PAPod 490 - A Panel Discussion on Safety Practices

I think panels generally are not very successful. This one was incredibly successful. Thank you. Interestingly enough, it was successful over, I think, maybe one of the more difficult questions. So it's not like you were talking about what kind of cake to have. That would have been a great panel. I'm pro that panel. I would vote yes for that. Also, that is a fairly difficult question to answer. Cake? I think the answer is all kinds of cakes.

If you limit cake. But if you could only have one. If I could only have one, I would make it, oh man, dulce de leche. I mean, tres leches. I don't know what you're talking about. Do you mean chocolate? No, tres leches. This is something from our land. It's basically soggy cake. Yeah. You're not selling it. Is it soggy with alcohol? No. No, it's soggy with three milks. No, no. Monkey, monkey milk. Powdered milk. See, Todd, this is a harder question than you thought. Yeah, that's true. Hey. Music.

Everybody. Welcome to the Pre-Accident Investigation Podcast. I'm the host of this here show, one of the safety podcasts that are in the world, of which I think there are fewer now than there used to be. For a while there, there were a ton, man. And everyone had, like, everybody and their dog had a safety podcast. Everyone had one. It was, like, amazing how many people had it. And then I think they fall off because...

I think it's more work than people think it's going to be. I don't really know. I mean, I should ask somebody. It is kind of a commitment in time. You have to manage your time pretty well. And I think you have to have a high need for completion. So I always have a high need for completion. I'm more interested in getting the job done than I am in the quality of the job, which you probably figured out if you listen to like more than one of these podcasts.

That probably snapped pretty early. But I think it's fun. And no matter how many there are, there's always room for one more. But thanks for listening and telling your friends and doing all that stuff. That makes a huge difference. And I'm always pleased to bring this to you because we always, it's weird. There's never a lack of stuff to talk about. That has not been a problem. And today is such a good example of that because I'm super psyched about today.

Actually, I'm super psyched because three of my favorite people are on this podcast all at the same time. And you're going to notice that none of us are fearful to speak over one another. But, you know, that's what happens when you get a gang of people together. But you're going to hear from Zoe Nation, from Martha Acosta, and from Andrea Baker. And what we're going to talk about is accountability, because you can't talk enough about accountability.

But partially the reason we're going to talk about accountability is because they had just done a presentation, a panel discussion. discussion, in fact, that's kind of what the intro was about, if you listened, on accountability, and it went really well, like, screamingly well. But that is not nearly as interesting as the conversation we had afterwards.

So I was able to kind of grab everybody, circle them up while the energy was still high, and ask a little bit more detailed question around this notion of accountability. You know, because you do this work for a living, that accountability is a big stinking deal. And that often our bosses are really interested in accountability. In fact, what they're really interested in is if they don't have accountability, I guess they fear anarchy.

So they believe accountability kind of holds the organization together. And maybe it does. To whom am I to say it doesn't? But I think that's an odd angle. And we tend to weaponize accountability pretty aggressively. And don't act like it's not your organization because your organization weaponizes accountability as much as the next one. We're all pretty stinking guilty of this. The problem is, is I think that is not really what accountability is.

In complex systems, failure happens at the couplings. And if you don't know what that means, well, hang out because we're going to have lots more conversations about that. And accountability really is an act of clarity. It helps us understand who owns those couplings. And so if you think about accountability that way, then the accountability conversation has to happen before an event takes place because it provides clarity to the complexity that is our daily operations.

And if you're any company at all, but the one that keeps coming to mind because it's in the news all the time, if you're a Boeing company. The notion of accountability becomes really a pretty sticky wicket because you want to hold people to account. Oh, yes, we do. That's emotionally satisfying. But that isn't the same thing as clarifying the complex couplings. Who is responsible for what and when?

Who's going to check to make sure it's done? Who needs to validate and verify that this process is good enough? Those are accountability questions. And that becomes, well, that becomes a pretty important part of the discussion that we're going to have. So I'm going to invite you into this because you need to be there. The audio is a little bit echoey because there were so many of us, but it works fine. I mean, you'll be fine. Turn it up. Turn one of your phone up. That'll make it sound better.

And I'm using AI now. So maybe AI will fix this problem. That'll be interesting to see. But sit back and relax because this is a great conversation betwixt Zoe, Martha, Andrea, and I on accountability, culpability, discipline, and the future of the world. Listen carefully and see what you think.

But you spoke of accountability. So we should give some background because I think that's worth it. So this is really the first large hop meeting in Australia, I think it's fair to say. And the attendance is noteworthy. I mean, I don't know how you guys are. We have board members. We have CEOs. We have leaders that usually would not show up to these things. I mean, where it's been going is we're all preaching to the choir and people are arguing about tiny little differences in language.

And this is people that are really soaking in this larger view of, yeah, the organization can be different. And there are 600 of them. Yeah. Which is massive. Yeah. That's massive. And it seems impressive. Well-organized, well-thought. Yeah. It seems good. How do you feel about your ability to sort of share that content?

I mean, I think first I was actually a little worried that Andrea and I would have a very different view of accountability just because we're looking at it from a different view. And actually, Sydney set it up for us pretty well in talking about the retrospective accountability versus what's the proactive, forward-looking. So let's break on that for a minute, because I find that to be, the more I think about that, the more that's just made out.

Right. That's not real. And the more you press on it, it's kind of goofy. I mean, I really like the idea of restorative, but I really like the way you guys spoke of accountability as kind of a collective. It's a group value. It's a relational value, not an individual value. Well, I mean, in a weird way, even just the way that Bob talked about learning. Well, that whole process of learning is accountability. Accountability is more like the actual fiber of work, right?

It's the fiber of the organization that holds everybody together towards meeting a shared purpose. So it has to be something that is driven through conversation, that's driven through empathy, that's driven through critical thinking, which is all the things we've been talking about all morning. So to make it something as petty as holding somebody accountable is not to recognize the importance of the work an organization does.

Well, so let's pull the string on that. Why is this accountability question so big with leaders? Well, why is this the one?

Hill they'll die on i'm not sure i love that but no that's fair well because because there's it's in that list so we asked the question at the beginning of the presentation what are you trying to get like what's the point because i asked that question because i'm like if there was all these lists of compliance number one you know when we had we always get i always get trust transparency reporting safety accountability and responsibility so those

those things come up and it's like, everyone's like, when you speak to people about what's your biggest problem with your workforce, a lot of the time it's like empowerment and accountability and compliance, right? A lot of those things are problems that they, when you ask them, okay, how's your workforce going? Oh, I've got these problems. And it's okay. So that's already something I'm quite sensitive to and want.

And then we start saying, hey, so we're going to start talking about whether you should be disciplining. They've been brought up in an environment as as leaders, where they've been rewarded with, be strong, show that you've got strong expectations. The best way to show that your expectations are serious is to hold people accountable. And there are consequences if you don't do the right thing. And so like someone brilliantly asked in the audience, well, if not this, then what?

Like you're leaving me with nothing. So the idea is if I can't have a consequence, I still get bogged down with those questions. I try to go to the The consequences, they were involved in the investigation. They helped you fix it. They had some actions they're taking away and so do you. But I think that's the biggest shift. Like people just cannot get their heads around it because it's like, I'm letting go.

It's going to be anarchy. And so that's why I loved, thank you, that you clarified in yours that this is not blame-free. Because that's where we've ended up. So organizations walk away, they get a little tidbit and they go, oh my God, you're doing that no-blame thing. I can't talk to you about your responsibility anymore because we're not blaming anyone. It's like, no, no, no, no. You're totally right. And I think a lot of that comes around to just the idea that they want to look for reasons.

Well, it's kind of multifaceted, but they want to look for reasons why this program will fail because it's scary and it seems like more work. And I guess they believe discipline is a good deterrence. It's not but i guess they believe it i have so many thoughts on this shoot them all out you don't have enough time for that or anything but so going to your question about why is this such a big topic.

I mean, there's so many reasons why it is, but a big piece of the puzzle in my mind is that the way that we've looked at the folks that are close to work has historically often mimicked a parent-child relationship. And so the model that we're using can mimic that of a parent-child dynamic. We actually have a fairly good model of accountability in organizations, and it's the way that we tend to treat each other in leadership teams, right? right? It's not that there are no expectations, right?

It's not that you don't have difficult conversations, right? We actually, in some places, do that quite well with people that we would believe to be our peers or that are directly reporting to us on what we would consider a management or a leadership team. And yet the model we then have had a complete different dynamic with people that we've brought close to the work.

And so I actually get sometimes confused as to to why we're so confused about it because we have something right in front of us because it's freaky i mean i mean so what you just said which i think you can make a pretty strong case is true is this weird psychosexual drama of daddy i mean i don't know where else to go. But it's the whole thing but i mean it's the whole parent child thing but it's but But I have I treat them like kids and they treat me like their daddy.

But if they're into that, I'm not forcing anyone consensually, of course. That goes back to Martha, something you said at the end of the presentation, which I am not going to get your verbiage right. So maybe I'll just ask you to say it. But like, what would you rather do?

Can you say what you said? So, you know, I talked about the three different kinds of empathy, and I said that in order to achieve that, what you need is to be curious, you need to be vulnerable, and you need to be compassionate. And we, you know, I brought up the fact that having all of these conversations, we think it's great. But when you get out into the workplace, you're like, yeah, if I just went around talking to people, people would say I wasn't doing my job.

But I gave them that choice. Joyce, would you rather focus on curiosity, compassion, and vulnerability, or would you rather have to show up and be charismatic and always be right? Always be right. And that's the piece that I think that feeds into our belief in many places that as leaders, we are in this parent ego position in which we're supposed to already know the answers.

We're always right. Right. As though the relationship that we have with folks is that that you would have with a five year old child that you're teaching the ways of the world and in their eyes. Right. They view you as the person. And we put in a tremendous amount of pressure on ourselves as leaders to stay in this position, in this dynamic of believing we're supposed to already know.

And even when we don't, really hard faking it to keep up whatever this strange place that, I mean, I remember being indoctrinated into that thought process, right? And I don't think I walked into an organization feeling as though that was I was supposed to know everything. I very like almost alarmingly was aware how little I knew. And yet when you watch other people around you, that's I think a bit of where the imposter syndrome comes.

Folks just they give off, they exude this confidence of I know all of the ways of the world and I am the sole provider of answers to you. And if we could adjust ourselves to seeing folks more in adult relationships and recognize that the people that we're working with, they're fully formed adult humans that have a valid perspective on the world.

And by seeking to understand their perspective, we also understand the real problems that they're facing, even if they might not be experts in the skill that we've asked somebody to do, right? That's not what we're talking about in terms of expertise. Oftentimes you do have people that are absolutely experts in that skill.

But even if you have someone who's brand new, who hasn't gained expertise in a skill, we're still seeking to understand their perspective of what it's like to be working in an organization where you are new to that skill and trying to work through it without having to have this facade of, yeah, I know all the answers. How does that play out with the new, so take that idea and play it out with sort of the new paradigm of work. So now workers are staying a shorter time.

They're certainly not identified for a long, so they're looking for a job, not a career. And so accountability must change. There must be more of a protege mentorship relationship. But that's different than a parent. Daddy. Stop with the daddy. But you can absolutely still have a protege mentorship that is very different than a parent-child. You can have somebody teach you a skill without talking down to you. Those are very different concepts, right?

And in fact, you know, even in the teaching field, what there's tons of research now, our dear friend Kirstie Tyson does it, that shows that listening Listening is incredibly important in teaching, teaching skills like math, where we think, you know, there's a right answer, and yet you still have to listen to the way that a child speaks. Creates a mental model around it in order to actually be able to teach them something that does have a right answer.

And we don't actually work in that many jobs. We know where you have, where there is that clear of a right answer. I will not sit here and listen to you take away the preferential treatment of numbers.

But I mean, this does this change accountability? Does the changing workforce, does the post-pandemic work environment change accountability? Does it change accountability because people, either they want you to come back to work or they don't want to come back to work? I just read this article really super recently where they questioned six people at $150,000 a year starting salary. And they asked all six people if in order to get this job, they would have to

come into the office. So they'd have to work in the office. Four of the six people declined the job. Right. And I don't know if this even fits in our conversation. I don't think that's accountability. No, and I'm not sure how it fits, but does it change stuff? I think it might in some ways change stuff because the way that we're talking about accountability requires a great deal of communication.

And I think what we as Gen Xers or as some of you are boomers, I'm not going to say who, have to do different. We have to have a different idea of what it means to build a relationship and to communicate. So clearly there are generations who believe that you can build a meaningful relationship without seeing people face to face. And so what we have to do is spend some time understanding that, playing with that.

And clearly it happens because there are people of your generation who end up giving away millions of dollars to people that they're in love with that do not exist. So that's probably there is a way of building a meaningful, empathetic relationship remotely. And as leaders, we just have to take a moment to see if that's true.

I think the other thing that was really another thing that's a big pushback that I get all the time that I wanted to address was that being empathetic is not the same thing as agreeing. And so there's a fear when we hand it over to worker, you know, hand safety over to the worker that they will be wrong. And that we can't do anything about it, that we have to agree with them. And that is not, that's not true.

If we are able to build, and I'm so glad Bob brought up psychological safety, even though he pretended not to know anything about it, which he totally knows everything that he was talking about was psychological safety. If we, if leaders can create. It's more fun to play dog. Yeah, it is. And I guess it helps with the whole daddy dynamic, too. The hibberleys. Right.

Now you made me lose my train of thought. If we can create psychological safety, a big misconception there is that all of a sudden everybody is getting along. And, you know, we all agree that is absolutely not it. When you're seeing psychological safety is when you see people battling it out, battling out the ideas, saying no to each other, you know, really feeling like it is okay to maybe offend you by saying, I think that idea is crap.

And you're being like, well, that was kind of offensive, but maybe you're right. Right? So it's this whole idea that we're pushing this fluffy, you know, happy, you know, nobody has accountability. Everybody's gonna, no one's gonna do the work. Idea is just bias. And fear. It is biased and it's based in sort of, I think it's based in the fear that if we stop doing things, it'll get worse.

Right. But I also think it's based on the fact that the more we have this conversation, the closer this problem gets to my desk. So. You know what I mean? I think. The David Payne statement is where that came from. Yeah, I know, right? I love his statement.

And so I think it's unfair of us to have this conversation without recognizing, like, you know, one of the, that it's like the 101 that you talk about with Harper or when we're talking about it it's not about behavior change for the worker now we're talking about behavior change of the leaders and so we have to be really careful because are we just pushing out and going well you guys need to be wearing fashion it's pretty easy all you do is turn up and you know you're just vulnerable actually

have you you know you guys I know you've all done this but it is like not it's not an ability that some of our leaders have like even when you say hey I need I need you to show show vulnerability. I need you to show curiosity. And I've seen them try and do it. And it's literally like, I cannot compute. Like I'm here to fix the problems. I'll listen to them. They're venting.

Now I'm going to fix their problem. That's me being empathetic. And you're like, no, no. So what we've done is we've brought our leadership up, rewarding them for their technical. Prowess, promoting them because they're technical leaders, giving them no skills, or like now we're starting to train these guys who've been in the industry for like 30 years in emotional intelligence, right? So we have to be empathetic to the leaders and go, this is so hard. This is not just a case.

It's so easy to be empathetic. Actually, this is not within their wheelhouse. And so what I do think is good though, maybe...

So bold to say is i do think that regardless outside of safety good leadership is evolving and changing and it's like it's time right so we're demanding diversity in terms of in the workforce that creates dare i say it's a more opportunity to have more natural emotional intelligence traditionally a more easy policy that females have for example and so you're seeing that That's slowly start to change. And generation as well. Our new generation is coming through more naturally,

have higher levels of empathy and won't settle for jobs. More comfort with diversity. Yeah. What can you offer me as an employee? Not I'm going to surrogate. Do you remember Gabe at GE Locomotive? Gabe, he was the safety director for the locomotive, the Edison shop. So GE has this locomotive factory. I don't know. I guess they make them there. That's because they have a test track. And it's the old Thomas Edison shop. And like the floor, it's four by four blocks of wood. And it's really cool.

Gabe had a poster made that he hung in the shop that said, are we asking, are we giving our leaders the right answers so they will ask the right follow-up question? And I thought that was really, it goes right to what you said, Zoe. And I do think you're right. Right. I think we assume that leaders will change behavior because we tell them to change behavior.

And when you really think about it, the accountability struggle probably needs to start with providing an opportunity to look at how we can change the systems and reporting mechanisms we use to actually change the dialogue and the narrative around what leaders are getting as data points.

Man was that a fun conversation that was so much fun the energy in that conversation was amazing i think what happened is i forgot to turn on my microphone i'm almost certain that's what happened so that's me but you know humans are fallible everybody makes mistakes and so that's mine so i'll chalk that down to a mistake and a non-mistake tolerance no it was a a pretty tolerant system because we still got the podcast. I can't believe I ended with me on the final words. That is just cheese ball.

But that was a pretty good place to end because we spun wildly out of control talking about that shop and Gabe and all the fun stuff that there was to talk about. That was just a really great conversation. And it was so much fun to get to share time with them. They are three outstanding people, three outstanding women leaders in safety. All of them are impressive. All of them do really important, really difficult work very, very well. So it was a joy to get to hang out and talk to them.

It was almost as fun as it is hanging out and talking to you. And that's saying something right there. Thanks for listening. Tell your friends, pass it around. Enjoy, enjoy, enjoy, because there's so much more for us to talk about. It's going to be a great year. It already is a great year. What am I saying? Learn something new every single day. I bet you did today because today was a good day for learning. Have as much fun as you possibly can. Be good to each other.

Be kind to each other. And for goodness sakes, you guys, be safe. Music.