors, thereby contributing to a significant reduction in the frequency and severity of accidents in the company.
This purpose is achievable when knowledge of behavioral psychology is used systematically and methodically. That is, the motivation for safety results from the management of human learning processes by the preventionist, using for this purpose, and according to their particular business realities, the methods that we present below.
These Behavior-based Work Safety Motivation Methods focus on reconfiguring the worker's environment, a process that facilitates learning and maintaining positive behaviors for safety over time.
2. Choosing the appropriate method for achieving safe behavior:
The following figure (Fig. 1) shows the different behavioral methods developed by PERSIST LTDA, to increase work safety in the company:
This description does not rigidly impose upon the Prevention Expert, the choice of programs to manage unsafe behavior, in the order indicated in Fig. 1. This is only a suggestion based on experience, since after the training of Basically, any of the stated Methods can be used at any level, or more than one simultaneously, to obtain changes in unsafe human behavior.
2.1. Building the foundation: training
At the base level of Fig. 1 is the Safety training activity. Training and didactic activities aimed at work safety are irreplaceable. Training and the dissemination actions that accompany it constitute the basic nucleus for work safety. They are unavoidable and are generally used in all organizations.
However, the difficulty in evaluating its real effect on behavioral change has determined that knowledge about safety is only a necessary condition or antecedent to act correctly, but not a sufficient condition for the worker to present and maintain it over time. safe behavior 2. An additional setback that can be observed frequently arises when the preventionist relies excessively on the capacity of training as the only tool for changing unsafe behavior.
2.2. Motivating and leading others. Behavior analysis applied to job safety: The Teps3 method.
This Method provides the Safety Expert and the Headquarters with practical motivational tools for behavior change towards safety, based on the knowledge already explained about the natural processes of human learning. The method consists of five steps:
2. Measurement and registration of key behaviors.
3. Functional Analysis of Behavior.
4. Intervention for the change and promotion of behavior towards safety.
5. Evaluation and Monitoring.
This method, used in various companies in different countries, shows significant increases in the safe behavior of workers.
The validity of the results obtained is supported by the comparison of these, with the results obtained by other groups of workers, whose working conditions are similar, but who have not been exposed to the intervention with the TEPS, which constitutes the test of the so-called natural control group.
This work has also been validated by comparing the same group with its own initial safe behavior index, prior to the application of the intervention with the TEPS.4
Finally, with the application of this method, the probability of accidents at work decreases. An additional demonstration of the causal relationship between the intervention carried out and the reduction in accidents can be obtained with the use of the Multiple Baseline test, as was done in some of the works cited below (see references).
It should be noted that there are no more than five or six Methods of these characteristics, existing globally. The TEPS Method is one of them, but it has some advantages over the others; for example, it includes a key step to determine the causes of unsafe behavior (step 3 above). In addition, it favors the reconfiguration of the environment with the involvement of the same team observed. These advantages have allowed us to work with this method on a global level, for which it has been translated into five languages from its origin in Spanish. It should be noted that there are also other incomplete variations derived from these original methods.
2.3. Learning to take care of yourself. Self-control techniques applied to work safety: The premac5 method.
The next level shown in Fig. 1 comprises the PREMAC Method, which provides workers with Behavioral Self - Control strategies that they themselves can use for their active self-protection against occupational hazards.
Self-control is understood as: the capacity of people that implies being and feeling owner of themselves. The ability to regulate one's behavior.
Safety based on self-control of behavior, includes learning a set of cognitive-behavioral skills and techniques; emotional training; control of irrational ideas about accidents and techniques that favor the development of social skills, all of which the worker can use to understand, analyze and manage their psychological and physical environment. By using these techniques, it is easier for the worker to develop her self-concept, her self-esteem and as a product of this development, self-protection behaviors are achieved at work. That is, it is achieved that the same worker directs her own behavior towards safety.
The axis on which this Method is based is logical and psychological in nature: when the worker's self-concept and self-esteem are developed, they value and appreciate themselves more. Therefore it seems reasonable to think that he will take better care of himself.
The PREMAC Method consists of four steps:
2. Self-evaluation of at least one of these behaviors.
3. Self-control through behavioral, cognitive, emotional training techniques and self-control of irrational ideas about Work Safety.
4. Formulation of safe behavior goals.
Self-reward
The PREMAC Method shows positive results in reducing accidents. It also shows interesting qualitative results, especially those derived from the emotional training provided to workers.
2.4. The participation factor in security: Participatory security
At the upper level of the triangle presented in Fig. 1, we find Participatory Security. This constitutes a program that offers a platform to integrate the different behavioral methods towards security in the company.
At this level, workers are incorporated in a decisive and active way as actors and protagonists of preventive actions.
Either for this program or for the implementation of any of the Methods previously exposed, constancy will be required, that is, to achieve success it is not enough with a course, or two or three isolated actions. It is necessary to establish a program that can be constantly measured and controlled, until the consolidation of safe behaviors is observed. Therefore, it will take enough time and professional effort.
Likewise, it is required to observe human behavior, as any other natural phenomenon is observed, that is to say, it will be necessary to leave people's “mind” calm, to work, in prevention, with their behavior.
The main objective of any of the programs presented above, that is, the increase of safe behavior, is achieved. And when this happens, accidents and days lost due to them decrease significantly.
3. References:
López-Mena, L. (1989). Psychological intervention in the company. Madrid: Planeta, Martínez- Roca.
López-Mena, L. (1992). Difficulties for motivation through positive reinforcement in the company. Psychology of work and organizations; 22; 77-87.
López-Mena L., and Correa S. (1997). Self-control techniques applied to change unsafe behavior at work. IST Magazine; 112.
López-Mena L. (2000). Self-control skills applied to work safety. Journal of Psychology of the University of Chile; 9; 61-74.
López-Mena, L. (2003). Motivation for Safety based on behavior. Security News; July August; 4-15.
Salmurri, F. (2004). Emotional freedom. Barcelona: Paidós.
Visit: www.persist.cl
This material was prepared for its exhibition at Expocorma 2007, based on the invitation made by the Chilean Security Association to PERSIST LTDA.
CORMA is a Corporation that brings together the most important forestry and timber companies in the country and the American continent.
To cite this work:
Sannino, D., and López-Mena, L. (2007) Motivation for job safety, based on behavior. VII Occupational Health and Safety Workshop. Expocorma. Conception. Chile.
Footnotes:
1 © 2007. PERSIST LTDA. Firm with more than 20 years of experience in training and advising different national and foreign companies. Development of own methodologies for motivation towards work safety, based on behavior. (56-2) 3332074 / (56-2) 2342680. (*) English version available only for our overseas partners.
2 An alternative to traditional training is Distance Training. This makes it possible to use the “dead times”, enriching them with basic safety knowledge. Likewise, it does not require a minimum number of participants or bring the workers together in the classroom to carry out training, as each one follows their own pace within an estimated period. Consult: [email protected] - visit:
3 TEPS: Psychological Techniques in Safety. This Method is original from PERSIST LTDA and all its materials are protected by law. Registration in the Intellectual Property Registry Number 101.308 of Chile and Legal Deposit B - 38847 -82 of Spain valid for the EU. It is currently available in Spanish-English and Portuguese. The translation into other languages has been made under a PERSIST License and its availability is restricted to the companies that own the translation. Consult: [email protected]
4 The interested reader will also find the name “PTAS Method” on the net, which is the name of the English translation carried out for our foreign clients.
5 PREMAC: Prevention Through Self-control. This Method is original from PERSIST LTDA, its material is protected and registered in the Intellectual Property Registry of Santiago de Chile, according to Inscription number 101.988 of October 27, 1997. Consult: [email protected].
