Observe, Repetition, Behavior, Routine, Ritual and Decision Making in Risk
Most choices made by persons are unconscious. The concept determination making is mind exercise between people is solely not supported by the proof (https://neurosciencenews.com/collective-intelligence-19512/ ). We all know that people embody habits, repetitions, rituals, routines and recurring choices as heuristics. Most heuristics are locked in place as physique reminiscence, collective and muscle reminiscence, in this manner people will be quick and environment friendly with out having to grind away with sluggish rational considering in order to get issues finished. You possibly can see examples of human heuristics right here: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/every-single-cognitive-bias/
Nonetheless, these are solely brain-centric in focus. There’s way more to how folks make choices when one considers the various social influences on determination making (https://safetyrisk.net/mapping-social-influence-strategies/). When a bunch repeat and follow a course of, the cues of that course of are shared between staff. It’s these ‘cues’ that set off determination making as collective heuristics. When a bunch of individuals ‘see’ these cues, they mechanically enact choices with out considering rationally. On this method, the considering is held in the shared cues, not in particular person brains. Because of this folks in teams could make super-fast choices as a result of they ‘feel’ their method into exercise. This ‘collective mind’ is created by follow and repetition. That is how humans create ‘flow’ and ‘optimise’ determination pace. I focus on this foundational concept right here by means of the One Mind, Three Minds (1B3M) Mannequin (https://vimeo.com/106770292 ). Every time we introduce 1B3M it resonates rapidly with folks and they surprise why they haven’t thought of it earlier than in the best way folks sort out risk.
A lot of how Security approaches risk is loaded with the assumptions of ‘brain-centrism’. We see how Security thinks about determination making it in the various flawed fashions of investigations (https://safetyrisk.net/deconstructing-icam-useful-or-useless/ ) and the slender concepts of behaviourism in the business. Consequently, most approaches to understanding in safety are about coaching, parroting and ‘rewiring the brain’, an entire distraction from the fact that 95% of all determination making on web site is heuristical (particular person and social).
How unusual this business that when it doesn’t perceive what’s outdoors of its worldview, it demonises transdiciplinary worldviews fairly than search discovery in why it doesn’t perceive. That is how we get investigations that blame the employee (https://safetyrisk.net/the-psychology-of-blaming-in-safety/ ). That is how we get loopy assumptions just like the Danny Cheney investigation that assumes a ‘conscious’ determination was made to die (https://slideplayer.com/slide/8998323/ ). Right here is slide 10 from the presentation:
Right here now we have poor Danny useless on the bottom and right here is Security ‘attributing’ consciousness to somebody they couldn’t interview! That is insanity!
Most determination making is NOT aware!
That is the sort of garbage Security makes up when it’s foolish assumptions of behaviourism and brain-centrism are let lose. That is what you get from a mono-disciplinary method to understanding that thinks determination making is rational, particular person and brain-centric. Poor olde Danny selected NOT to conform, although we couldn’t communicate to Danny. Poor olde Danny selected unsafety as a result of we consider ‘safety is a choice you make’ and ‘all accidents are preventable’.
When your worldview is based on nonsense concepts, you’re going to get investigations resembling this.
Maybe take a look at what the Court considered in the matter and how the Court docket does NOT attribute consciousness to Mr Cheney. Even then, the courtroom doesn’t take into account many essential elements related to collective thoughts, ritual, routines, follow, behavior and heuristics however at the least it’s much less slender than Security. Certainly, the precept contractor John Holland got here in for a good belting by the Court docket for his or her methodology.
Not one of the essential elements I’d take into account in this case had been even a part of the enquiry! When your worldview is based on the disciplines of legislation and engineering, why would one take into account discussing essential social psychological elements resembling: habits, repetitions, rituals, routines and recurring choices in heuristics. In my analysis, most occasions happen when there’s incongruence between social heuristics and context.
If you wish to be taught extra about how the SEEK method to investigations can broaden and broaden your investigations methodology you’ll be able to examine right here: https://cllr.com.au/product/seek-the-social-psychology-of-event-investigations-unit-2-elearning/
One Brain Three Minds from Human Dymensions on Vimeo.
Newest posts by Dr Rob Lengthy (see all)
PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA
Rob is the founding father of Human Dymensions and has intensive expertise, {qualifications} and experience throughout a spread of sectors together with authorities, training, company, business and neighborhood sectors over 30 years. Rob has labored in any respect ranges of the training and coaching sector together with serving on numerous put up graduate government, put up graduate supervision, put up graduate course design and implementation packages.