For The Love of Zero Compressed

For the Love of Zero
Human Fallibility and Risk
Dr Robert Long
Risk Makes Sense:
Risk Makes Sense Human Judgement and Risk
Human Judgement and Risk is the first book in the series and
is available to order from
www.humandymensions.com.au
Dr Robert Long and Joshua Long

2nd Edition
National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry

Author
Long, Robert
Title
For the Love of Zero / Robert Long,
ISBN 978-0-646-58765-3
Subjects
Risk-taking (Psychology) Risk perception. Risk--Sociological aspects.
Social choice.
Other Authors/Contributors
Dewey Number 302.12
Scotoma Press
10 Jens Place
Kambah ACT 2902
admin@humandymensions.com
www.humandymensions.com
© Copyright 2012 by Robert Long.
All rights reserved including the right of reproduction in whole or in part in any form.
ISBN 978-0-646-58765-3
Graphic design and layout by Justin Huehn and Craig Ashhurst
ii For the Love of Zero

For The Love of Zero
Human Fallibility and Risk
Dr Robert Long
iii
iv For the Love of Zero
Contents
Table Of Illustrations ............................................................................................................. viii
Foreword ...................................................................................................................................ix
With Memory and Thanks ........................................................................................................x
The Book Cover Explained .......................................................................................................xi
About the Book Logo ..............................................................................................................xii
Making Contact .......................................................................................................................xii
Glossary .................................................................................................................................. xiii
What This Book Is About ........................................................................................................xv
Structure and Use of the Book ...............................................................................................xvii
SECTION ONE - For the Love of Zero ........................................................................... 1
Chapter 1 - The Attraction of Zero .............................................................................................. 3

The Fascination with Zero ........................................................................................................ 3
The History of Zero .................................................................................................................. 8
The Meaning of Zero ................................................................................................................ 9
Workshop Questions............................................................................................................... 11
Transition ................................................................................................................................ 12
Chapter 2 - The Logic of Zero .....................................................................................................13

The ‘Zero Harm’ Argument ..................................................................................................... 13
Trends in ‘Zero harm’ Culture and Marketing ........................................................................ 17
The Quest for Perfection ......................................................................................................... 19
The Rage for Utopia ................................................................................................................ 22
Transition ................................................................................................................................ 24
Chapter 3 - The Discourse of Zero.............................................................................................25

Language that Makes Culture ................................................................................................ 25
The Discourse and Trajectory of Zero..................................................................................... 31
The Meaning of Discourse ...................................................................................................... 32
Transition ................................................................................................................................ 33
SECTION TWO - Zero Dissent ................................................................................... 35
Chapter 4 - Zero Dissent .............................................................................................................37

The Meaning of Dissent.......................................................................................................... 37
Zero Harm Dissenters ............................................................................................................ 38
The Evidence of Belief ............................................................................................................ 42
Since When Did Intolerance Become a Virtue?..................................................................... 45
Motivation and Learning ........................................................................................................ 47
The Essentials of Motivation .................................................................................................. 48
How We Learn is What We Learn ........................................................................................ 73
Motivation and Learning ........................................................................................................ 74
Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero v

Transition ................................................................................................................................ 50
Chapter 5 - Making Sense of Zero ............................................................................................51

Binary Opposites ..................................................................................................................... 51
Goal Strategy .......................................................................................................................... 54
Goal States .............................................................................................................................. 55
Good Goal Setting .................................................................................................................. 60
Transition ................................................................................................................................ 61
Chapter 6 - The Nature of Fundamentalism ............................................................................63

The Branch Davidian .............................................................................................................. 63
Sociopsychological Characteristics of Fundamentalism ......................................................... 66
Venturing for Victory .............................................................................................................. 66
Understanding the Mind of Fundamentalism ........................................................................ 69
Cognitive Dissonance.............................................................................................................. 74
Understanding Cognitive Bias and the Unconscious.............................................................. 77
The Psychology of Conversion ................................................................................................ 81
The Escape from Fundamentalism.......................................................................................... 82
Transition ................................................................................................................................ 83
SECTION THREE - Strategies Without Zero ............................................................... 85
Chapter 7 - Strategies without Zero ..........................................................................................87

Strategic Silences in Safety...................................................................................................... 87
Believability and the Destructiveness of Unhealthy Scepticism ............................................. 88
Healthy Scepticism and Entertaining Doubt ......................................................................... 90
The Absurdity of Commitment to Binary Absolutes Generates ‘Selective Zero Harm’......... 91
My Target Goal is Zero Death ............................................................................................... 93
A Focus on Zero or a Focus on People ................................................................................... 94
The Importance of Learning ................................................................................................... 95
Realism is not Fatalism ........................................................................................................... 99
Human Error and Luck ........................................................................................................ 100
Workshop Questions............................................................................................................. 102
Transition .............................................................................................................................. 102
Chapter 8 - The Humanising Organisation ............................................................................ 103

The Humanising Organisation ............................................................................................. 103
How Language and Discourse Shape Behaviour.................................................................. 104
Your Talk Matters.................................................................................................................. 105
Right Language and Goals in the Psychology of Risk ......................................................... 107
Examples of Promotional Goal Organisations ..................................................................... 107
Can an Organisation be ‘World Class’ Without Zero? ......................................................... 108
Explaining the Risk and Safety Matrix - The ‘World Class’ Disposition ............................. 119
Workshop Questions............................................................................................................. 136
vi For the Love of Zero

The Rotor .............................................................................................................................. 137
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 138
Further Directions ................................................................................................................. 139
Training ................................................................................................................................. 139
Chapter 9 - A Reading List .......................................................................................................141

About the Author.................................................................................................................. 146
Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero vii

Table Of Illustrations
Figure 1. Zero Shop in Glenelg, South Australia ..................................................................... 6
Figure 2. Point Zero in Perth CBD .......................................................................................... 6
Figure 3. The Triple Zero Kid’s Challenge ................................................................................ 7
Figure 4. Advertisement for a Zero Harm Advisor on seek.com.au ....................................... 18
Figure 5. Booth’s Map of Social Salvation and Utopia ........................................................... 22
Figure 6. Concept Map of Culture Characteristics and Trajectories ...................................... 28
Figure 7. Sample One from MiProfile Survey ........................................................................ 43
Figure 8. Sample Two from MiProfile Survey ........................................................................ 44
Figure 9. Sample Three from MiProfile Survey ...................................................................... 44
Figure 10. Rationalist, irrational and arational thinking positions. ......................................... 53
Figure 11. Human Goal States ............................................................................................... 57
Figure 12. Black Snake ............................................................................................................ 58
Figure 13. The Subversion of Goals and Goal By-Products ................................................... 59
Figure 14. The Burning Compound of the Branch Davidian Ranch ..................................... 64
Figure 15. Doomsday Cult in South Australia ....................................................................... 65
Figure 16. Half Time Evangelicalism ..................................................................................... 67
Figure 17. Game Number Two with Fresh Team ................................................................... 68
Figure 18. The Cognitive Dissonance Cycle ........................................................................... 76
Figure 19. The Great Toilet Roll Debate................................................................................. 78
Figure 20. The Balance of Cost, Risk and Production .......................................................... 100
Figure 21. The Human Error Fault Tree ............................................................................... 101
Figure 22. Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix ......................................................................... 113
Figure 23. Risk and Safety Maturity with Hudson’s Model ................................................. 114
Figure 24. Regression to the Mean ....................................................................................... 116
Figure 25. Heinrich’s Safety Pyramid ................................................................................... 117
Figure 26. Nature of Human Community ............................................................................ 120
Figure 27. Response to Significant Event ............................................................................. 120
Figure 28. Pressure of a Significant Event ............................................................................ 121
Figure 29. The Event Pierces the Community ...................................................................... 121
Figure 30. Healing the Injured Community ......................................................................... 122
Figure 31. The Nature of Community in TIme .................................................................... 122
Figure 32. The Nature of Community Healing Trajectory in TIme ..................................... 123
Figure 33. The Competing Values Quadrant ........................................................................ 127
Figure 34. Socio-political CVF Summary - Example: Risk and Security ............................ 128
Figure 35. CVF Management and Leadership Characteristics ............................................ 129
Figure 36. Competing Values Organisational Types ............................................................. 130
Figure 37. Conflict Pairs........................................................................................................ 131
Figure 38. Deficit Type.......................................................................................................... 132
Figure 39. Stepping Up to Risk and Safety Maturity Programs........................................... 136
viii For the Love of Zero

Foreword
There is no such thing as a single human being. The minimum number in the fundamental human
unit is two. At the core of what it means to be human is connection. So the word ‘I’ is the shortest and
yet the most misleading word in the English language. This word more than all others is in need of
review. The word ‘I’ could at best only ever refer to half of something.
In a culture that has privatised everything, most especially the self, we nod to the idea of community.
We think that familiarity with a word is the same thing or similar to understanding the word. Alas,
the word mostly denotes a gathering of individuals, half units.
What a price we pay in the West for a silly idea. Most of our movies begin with the portrayal of an
injustice that is answered when some hero, some superman or superwoman, saves the day. Most often
the solitary hero achieves his day of justice through the power of a gun. I remember a time when our
culture was made up of things called ‘citizens’. The word implied membership to a collective based on
a set of responsibilities. One of the many cultural shifts of our day means that our culture is made up
of ‘consumers’. Consumers only have responsibility to achieve value for money. Consumers aim for a
good experience.
In our political life too we have ceased to elect governments and begun to elect individuals. We vote
for leaders or potential leaders. We expect leaders to save the day in one way or another, and when
it becomes clear that we expect more than any individual can deliver, we never stop to examine our
expectations but rather, dump yesterday’s loser in a moment and go looking for the next superman
or superwoman.
A wealthy barrister walked into my office last week, wearing a suit that I couldn’t pay for with a year’s
wages. He sat in front of me and began to weep. He was at the top of his tree in his career and he had
everything that money could buy. He had married a woman he loved and they had recently, rather late
in life, become parents to a healthy little boy. As the man sobbed he kept apologising, saying that he
had not cried for any reason since he was 8 years old. I believe him. For some reason that I couldn’t
fathom, he found someone he could cry with, for the first time in his adult life.
We wonder why we live in an age when mental illness seems to be the issue of everyone! Who can
doubt that we are not coping with the stresses of modern life? Unfortunately we have no appetite
for asking fundamental questions in order to examine the cause of our ailing society. Instead we have
individuals who are trained to diagnose and mostly medicate so that we can feel more comfortable in
our unhappy state. Most forms of help come in the approximate form of the medical model, which
means individuals seek the help of professionals who dispense services to these things that are called
‘patients’ or ‘clients’. Things, always things!
Imagine the joy that could come if our goal was to ‘meet’ people rather than to fix them. Imagine the
burden that would be lifted from consumers as well as dispensers of ‘helping services’. In order for the
‘client’ to cease to become a thing, the expert must also be willing to cease to become a thing. Imagine
if we could admit that human frailty was shared on both sides of the professional table. We so need to
discover that no matter how good the heart is that seeks to fix its fellow human being, there is a push
away in the act of helping.
Every indicator that I can see causes me to conclude that there are difficult days ahead. The
privatisation of the self is gathering momentum and we are largely blind to the cultural shift.
Psychiatrists have growing volumes of syndromes that can be applied to almost any behaviour.
Eccentricity is a thing of the past; colourful characters might be entertaining but they all need
ix
therapists. Even reading this book probably defines the reader with a syndrome of some kind for
which there is medication available.
A person knows themselves as connected to others. An individual knows themselves as distinct from
others. It is not just the broken who function as individuals but also the successful. Most who walk
in the door of The Wayside Chapel* come on the worst day of their lives. The one thing they all
have in common is a belief that they are alone. For most, family and social supports have long gone.
Loneliness is the growing characteristic of life in the western world. Our bitter lessons have revealed
that institutions yield no social life and feelings yield no personal life. Only when we learn to live in
connection and community do we function as persons.
When individuals seek to control others through heavy hands, inevitably the outcomes they seek are
illusive. See the obscene amounts of money we spend to control drugs via customs services, policing,
prisons and so on. It seems like we’d prefer to spend $100,000 per year to keep a drug user in gaol
than to spend a fraction of that to help that person with their addiction. ‘Zero harm’ is the language of
such controllers.
Imagine the absurdity of speaking zero harm at The Wayside Chapel. Harm is in the air that we
breathe. People have a perverse way of punishing themselves and others in the hope of finding
evidence that they are yet alive. Most who walk into our doors have already been around all the
systems we’ve developed to help people and most of them can speak the language of the medical
system and they are well equipped in the language and framework of psychology. These people are
well used to being treated but not of being met. If someone walks out of doors feeling met rather than
worked on, its a good day for us.
There is no great secret here. People come to life and flourish as human beings when they function as
people rather than as individuals. This is true in Kings Cross as it is true in the workplace and every
other place. This is a book that brings this simple principle with due regard to the sophistication of
the modern workplace.
Rev Graham Long

CEO and Pastor
The Wayside Chapel
Kings Cross, Sydney
*A church and charity located in the heart of the city of Sydney, Australia.
With Memory and Thanks

In memory of Harold, my Dad, who gave me a passion for learning, questioning, critical thinking and
the wise embrace of risk.
To Mum, who taught me that the ‘everyday’ is often where we find greatness and the fullness of what
it is to be truly human.
Thanks to my brother Graham who helped in the escape from fundamentalism and in the
engagement of ‘i-thou’.
Thanks to Pip and Craig Ashhurst for their skills and support in editing the manuscript and
challenging ideas.
x For the Love of Zero

The Book Cover Explained
Why is there no landing for the jumper on the cover? This is because this book tackles the problems
of uncertainty and fundamentalism in the pursuit to manage risk. There is nothing more devastating
to the fundamentalist than the loss of security and certainty. Risk is all about uncertainty and life is
all about its management. In the mind of the fundamentalist, lack of control is associated with the
uncertainties of risk and the need to eliminate that uncertainty. The need for absolute control, absolute
certainty and black and white answers is a fundamentalist quest and a denial of fallibility.
The meaning of the word ‘risk’ assumes the possibility of loss. The idea of risk conveys the notion that
there is no absolute certainty, no absolute control and no absolute escape from the limitations of the
finiteness of the human condition. Human fallibility and eventual death are the great levellers of life.
As was once said, ‘there are no pockets in shrouds’.
All human activity involves some risk and this risk increases or decreases the more one embraces and
engages with the world and with life. The reality is that the journey of life is a journey of learning and
engaging with risk. The journey in risk aversion is both dehumanising and life denying.
This is the second book in a series on risk. The first book, Risk Makes Sense: Human Judgement and
Risk, depicted the same character on the cover jumping off a cliff but with a visible landing point.
The first book was about the trend in modern western societies to risk aversion. The trend toward risk
aversion, risk control and risk elimination is a fundamentalist exercise that espouses absolute control.
The ‘zero harm’ and ‘all accidents are preventable’ (AAAP) movements in recent times are the cult-like
presentation of this fundamentalist trajectory in risk aversion and risk control. The message of the
first book was that the fear of risk is the fear of learning. Risk is not wrong. Risk doesn’t ensure a
lack of safety. The message is not to eliminate risk but to ‘Risk Safely’.
The AS/NZS 31000:2009 definition of risk is the ‘effect of uncertainty on objectives’. For the zero
fraternity, this is an unsatisfactory definition; there must be certainty, there must be absolute control.
To the fundamentalist, the loss of control and certainty is captured in the graphic on the cover. For
the fundamentalist, without absolute certainty any leap in faith is a leap into the unknown. If faith in
zero ideology is taken away, nothing is left on which to build a secure foundation.
So, the leap of risk on the cover captures the fear of uncertainty for proponents of zero ideology.
However, it is the argument of this book that the ideology of zero is not necessary for security and
certainty in the management of risk. There is a landing, it’s just that zero ideology cannot see it.
For the ‘zero harm’ ideology there is only one of two alternatives: the desire for no harm or the desire
for injury. However, this book argues that there is more than black and white binary opposition
thinking when it comes to engaging with risk. Indeed, fundamentalist thinking anchored in zero has
its own psychological and cultural trajectory that drives its advocacy to a position of absolute risk
aversion and risk elimination.
xi
About the Book Logo
The three symbols on the cover and in the footer of this book serve to highlight the three key
elements required to make sense of zero. The first is the symbol for certainty. This symbol is located in
the head and depicts a padlock and a key. This symbolises the way oppositional and binary thinking
tends to lock up the mind to learning, listening and dialogue. To the binary mind there are only two
views; life is an either/or existence, there is no in-between. For the mind fixed on zero there is only an
absolute, one either believes zero or desires harm. The binary mind is a mind locked up to one view
and the key, that is learning, sits nearby but is not accessed.
The second symbol of the ‘ying yang’ represents the need for balance and the problem of extremisms.
The focus here is on the absence of perfectionism, absolutes and fundamentalism. If we are going to
make sense of risk and learning, we need to better understand how humans make decisions in states
of uncertainty. The denial of uncertainty, fallibility and humanness is a fundamentalist delusion.
The third symbol represents learning through community. The ideology of zero and its trajectory of
dehumanising others is both anti-community and anti-learning.
Making Contact
You can contact Rob or learn more about Human Dymensions at:
www.humandymensions.com
admin@humandymensions.com
xii For the Love of Zero

Glossary
Arational: not based or governed by reason. Neither rational nor irrational but non-rational.
Benthemite Utilitarianism: Jeremy Bentham (1748- 1832) was an English author, jurist, philosopher,
and legal and social reformer. He became a leading theorist in welfarism and utilitarianism. The
philosophy of utilitarianism has as its fundamental axiom the greatest happiness of the greatest
number as the measure of right and wrong.
Binary Opposition: Binary opposition is the system by which, in language and thought, two
theoretical opposites are strictly defined and set off against one another.
Cognitive Dissonance: developed by Leon Festinger. Refers to the mental gymnastics required
to maintain consistency in the light of contradicting evidence. Cognitive dissonance is concerned
with situations which confront groups holding strong convictions when confronted with clear and
undeniable disproof of those convictions. The decision making which follows denies the evidence and
confirms its opposite. Cognitive dissonance is most observable in religious groups and cults, where
despite all evidence, belief is strengthened.
Discourse: developed by Michael Foucault. The transmission of power in systems of thoughts

composed of ideas, attitudes, courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the
subjects and the worlds of which they speak.
Discernment: used to explain arational sensemaking with a particular focus on attributed value
given to an activity or choice in sensemaking. Originally from the Christian tradition used to explain
spiritual sensemaking. Used in this book to mean: perception that goes beyond the physical and
material in sensemaking.
Fundamentalism: originally coined in reference to a rigid theological movement in the USA in 1905
upholding the literal interpretation of the Bible. More generally, fundamentalism refers to rigid faith
like black-and-white thinking and actions on issues. Further, fundamentalism indicates a closed-
mindedness, an inability to countenance debate and a vigorous energy devoted to indoctrination and
censorship.
Heuristics: refer to experience-based techniques for problem-solving, learning, and discovery.

Heuristics are like mental short cuts used to speed up the process of finding a satisfactory solution,
where an exhaustive search is impractical. Heuristics tend to become internal micro-rules.
Hubris: indicates a loss of contact with reality which results in extreme overconfidence and
complacency.
Ideology: meaning a worldview and disposition in faith/belief. An ideology is to be understood as

that synthesis of beliefs within a culture which (not withstanding its degree of inner consistency, its
degree of command of social allegiance, the degree of sophisticated social understanding of its social
ramifications, nor its rational adequacy as an interpretation of reality), defines answers for a society to
problems of the meaning of reality, and tends to commit such society to action consonant with these.
Mentalities: comes from the French Annales School of History and refers to the history of attitudes,
mindsets and dispositions. It denotes the psychosocial and cultural nature of history.
xiii
Mindfulness: developed by Karl E. Weick and indicates the preoccupation with failure; reluctance
to simplify interpretations; sensitivity to operations; commitment to resilience, and deference to
expertise. A full definition of mindfulness is in Chapter 6 SenseMaking, Mindfulness and Risk.
Priming: is an implicit memory effect which influences response. Priming is received in the
subconscious and transfers to enactment in the conscious.
Risk: The ISO 31000 (2009) / ISO Guide 73:2002 definition of risk is the ‘effect of uncertainty
on objectives’
Sensemaking: is about paying attention to ambiguity and uncertainty. Developed by Karl E. Weick
to represent the seven ways we ‘make sense’ of uncertainty and contradiction. A full definition of
sensemaking is in Chapter 6 SenseMaking, Mindfulness and Risk.
Unconscious: processes of the mind which are not immediately known or made aware to the
conscious mind. The term subconscious is also used interchangeably and denotes a state ‘below’ the
conscious state. The subconscious is more associated with psychoanalytics.
xiv For the Love of Zero

What This Book Is About
This book seeks to contribute to the debate about the value of zero harm as a goal and motivational
tool to stimulate ownership in risk. The ever expanding-popularity of the mantra of zero harm across
mining, building and construction and related industries has spread like an epidemic in the last 10
years. But is the concept all it’s claimed to be? Has the adoption of zero harm language been well
thought through? Does the concept of zero harm inspire and motivate leadership, ownership and
better practice? Does the discourse of zero harm promote the right outcome, or are there hidden
dynamics associated with its promotion? What is the logic of zero harm? Is the ideology of zero harm
ethical or helpful? Is the binary oppositional mindset that accompanies zero helping lead people to
thinking, learning and dialogue about risk? Does the language of ‘zero’ perpetuate adversarialism?
Could it be that the discourse of zero harm counter-intuitively stimulates the opposite of what it seeks
to achieve? These and many more questions are answered by the discussion of this book.
Everywhere you look in the mining, building and construction industry you can see the advocacy for
zero harm. The Queensland Government offer a Zero Harm at Work Leadership Program as part of
their ‘zero harm strategy’, with more than 300 hundred members made up of nearly every company of
significance in the state (http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/workplace/zeroharm/partners/index.htm). You
can find companies called Zero Harm and positions advertised as ‘Manager of Zero Harm’. There are
advertisements for ‘zero harm auditing services’, ‘zero harm training’, ‘zero harm directors’ and ‘zero
harm charters’. As you fly about Australia and walk through airport lounges the badging for zero harm
is everywhere, on shirts, cups, drink bottles and every imaginable marketing trinket, but not on the
airline marketing. The language of zero harm seems to be everywhere. Companies give out ‘zero harm
safety awards’, speak about ‘designing zero harm’, ‘towards zero harm’ and ‘think zero harm’. Some even
go to the absurd use of language, espousing such meaningless language as ‘beyond zero harm’.
So, in writing this book I may not be winning lots of friends and certainly am running against the tide.
It would be easy to endorse the status quo and tell everyone what they want to hear, the language of
simplicity seems so attractive and certainly a source of income in safety, security and risk consulting. If
you want business in training in risk it seems you conform to and espouse zero harm or you don’t get
the work. However, that would be counter to the evidence that shows that the ‘zero’ concept and ‘zero’
language are far from harmless or motivational.
Most of the arguments for zero harm are based on a black and white binary opposition argument and
simplistic understanding of goal setting. The argument is: there can be no goal for harm that makes
sense, so the only goal can be for zero harm. I call this ‘the binary opposition argument’.
Most of the arguments against the notion of zero harm are based on the incongruity of the absolute
of zero with human limitation and imperfection. I call this argument ‘the incongruity argument’. The
strategy of this book is to extend much further than the incongruity argument. The language of zero
may be incongruous, but what is worse is that it ‘primes’ a discourse and thinking that is anti-learning
and anti-community. This is the one concern discussed in this book.
This book proposes that the language and concept of zero harm has now taken on the nature of an
ideology . The book seeks to add to the zero harm debate with some new discussion based on research
into the psychology and culture of risk. The purpose of the book is to put forward new concerns about
zero harm ideology, zero harm discourse and language, and its effects on organisational culture and
how people understand risk.
xv
One of the arguments of this book is that the zero harm ideology has now taken on a somewhat
religious fundamentalist fervour. New extremisms have developed in the zero organisational world.
Once an ideology takes on such a fundamentalist and extremist identity it is highly unlikely that any
argument will affect belief. The author is not naïve enough to think that the argument of this book
will make much difference to the religious-like fervour and fundamentalist-like conviction of zero
believers. Indeed, it is a risk that more argument such as espoused in this book, could simply harden
religious fervour through the dynamic of cognitive dissonance. However, it is a risk that must be taken
if learning is to be my goal.
Regardless of the risk of hardening the zero harm ideology, it is important to articulate the arguments
of this book for those who feel intimidated by the ideological strength of zero harm proponents
and zero harm fundamentalism. However, no amount of evidence about the foundations or nature
of various cults and religious groups in the past has tended to sway fundamentalist belief. So it is
unlikely that much will change in the intensity of intimidation by zero fundamentalism on the general
population in the mining and construction industries.
This book seeks to show that the zero harm concept, zero harm discourse and zero harm ideology
undermine a culture of learning in organisations. The book discusses issues to do with culture,
language, motivation, goal setting, binary opposition, unconscious priming, cognitive dissonance,
counter-intuitive dynamics and survey evidence on zero harm believability and ownership.
Whilst this book is primarily focused on risk and safety it is important to realise that any discussion
of zero extends way beyond such interests. As the issues of zero and risk are discussed it is important
to remember how other areas of business such as quality, sustainability, environment, management,
leadership and health might also be influenced by this ideology.
Key Questions
This book is guided by a range of key questions:
R5 What is the fascination with zero and why is the language of zero so attractive to so many?
R5 Does the language of zero make any difference?
R5 Is zero a harmless neutral concept that doesn’t really matter?
R5 Does zero language inspire and motivate people?
R5 Could it be possible that the language and discourse of zero is insidious and dangerous?
R5 If I set a goal that is unachievable or perceived to be unachievable, do I really think people will
give all their effort in pursuing it?
R5 Does a high jumper improve by setting the bar at the world record height first up, or by setting
the bar at a height that is just beyond reach, then repeatedly trying until they achieve the small
success of jumping over the bar, then moving slightly higher again?
R5 If I do not believe in God, does this automatically mean I believe in the Devil? Similarly, if I do
not believe in zero harm, does this mean I endorse harm?
R5 Could it be that on the surface of things the mantra of zero is naively badged as positive yet the
by-products of such cultural discourse can be negative?
xvi For the Love of Zero

R5 Is the language of zero not only unconsciously priming workers to fail but creating a cultural
discourse that counter-intuitively drives people away from the very things it desires?
These questions will be addressed through the discussion of this book.
Structure and Use of the Book

This book is structured in three parts. The first three chapters (section one) deal with the fascination
and logic of zero and zero harm. Chapters four to six (section two) deal with arguments against zero
harm. Chapters seven and eight (third section) deal with alternatives to zero harm ideology.
Some sources and books are referred to throughout the book, more as a pointer for further interest
than for academic validation. A complete reading list is at the end of the book for those who wish to
delve further into the topic.
The book can also be used as a workshop and training manual for programs in leadership and
management in risk. Each chapter end has a section of suggested workshop questions which can be
used by safety or security professionals or as a framework for safety culture or security culture training
programs with Dr Long and his team.
Rob Long
xvii
xviii For the Love of Zero
SECTION
ONE
1
2 For the Love of Zero
CHAPTER 1
The Attraction of Zero
1
Rather than measure what we value, we tend to value what we can measure -
Anon
When absolutes in history are rejected, the absolutism of relativity is also

rejected - Charles Beard.
The Fascination with Zero

A University Baptism into Zero Philosophy
My first few years at university in the early 1970s were quite confusing. I had come from a strong
fundamentalist Christian background, and was quickly exposed to a whole range of radical
psychological and philosophical ideas I had not encountered before. Most memorable was going
on a Gestalt camp and coming home feeling quite crazy. Until I actually went out teaching to my
first school in Lucindale South Australia, I felt like I was on the radical edge of everything.
At university I studied English, History, Philosophy and Education. I was a ‘bonded’ student
which meant the government paid for my tuition in exchange for my accepting any country
posting upon graduation. It was a trade-off, paid tuition for bonded obligation for 4 years. If you
didn’t accept the placement after graduation you had to pay back the fees to the government.
During university I was confronted by the ideas of existentialism in English studies and a host
of other ideas that challenged the very foundations of many things I had thought to be true. In
Education we were studying the radical ‘deschoolers’, ‘freeschoolers’ and ‘unschoolers’ like Illich
and Frieire. In History we studied the idea that all history is constructed.
At that time my world was full of the Vietnam War, Sunbury, Moritorium protests, the peace
movement, Dylan, Led Zepplin, John Lennon, The Doors, Frank Zappa, Black Sabbath, Deep
Purple, Bowie, Elton John, Hendrix, Cream and Van Morrison. I lived in South Australia under
the government of radical Premier Don Dunstan and, after 1973, the Whitlam government.
‘Number 96’ was on the television and there was lots of talk about free love, rock and roll
and drugs.
Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero 3

As if in competition and contrast to the ‘hippie’ counter-culture of the early 1970s, there was
The Jesus Movement, identified by new Christian music and a non-orthodox focus on the
young person. Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell were huge musical ‘hits’ and ‘Day by Day’
from Godspell was number 1 on the Australian charts earning Colleen Hewitt gold. The Jesus
Movement was no small thing. Whilst in University I played guitar in a Christian Rock Band
performing at Elder Park in the middle of Adelaide to a crowd in excess of 20,000 people on Palm
Sunday. So I felt the ‘push and pull’ of radical and conservative influences at every turn. It was a
confusing time for me as a young person in my 20’s.
At university I was being challenged by the whole idea of nothingness and being, what is known
academically as ontology (the theory of being). The idea of nothingness and emptiness has
fascinated philosophers and students of religion for centuries. In university I was challenged about
the void, nothingness and zero, through the works of John-Paul Satre (Being and Nothingness),
T.S. Elliot (Wasteland and The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock) and in the rising interest across
the university sector in Buddhism.
The emptying of self in Buddhism, thought to be the pathway to the end of suffering, was
attractive in a world consumed by Vietnam, the first ‘TV War’. Interest in religion and philosophy
was made more intense as the ballot for National Conscription lingered in the minds of every
young Australian man at that time. I had friends who had been ‘called up’ but I was one of the
lucky ones who missed out. I learned through Buddhism that emptiness is where all energy and
mental processes are withdrawn or dissolved. In Buddhism emptiness is linked to the ‘creative
void’. Yet in Christianity and other faiths, the idea of nothingness and the void was not attractive.
For Christians, humans neither start from nothing nor go to nothing.
This was my first encounter with zero projected as a positive concept.

It seems like the world is in love with ‘zero’. Everywhere we go the fad word ‘zero’ is there. We drink
it, shop at it, locate by it and talk about it. You can take a Zero diet, join a Zero waste campaign,
buy a Zero motorbike and eat Zero food. However, some industries seem to be more in love with
and preoccupied with the word ‘zero’ than others. In mining, building and construction it seems the
love affair with zero is most intense. Catch a plane and walk about the airport terminal or member’s
lounges in Perth or Brisbane and you will see the word ‘zero’ embroidered and emblazoned on many
shirts and jackets. You will see targets for zero, towards zero, goals of zero, visions for zero, mantras
about zero and artefacts on walls extolling the virtues of zero. ‘Zero harm’ has become the new
unquestioned mantra and safety ideology for mining and construction industries.
There are government departments that badge their work with ‘zero’ and offer ‘zero harm at work’
leadership programs (http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/workplace/zeroharm/index.htm accessed 20.7.12).
Organisations now advertise for ‘Zero Harm Managers’ and Woolworths run a ‘Destination Zero’
campaign nationally across their business.
The Mitsubishi A6M Zero was a long-range fighter aircraft operated by the Imperial Japanese Navy
Air Service (IJNAS) from 1940 to 1945. ‘Zero Haliburton’ is a suitcase range that is supposedly
‘lighter than air’ (http://www.zerohalliburton.jp/). Zero Engineering in the USA make motorcycles
that are a copy of Harley Davidson and boast ‘zero gear’ (http://www.zeroengineeringeu.com/).
The Energy Research Institute in Melbourne set targets for ‘zero emissions’ by 2020 (http://

beyondzeroemissions.org/zero-carbon-australia-2020). The name of the Institute’s website is
‘Beyond Zero Emissions’. Zero Contemporary Food in Milan offers exquisite cuisine (http://
www.zeromagenta.it/). The Zero Calorie Diet offers weight loss through fasting (http://www.
michaelfinemd.com/10.html). The Zero record store offers unlimited music and an online catalogue
(http://www.zero-inch.com/). Zero to Three is a website for early childhood education (http://www.
zerotothree.org/). Mastercard like to advertise that they have ‘zero liability’ (http://www.mastercard.
com.au/zero-liability.html) against fraud and unauthorised transactions. Interestingly the website for
Mastercard also informs you under what circumstances you are not protected, so you understand that
zero liability doesn’t really mean zero liability. The electronic music of Israeli band Zero Cult (http://
www.zerocult.net/) is astounding listening, with their best released album aptly named ‘Separation
from the World’.
Last time I was in Adelaide I saw a shop in Glenelg called Zero (Figure 1) expecting it to have
nothing in it, but it was full of merchandise. ‘Point Zero’ in Perth (Figure 2) is at the GPO and
indicates a starting point not an end. We are so familiar with the language of ‘zero’ and yet rarely
question how such language primes our thinking.
Have you ever had the old argument with someone about their birthdate or the beginning of the
new millennium? It’s the old 00 vs 01 debate. When we start counting forward, we don’t start with
zero, we start ‘one, two, three’ and yet when we count down, we end on zero. The first hour of the
day starts at zero seconds past midnight and the second hour starts at 1am. Though we count in
ordinals we mark our thinking about time in cardinals. Recently many people throughout the world
celebrated the new millennium on 1 January 2000. Of course they celebrated the passing of only 1999
years since when the calendar was set up no year zero was specified. Although one might forgive the
original error, it is a little surprising that most people seemed unable to understand why the third
millennium and the 21st century begin on 1 January 2001.
Of course there is no zero, there is no nothing, there is no void. The can of Zero you drink actually
has sugar in it, as well as a multitude of other carcinogens. The BP company that bragged about ‘zero
harm’ in 2010 killed 11 people, injured 17 others and caused the largest marine spill in history (the
Deepwater Horizon One disaster released 4.9 million barrels of crude oil into the Mexico Gulf,
poisoning its waters for countless years). You can go to ground zero in New York after 9/11 and there
is still something there.
It was Shakespeare’s King Lear who said to his daughter Cordelia ‘Nothing will come of nothing’
(King Lear Act 1.1 and Act 1.4). The puzzle of non-existence has always been troubling for humanity.
Zero is behind all the big problems of physics. The infinite density of the black hole is a division
by zero. The Big Bang is a creation of something from the void of zero. The infinite energy of the
vacuum is a division by zero. Stephen Hawking said in relation to zero, ‘If we find the answer to that,
it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for we would know the mind of God’.

Figure 1. Zero Shop in Glenelg, Figure 2. Point Zero in Perth CBD
South Australia

Zero is also a manga character in a video game called Mega Man Zero. Zero is an iPhone app that
helps with reminders and notes (http://www.getzeroapp.com/). Event Zero is a software company
that focuses on sustainability (http://www.eventzero.com/global/). Gravity-Zero is a carbon fibre
cycle outlet (http://www.gravity-zero.com.au/).
Triple zero is both the number called for emergency services in Australia and the name of a related
online interactive game called Triple Zero Kid’s Challenge (http://kids.triplezero.gov.au/). The
000 emergency call has become a significant problem in Australia as many young people become
influenced by American TV and believe that the emergency number is 911. So the Australian
government sponsored the creation of the website and game to promote 000. The website tells
animated stories and games to teach the handling of emergencies and the importance of 000.
Figure 3. The Triple Zero Kid’s Challenge
Zero’ is the title of a short stop motion animation (http://www.zeroshortfilm.com/) that offers a
philosophy of life and death. The film is about a young person called Zero. The main question of the
film is: how can something be nothing?
If one enters the word ‘zero’ in a Google search, there are over 101 million entries. There are as many
meanings for the word ‘zero’ as there are products to sell and in many instances the word has become
meaningless; it’s just a popular brand. No one is selling nothing, nothing is empty, every product has
substance, and most examples of the use of the word are meaningless.

The History of Zero
The concept and language of ‘zero’ has an interesting history. For ancient people the idea of zero, the
primal void, was foreign and scary. Research into the development of mathematics will show that
some of the most ancient counting systems had no zero. It’s amazing to think that the Egyptians built
the pyramids without a zero in their numbering system. It wasn’t until the Babylonians in 300BC that
a space was created to represent an empty space. So, zero started as a placeholder and was thought of
as nothing more, it was merely a symbol for a blank place on an abacus. Seife (2000, p. 15) comments:
A zero in a string of digits takes its meaning from some other digit to its left. On its own, it
meant... nothing. Zero was a digit, not a number. It had no value.
It is hard to imagine today that people could fear zero, but the Romans and Greeks did. The fear of
zero went much deeper than just a fear of the void and chaos, the properties of zero were inexplicable
and mysterious. Add a number to itself and it changes, but add zero to itself and nothing changes.
This violates the fundamental axioms of Archimedes. Zero doesn’t make anything bigger if you add it
to a number and, what is more mysterious, if you multiply an existing number by zero it takes it back
to zero. In the minds of the Greeks, the idea of zero destroyed the logic of a number line and order.
The Greeks saw that if you multiplied or divided by zero you destroyed the entire foundation of logic
and mathematics. The Greeks understood that this concept of zero was more than just a number, it
was a philosophy which threatened the logic of western thinking established by Pythagoras, Aristotle
and Ptolemy.
The idea of ‘the void’ is also central to religion and theology and was also a source of why zero was
problematic. In Christian and Muslim religions it is believed that God created the universe out of the
void, a doctrine that rejects Aristotle’s hatred of the void. It was in the East, in the Indian and Arabic
numerical systems that zero most easily found a home. But it wasn’t until the Renaissance that the
West began to embrace the idea and philosophy of zero. It was ultimately through trade with the East
that zero came solidly into the Western numerical system and thinking. Zero and infinity were at the
very centre of the Renaissance. It was a battle between the old Aristotelian philosophy and thinkers
like Copernicus and Galileo.
The development of calculus by Isaac Newton gave rise to new thinking about zero. Calculus
operated on a new set of laws that seemed illogical, yet they worked. That is, they proved true upon
calculus’s own assumptions. However, it wasn’t until after the French Revolution that mathematicians
would establish that zero and infinity were the two sides of the same coin, they were both equal and
opposite, yin and yang. Infinity and zero are essential to mathematics.
It wasn’t until Lord Kelvin in 1848 that physicists postulated the idea that ‘the void’ did not happen at
zero. Kelvin posed the question: at what point did all gas cease to exist and occupy negative space? At
what point did all atoms cease to move and there was no energy at all? Kelvin discovered the idea of
absolute zero, the state where a container of gas has been drained of all its energy. Absolute zero was
defined by Kelvin at -273.15 degrees Celsius, the theoretical temperature at which entropy reaches
its minimum value. According to the laws of thermodynamics, absolute zero is an unattainable goal.
Absolute zero cannot be reached using thermodynamic means, because a system of absolute zero still
possesses quantum mechanical zero-point energy, the energy of its ground state. The kinetic energy of
the ground state cannot be removed.
The concept of zero, like infinity, is an absolute. In absolutes there is no movement, no flexibility and
no life. In science thus far at least, we have been unable to demonstrate that nothingness is possible.

In absolutes there is only infallibility, perfection and rigidity. It is important to remember that
ideologies also take on a trajectory and ‘life’ of their own. The properties and trajectories of absolutes
know no compromise. A zero harm ideology cannot think or entertain the validity of ideas outside
of itself. By nature, it is oppositional and adversarial. Zero is an extreme. Robinson (2011) calls the
inability to consider options outside of one’s own worldview, ‘toxic logic’. Toxic logic is one of the
clear identifiers in fundamentalism and indoctrination.
The Meaning of Zero

We have seen already that the name of zero can be attached to nearly anything. However, any
application of the word ‘zero’ to anything that is this worldly never makes sense. Just think of the idea
of the zero emissions goal. The process of being human consumes energy and makes waste.
Three Year Olds and Pooh Pooh

My little grandaughter, like many three year olds, understands the fun and fascination with ‘pooh
pooh’. The fundamentals of toilet training, whilst agonising for parents, are the fun in language
for children. Seeing the result of calling someone ‘pooh pooh’ is how three year olds learn
about insults, fun and association. Even three year olds know there is no zero emissions in the
real world.
The very process of living is the observation of things in decline. Things wind down and decay. Even
the universe is expanding at an astounding rate.
The word ‘zero’ comes from Arabic meaning ‘nothing’ or ‘empty’.
To understand zero better, we can undertake an experiment suggested by Charles Siefe. Imagine an
elastic band as the number line. When you multiply you stretch the band. When you divide you relax
the band. This is what happens with routine divisions and multiplications with numbers other than
zero. However, the bizarre happens when you operate with zero. Now when you multiply by zero
the band is so stretched that it explodes: and nothing remains as zero sucks any number into itself.
Similarly when you divide by zero the band so contracts that it implodes; nothing of it remains. Such
are the properties of the zero. These operations represent the end of logic as we know it: any equation
in the world can be proved by multiplying both sides by zero. In what philosophical worldview could
any of these make sense? Zero and infinity are the same.
The SISK Group (http://www.siskgroup.com/about-us/zero-philosophy) badge their website stating

they have a ‘zero philosophy’. The links on the page says ‘tell me about’:
R5 4,)5#(#(.-
R5 4,)5#($/,#-
R5 4,)5 .-
R5 4,)5-(!-
R5 4,)5&3-
R5 4,)5-/,*,#--

What kind of world has zero surprises? In what kind of world would you want zero surprises? How
can one be human and have zero delays? What humans live a life without snags, defects and bumps?
This is the kind of trajectory the philosophy of zero takes. A journey to nothingness is a journey
to nonsense. On the web page ‘About us’, the group explains that one of their values is ‘evolution’.
Strange, the very concept of evolution presupposes risk, fallibility, variation, incompleteness and
developmentalism. All of these are opposed to the philosophy of zero. The logical outcome of zero
ideology is a commitment to ‘tortured logic’, language gymnastics that reconstruct meaning so that
zero doesn’t mean zero. This logic defies all that has been learned in the study of semiology (the
study of the function of signs and symbols in human communication, both in language and by various
non-linguistic means).
The Cult of Zero (http://thecultofzero.com/) is a religious movement that takes its foundation from
ancient Indian religious ideas that believed that God is zero. This is because zero is also infinite. The
website states:
The very nature of the cult of zero is that it eludes and appears to not actually exist. In other
words... God is zero and existence is one. Oneness with zero ...
The Cult of Zero is also a heavy metal instrumental band from Brisbane (http://www.cultofzeroband.
com/cozMusic.html).
Discussion
We are now being bombarded with the word ‘zero’ more than we have in the past. A search in the
archives of a daily newspaper like the Sydney Morning Herald shows that the use of the word ‘zero’ in
popular culture is increasing. Similarly, the word ‘risk’ has also been on the increase as demonstrated
by Lupton (1999, p. 10). Semantic satiation (also semantic saturation) is a psychological phenomenon
in which repetition causes a word or phrase to lose meaning for the listener. This brief excursion in
this opening chapter to the use and meaning of zero has shown just how broadly the word ‘zero’ is
used in popular culture.
In many ways we have been so bombarded with ‘zero’, along with its adaptations and combinations,
that its definition has virtually become meaningless. This is certainly the case with the use of
expressions such as ‘zero harm’, ‘zero injuries’ and ‘zero tolerance’. Most organisations who use such
expressions often qualify the meaning of the word ‘zero’ to not mean ‘nothing’ or, in the case of ‘zero
tolerance’, to mean ‘limited or selective intolerance’. Often companies immersed in the ideology and
rhetoric of zero continue to talk about the ‘journey’ of zero or ‘toward’ zero. Some use words such
as ‘beyond zero’ and enter fully into the nonsense and meaningless ‘mishmash’ of words. What is
even more astounding is that people ‘buy’ such nonsense words and marketing as if such expressions
have meaning.
Zero tolerance has become a popular mantra for politicians looking to appeal to the simplistic
majority who want easy answers. Like mantras to ‘turn around boats’, zero tolerance doesn’t work
once we get into the logic and rational structure of the court system.
The word ‘zero’ seems has become more a cultural symbol or expression of acceptance than a word
that actually means ‘nothing’. Its use has taken on a quasi-religious significance. If one accepts
the word ‘zero’, redefines it to mean what they want but don’t challenge the absolute meaning
of the word, then one is accepted in the group who uses the word ‘zero’, and all is well. In other
words, the word ‘zero’ has become a gatekeeper for group membership, particularly in mining and
construction cultures.

In most cases the word ‘zero’ is not actually used to mean ‘nothing’. To use religious terminology, it
has become a shibboleth, a word whose pronunciation identifies its speaker as being a member or not
a member of a particular group. Shibboleths are a key part of sorting membership in fundamentalist
organisations. One can learn about the religious commitment to ‘zero’ in an organisation the moment
one decides to debate it or question it.
Conforming to Cultural Language

I was brought up in a evangelical fundamentalist home until I left home to become a school
teacher. Over 20 years I had learned the many shibboleths required to belong to a fundamentalist
church group. Later in the 1990s I would use this knowledge to conduct my PhD research into
fundamentalism. It is not hard to switch into fundamentalist mode. Just observe the average
televangelist on Sunday morning TV, note the language, actions and mannerisms, and especially
learn key words and expressions that are used to anchor and decode loyalty and acceptance by
others. I know many people in ‘zero harm organisations’ who do exactly the same. Indeed, most
people in ‘zero harm’ organisations don’t believe the organisation’s mantra but learn quickly the
language required to keep their job.
In a later chapter I will discuss research that substantiates my claim that most people in organisations
do not believe in ‘zero harm’. In the end this is easy to do especially when the word ‘zero’ is made
so meaningless by its many proponents. This is no different than many people in fundamentalist
religious groups who affirm the language of fundamentalist discourse but maintain their own values
system and beliefs that are at odds with the prevailing morality and moral extremism of the group to
which they belong.
Workshop Questions
1. Can you think of ways in which the word ‘zero’ is used in popular culture that has not been
presented here?
2. Do a stocktake of how zero is being used in your organisation.
3. If the word ‘zero’ is used in your organisation, in what context is it used and what words are used
with it?
4. In what ways is the word ‘zero’ used to mean something other than nothing?
5. Do a word search of your local newspaper and see how the use of the word ‘zero’ has increased in
your community.

Transition
So, what is the basic argument and logic of the zero discourse? How is it used in organisations
to theoretically inspire and motivate people? Why would people in management be so attracted
to such a utopian, perfectionist and ideological position? These questions will be addressed in the
following chapter.

CHAPTER 2
The Logic of Zero
Knowing that we could not achieve zero is more motivational than the delusion
that we could! - Corrie Pitzer, CEO, Safemap
This is the way the world ends, Not with a bang but a whimper - T. S. Elliot.
(The Hollow Men)
2
The ‘Zero Harm’ Argument
The concept of ‘zero harm’ is now fixed in the identity of many mining and construction companies.
In most circumstances the concept of ‘zero harm’ has become an unquestioned (and not to be debated)
concept. Many people write to me and converse, stating that they are not allowed (in their companies)
to contest, challenge or say anything negative about zero harm. Such a climate is evidence of fear.
Enforced silence, fear of debate and blind indoctrination are the essentials of fundamentalism. The
dynamic of enforced silence and intolerance as a characteristic of fundamentalism will be discussed
in Chapter 6. In this chapter the discussion is focused on the logic and propositions of the zero
harm argument.
One of the best places to observe debate about zero harm is in the social media pages of LinkedIn.
The following quotes represent popular conceptual thinking and arguments regarding zero harm as
extracted from LinkedIn media. (As these are quotes come from social media, no attribution to source
will be applied).
Comments by the author follow each quote in italics to indicate the assertion and position of
each quote.
Quote 1
People are trained to achieve the target they are set - therefore they will achieve any number if that
number is not zero. Any target other than zero means you have a company policy to achieve SOME
harm - clearly unacceptable, and possibly negligent.
The language of targets is common to the ‘zero harm’ position and this quote is fairly typical. Note
the binary opposite logic of asserting that any other target than zero means negligence and assumed
policy to accept some harm. The idea of setting a target that is extreme and absolute is of no concern to
this argument.
Chapter 2: The Logic of Zero 13

Quote 2
Anyone ever work with or been a contractor working alongside XXXX or XXXX and questioned
their zero philosophy? Be prepared for an earful and keep your head down if you do!
This quote is typical of many that tell me that fear and fundamentalism are normalised in organisation
and its commitment to ‘zero harm’ ideology.
Quote 3
‘Zero Accident’ is a philosophy and a driver for the continual improvement based on accident
prevention. If one measures and reports the accidents, e.g. quarterly to management, then it is
expected better achievement next quarter and so on, i.e., a moving target towards zero accidents.
Here we see the redefinition and adjustment of zero not to mean zero, an approach most zero harm
proponents adopt. This is common with many mantras about ‘think zero’ or ‘toward zero’ language.
The focus on a calculation makes these organisations ‘calculative’ in the way they see risk, the tendency
to suppose that the measurement of incidents is a cultural measure. The idea of measuring Lost Time
Injuries (LTIs) as a measure of culture is like measuring parenting effectiveness by the number of ‘smacks’
dished out to their children.
Quote 4
Philosophically, you are on a hiding to nothing if you decry these zero harm goals. It’s better
to sit back and realise that it is an objective, nothing more. It is statement of a desired state of
affairs. Similarly, ‘all accidents are preventable’ is a statement of motivation. We all recognise that
socially and economically, it is currently impossible to achieve. However, the value of the statement
is that it provokes thought and action in relation to changes of policies, processes, procedures and
behaviours that DOES have a positive influence on reducing risk. Forget about the statistics, it is a
philosophy and that is its value. Treat it in that way, and it’s a useful statement.
Here we have the typical statement that zero harm is an objective, ‘nothing more’. Then the assertion
that ‘all accidents are preventable’ is a ‘statement of motivation’. The assertion that such language is
motivational is never supported or explained by zero harm proponents. It has yet to be demonstrated
how such a goal or language is motivational, especially as the quote then admits that such goals are
unachievable. This is the language of cognitive dissonance - how can something that is unachievable be
motivational? Such ‘tortured logic’ makes the argument for zero nonsensical. Then the quote asserts that
such language is somehow positive and influences the reduction of risk. Finally, declaration that zero
harm is a philosophy.
Quote 5
Still, as an attitude, I think that all accidents are preventable gives people the right mindset.
I have spent many years investigating accidents (near misses, amputations, and deaths), and the sad
part is that everyone of them could have been avoided. So there should be 0 tolerance when it comes
to death in the workplace.
The assertion that zero harm gives the right mindset is common to the zero harm proponent, however this
mindset is rarely defined. In essence such statements are more an assertion about membership to a club of
like-minded people.

Quote 6
As safety practitioners, we all respect human life and we all want to see zero injuries - at least I do.
By advocating against the zero concept, I am not advocating ANYONE get hurt or accepting that
anyone be injured.
Again, binary opposition thinking draws this view into the discourse, that not advocating zero is
advocacy for injury.
Quote 7
If we admit that zero injuries is impossible and therefore foolhardy to pursue then we are forced
into a position where we have to identify an acceptable level of collateral damage. We have to have
an acceptable fatality goal. How many people are we going to kill this year? Of course, its an absurd
position to take.
The assertion that silence on zero harm is a foolhardy position is typical of the binary opposition
disposition. The binary opposition disposition ‘forces’ the acceptance of a fatality goal. Note the logical
fallacy question at the end.
Quote 8
Am interested that there is very academic thread in this debate. I simplify the zero harm target
to my people when running jobs: IT IS YOUR DUTY OF CARE TO LOOK OUT FOR
YOURSELF AND THE REST OF US. IF YOU SEE A HAZARD FIX IT AND/OR REPORT
IT. MANAGERS MUST FIX THE HAZARDS. Simple. With ALL the team WORKING as a
TEAM there is no need for the academic KRI, KPI, KWH measurements and so on. Do the job
safely, be aware of the hazards and eliminate/make them safe. Get down to earth again.
The reinterpretation of zero harm to not mean zero abounds in zero harm organisations. This quote above
attempts to discredit a non-zero harm view as overly academic and therefore impractical. The assertion
that the zero harm position is simple is seen as appealing despite the reality that the nature of risk and
organisations are increasingly complex. The reduction of risk and systems complexity to the assertion that
risk is simple and practical is typical of naive zero harm discourse.
Quote 9
Zero harm is a great aim, if it is implemented correctly. Unfortunately it is the mantra of many
companies without a lot of substance behind it. So, as various people have commented previously, this
can drive reporting down, which will provide nice figures, but we are still hurting people.
Sorry but I think you have along way to go. I believe you should only have one target of zero fatalities
and that is achievable with the right management structure and ensuring safety is on the same level as
production and quality. With the right systems, policies, procedures, work instructions and proper risk
assessments and a total commitment to continuous improvements. The days of building fatalities into
any business I believe should be well and truly gone. Anyone who believes they can calculate a fatality
into an organisation should be removed immediately no excuse. The Tools are there to achieve zero,
such as site safety culture, behavioural based safety, risk assessments management systems (OHSAS
18001) ETC ETC... BEST OF LUCK
One of the mechanisms in cognitive dissonance is explaining away of failure due to extenuating
circumstances such as time, commitment and implementation. This quote is typical of a conditional view.
The conditional approach is similar to the fundamentalist cult member who explains why Jesus did not

appear in the clouds. Lack of commitment, correct implementation or sufficient faith is why the goal was
not achieved. The argument asserts that if implemented properly zero harm could be achieved. This is a
convenient way of managing the contradictions of goal-outcome failure.
Quote 10
We shouldn’t see zero harm as the target but as the philosophy, the Nirvana, the Heaven or what have
you. The beautiful place to be. It is achievable if we believe it and we should strive every day to get
there. The targets set to guide us down the long road there should be practically leading us towards
that destination one step at a time and once achieved they trigger the bar to be raised. That way we
can track the journey and understand our successes and failures.
The connection of the absolute aspiration of zero to religious transcendence is apparent here. The emotion-
loaded nature of this quote with quasi-religious language of belief, striving and destination is apparent.
Discussion
The common approach in the language about zero harm is that it is viewed as goal, a mindset, a
target, a desire, an aspiration, a commitment and a vision. Whilst the idea of targets and goals are
discussed, there is little thought about the discourse and language used. A target is understood as a
measurable level of performance to achieve within a specified time. Most of the literature on target
setting and targets emphasises the importance of making the target realistic or ‘grounded in reality’.
Whilst some target setting may use the term ‘stretch targets’ there is no support in the literature on
target and goal setting that supports the idea of perfectionist or absolute targets as either motivational
or attainable.
For those who are concerned about the absolutist nature and language of zero, there are often
modifications such as, ‘think zero harm’, ‘toward zero harm’, ‘striving for zero harm’ or ‘steps towards
zero harm’.
Some companies just put it all out on the table: zero harm means ‘zero injuries, zero environmental
damage and zero equipment damage’ (BIS Industries http://www.bislimited.com/forms/sd_zeroharm.
aspx accessed 13 July 2012). The psychology of setting goals that are perfectionist and unattainable
will be discussed further in Chapter 5.
Some companies describe zero harm as a ‘platform on which we do business’. There are ‘zero harm’
training programs, agencies and consultancy groups that even prescribe a ‘zero harm code of practice’.
Companies have ‘zero harm charters’, ‘zero harm clubs’ and ‘zero harm policies’. There are countless
offers on the Internet of ‘free zero harm resources’ and ‘zero harm training’ programs. It seems if you
badge something as ‘zero harm’ it will be accepted in the mainstream of safety and risk as both good
and transformational. As for describing zero harm as ‘the Nirvana’ or ‘Heaven’ (quote 10), this is
indeed a strong connection to the religious nature of this ideological position. It should be noted that
the only way to achieve Nirvana or Heaven is to leave this earthy life. The idea that zero is achievable
by faith is the same argument put forward by faith healers and Pentecostal Christians. There is little
difference between organisations who use marketing language that ‘guarantees’ zero harm and faith
healers who guarantee miracle cures. Both are brought back to reality by the fallibility of what it is to
be human.
Whilst there are some critics of zero harm, they are few indeed. To dissent from the mantra of zero
is business suicide for any ambitious consultant. To criticise the concept of zero often incurs ridicule,

silence, dismissal or ostracism. I am constantly bombarded by emails from safety professionals who
are victimised and silenced by organisations that will not countenance any challenge to this absolutist
and perfectionist mantra.
Trends in ‘Zero harm’ Culture and Marketing

Recent trends in the marketing of ‘zero harm’ indicate that the phrase ‘zero harm’ has begun to be
substituted for the words ‘safety’ and ‘risk’. So the extent of the ideological conversion has actually led
to the redefinition of the meaning of these words. What an extraordinary development. This is indeed
how ideologies work; the trajectory of zero must reshape and redefine a new reality and consequently
must have a new language to identify itself. The following job advertisement (Figure 4) exemplifies
this change in meaning and the redefinition process. Such ‘spin’ generation, ‘tortured logic’ and
reframing in the past has been more the domain of political and religious organisations but not so
now; enter mining and construction into the generation of new cultural discourse about risk.
A simple analysis of this advertisement (easily located on seek.com.au) will show that the word
‘safety’ is only used once and only in the context of auditing. The word ‘risk’ appears nowhere in the
advertisement. What has happened is that the phrase ‘zero harm’ has now been substituted and
equated with the ideas of risk and safety. If successful the new advisor is not an advisor in safety but
an advisor in ‘zero harm’, administering ‘zero harm policies’, ‘zero harm plans’ and implementing ‘zero
harm initiatives’. Meeting with a ‘zero harm team’ and undertaking ‘zero harm strategic planning’.
Presumably the applicant will have a degree in Zero Harm! Is that perhaps a B.Zh?
How long will it take for people in this organisation to not be wearing ‘safety’ hard hats but wear
‘zero harm’ hard hats? Will they do risk assessments or ‘zero harm assessments’? I wonder if they
have safety committees or ‘zero harm committees’. Further, would they have ‘zero harm walks’, ‘zero
harm observations’ and ‘zero harm’ PPE? Perhaps they have a ‘zero harm’ lunch room and ‘zero harm’
equipment?
Why this need for redefinition and retraction of the word ‘safety’? Obviously because the language
and meaning of ‘risk’ accepts the possibility of the unforeseen and uncertain, that is, its meaning is
not absolute. The name of the company has been covered for obvious reasons but other companies are
now advertising in such a way. Australia Post is perhaps the most prominent employer who advertises
in this way.

Figure 4. Advertisement for a Zero Harm Advisor on seek.com.au
It seems that there is no limit to the way the language of zero harm is being used. I await with further
fascination the ongoing absurdity in cultural discourse and use of ‘zero’ language in this way. This
development is evidence of an ideological and fundamentalist-driven thought process.
Recently, in quite a number of marketing strategies the language of zero harm has taken on religious
connotations. Language of ‘one way’, ‘zero harm commitment’, ‘zero harm hope’, ‘zero harm
aspiration’, ‘think zero harm everyday’, ‘zero tolerance’, ‘zero harm ethic and intent’, ‘zero harm
commandments’, ‘faith in zero harm’ and ‘zero harm belief ’ could all be found in forms of evangelical
fundamentalism.
If one wants to find out if zero harm ideology is being practiced in a fundamentalist way in an
organisation, just criticise the concept and wait for the response. If you incur the quashing of debate,
inquisition and fear, you will know just how strong the religious fundamentalist commitment is. If

you are allowed some sense of scepticism or debate then you can deem that zero harm has yet to
reach the peak of religious fervour in that organisation.
The fact that the word ‘risk’ has been removed and substituted by ‘zero harm’ in this job advertisement
shows exactly how language and redefinition of language is critical to cultural formation. This
evolution of language use associate with zero reinforces the point to be made later in this paper that
language is a primary carrier of cultural meaning. If one wants to cultivate a zero harm organisation
and zero harm culture then the words ‘risk’ and ‘safety’ have to go. Similarly, if one wants an open
organisation characterised by tolerance, dialogue and learning, then the absolute of zero is not
suitable.
The Quest for Perfection

ALL mistakes are NOT terrible – Mistakes are gifts of wisdom!
Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Matthew 5:28

People are not motivated by the idea of perfection, indeed there is a great deal of evidence to show
that perfectionism causes significant psychological problems. Perfectionism is listed in the DSM IV
(Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition) as associated with many
mental disorders.
Perfectionism has three primary characteristics:
1. The tendency to set unrealistically high personal standards and goals.

2. The tendency to use all-or-nothing language and thinking when evaluating one’s actions and to
consider as a failure any achievement not meeting the unrealistically high standards.
3. A selective point of view that focuses on small flaws and errors rather than on one’s overall
progress or achievement.
Some theorists (Spielberger, 2004) link high conscientiousness to obsessive-compulsive personality

disorder and perfectionism. Highly conscientious people might also be workaholics whose task
orientation interferes with family and social life. Speilberger (2004, p. 837) comments:
The impact of perfectionism on slump-related coping appears to depend on the particular

subcomponent that predominates. More specifically, when perfectionist tendencies are driven
by excessive concern about mistakes, avoidance-based coping strategies are employed. On the
other hand, when concern over mistakes is accompanied by a focus on high personal standards,
a potentially more productive mix of problem-focused and emotion-focused strategies tends to
be used.
It is important to note here that the issue of avoidance is a critical component in the zero aspiration.
In the psychology of goals, absolutes and perfectionism are closely associated with avoidance goals.
There is a huge difference between the promotion of understanding and embracing risk versus the
avoidance of harm. Avoidance mantras and ideologies in goal setting have a trajectory that leads to
confusion, blame and scepticism.

Betty and Cleaning to Perfection
My second school experience in teaching was in South Australia at a primary school in the
Riverland. It was at this school two boys burnt down my classroom and I experienced for the first
time the political power of influential parents. In a bizarre twist, one of the boys’ parents sold fire
insurance and the other was the son of the regional manager in social work. The boys excused their
act of vandalism due to demands to complete homework, a surprise to me. Sadly, later, one of the
boys suicided as a result of a bipolar disorder and drug dependence.
It was also at this school that I met Betty. Betty was an older woman who taught children in
Year 2. Betty was a heavy smoker and we used to exchange jokes on playground duty and in the
staff room. As I got to know Betty I soon learned that she had what seemed to be a phobia for
cleanliness. Betty would leave the school grounds at any opportunity to walk home to her home
and wash or shower. She deliberately bought a home close to the school for this purpose. The
washing was habitual and compulsive. Betty was so trapped in this compulsive disorder that she
developed allergies to common soaps. She soon had to import special and expensive soaps from
Germany but even this lasted only a year. Eventually Betty had a breakdown due to the disorder
and was unable to work and required hospitalisation and psychiatric treatment. Her absolute
quest and need for perfect cleanliness was in the end her own undoing. Somewhere in her past
there may have been some pilate-type need to cleanse herself of either the past or of things
unclean, but the tragedy of her situation was that avoidance of things unclean in this human
world is not possible.
The language of zero harm is language of perfectionism, the language of absolutes. When one embeds
such language in a culture it eventually takes on a life of its own; it becomes an ideology. Leaders
may want to believe that they control the culture with the language of zero but unfortunately, the
discourse of zero as an absolute takes control. All ideologies as absolutes are all-controlling. When
organisations become controlled by various ideologies they become incapable of change and this
often explains the cycle of boom and bust in organisational life history. The decline of Microsoft,
Blackberry and Nokia are good examples of how the inability to change becomes institutionalised in
organisations. This often comes about by hubris (excessive pride or self-confidence) and the omission
of ‘continual improvement’ from the discourse of the culture. Perfectionist language has no space for
continual improvement; it can only lead to arrogance and hubris. The language of absolutes cannot
accept second best; a bronze medal is failure, and doing your best but not achieving perfection is ‘not
good enough’.
Negative (unhealthy) perfectionism is defined as a function of avoidance of negative consequences

and the motivation to achieve a certain goal in order to avoid adverse consequences.
It is important to note that in many cases, the perfectionist leader is completely unaware of both
problem behaviours and their root causes. What’s more, in-depth case studies reveal that often their
perception of the degree to which managers are loosely or tightly controlling others is so inaccurate
that they may actually think they are being empowering, when in fact they are over-controlling.
Perfectionism is a difficult character trait to overcome, because perfectionists are so intransigent and
rigid they often don’t see themselves as needing to change. The promotion of zero is the promotion of
rigidity. So whilst leaders would like employees to be creative and innovative, and think critically, the
mantra of zero sub-consciously promotes the opposite.

The much misunderstood Bible passage at the start of this discussion gives the idea that humans can
attain perfection. This seemingly contradicts every other theme in Christianity about the fallibility of
humans. The mistranslation of the noun should rather read ‘mature’ or ‘purposeful’. The goal for the
educated human is not perfection but maturity. To be truly human is to live in community, not to live
in superiority to community. When one becomes mature, one is less judgemental, slower to criticise
and has greater perspective on ‘there but for the grace of God go I’.
The Escape from Fundamentalism

It is no accident that I requested my brother Graham write the foreward to this book. As CEO
and Pastor of the Wayside Chapel Kings Cross, Graham has some idea of what human fallibility
and risk is all about. If it had not been for Graham and his unique personality, I doubt I would
have escaped from my own fundamentalist experience in the early 1980s. The escape happened
because Graham responded to and extracted the right question and because learning was the
common ground for discourse. Wayside is a unique community that knows more about risk than
any building site.
Whilst I have not experienced the exact extremities of human fallibility that Graham has,
my experiences nonetheless with at-risk young people in Galilee and Quamby were most
sobering. Anyone with experience in human services will know that the language of absolutes,
perfectionism and zero are nonsense.
The projection of perfectionism, captured by the concept of zero, not only leads to a range of mental
disorders but also generates spin, selectivity and ‘hiding’. At Wayside, help comes when hiding is
abandoned and love and learning in community are embraced. As sure as one sets absolutes as goals,
this generates the search for blame when something goes wrong. If the myth of total control is
projected (e.g. ‘all accidents are preventable’) then the first response of the zero harm proponent is:
‘why was this not prevented?’ … ‘ who was in control?’
Lessons from the Death of Danny Cheney

There is a popular PowerPoint presentation that circulates about the Internet in Australia called
‘Lessons from the Death of Danny Cheney’. Disguised as a case study in incident investigation,
the PowerPoint attempts to be an instructional presentation, but its hidden assumptions are most
offensive and dangerous. The presentation starts by presenting a range of ‘facts’ about a linesman
working on a high power transmission line. The fouth slide in the presentation has the title
‘What should have happened’ and has a focus on procedures. The fifth slide in the presentation
then shows what actually happened. The next slide documents a range of procedures that were
not followed and the resulting sad fatality. The most disturbing slide is the tenth, which asks the
question in bold print: ‘Why did a highly experienced, trained person who was heavily involved
in the planning of the job and with all the authority to make decisions regarding the job, make
a conscious decision not to comply with well established rules and procedures to undertake this
job safely?’
What a disgraceful assumption! People who don’t follow procedures must be suicidal? People who
don’t follow procedures must consciously want to die? This is the trajectory of the black and white
thinker, the perfectionist discourse, it leads to blame and projected superiority.

The Rage for Utopia
This is the title of the stirring book by Ronal Conway published in 1992. Conway argues that
obsession and compulsion for Utopia is an illness. The idea of Utopia was proposed by Plato and the
word means ‘no place’. The idea of utopia was later popularised by Sir Thomas More in 1516 in his
book Utopia. More’s Utopia is a fictional island in the Atlantic Ocean. Utopia is the aspiration for
the ideal and perfect society. Many writers and artists have since aspired to Utopia in their works.
One of the most famous and earliest proposals for the ideal society and paradise was by the artist
Hieronymus Bosch. His Garden of Earthy Delights was painted in 1500 and is housed in the Museo
del Prado in Madris. The idea of a Garden of Eden has been a continuing theme for those who are
disappointed with the finite, imperfect, fallible and ‘corrupt’ nature of humanity. Heaven, the infinite
and zero are one and the same.
One of the most famous presentations for the ideal society was put forward by William Booth, the
founder of the Salvation Army. Booth, the son of an alcoholic, experienced first hand the squalor
and poverty of industrial England. He proposed the solution to the finite, imperfect and corrupt
(sinful) nature of humanity in his book, In Darkest England and the Way Out, published in 1890.
In the inside cover Booth draws a map of how the colonies are the opportunity to escape the despair
and darkness of England. Booth’s plan was for a new world order for England and for the colonies,
a Utopia.
Figure 5. Booth’s Map of Social Salvation and Utopia

Conway notes:
the constant drive for order, security and certainty in accomplishment which so torments the
neurotic sufferer, serves our prevailing world view in empirical science, dogmatic religion and
bureaucratic structures.
Fromm describes the ‘Fear of Freedom’ as a sickness. The aspiration to a fantasy Utopia and resultant
need for efficiency, Conway proposes, ‘disintegrates into meticulous nitpicking, prudence becomes
a chronic hesitancy, dogmatic rigidity slides into a desperate obstinacy’. Conway further states:
‘Nothing is more dangerous than a good idea, when it is the only idea we have’. Conway describes the
key words and concepts associated with the obsessive-compulsive style in the following dichotomy.
Conway tells this joke:
Satan was walking through the world one day in the company of a senior demon. The demon
nudged the Lord Lucifer and noted anxiously: ‘Sire, look over there, someone has picked up an
important piece of truth. ‘We had better look after our safety’. Satan smiled nonchalantly. ‘Never
mind my dear fellow. We are in no danger. He will try now to systemetise it.’
Indeed, the world needs ordered systems - never more than today, with large populations burdening a
crowded planet. But the obsessional mentality wants a perfect system which can lead in practice only
to tyranny or its natural antithesis, which is revolution or anarchy. In all political and social systems, a
craving for perfect government leads to a dangerous worship of ‘ideological abstractions’.
What is the trajectory of the obsession with utopian language such as ‘zero’ in the risk industry?
As discussed in the previous book Risk Makes Sense, it is the preoccupation with risk aversion and
absolute control.
I saw an organisation recently advertising on the internet proposing they could guarantee an Accident
Free Future. The company was also being promoted in advertising by the Safety Institute of Australia
on their website and in their magazine. I am not surprised people actually find such simplistic
messages attractive. The rage for Utopia is the rage for fundamentalist certainty and the eradication of
risk. The rage for zero in the risk industry is the rage for an absolute. In the end zero takes on religious
significance and all critical thinking ceases.
In the first book the idea of fundamentalism was introduced, along with its association with the quest
for absolutes in risk management. In Chapter 6 the characteristics of fundamentalism are explained to
demonstrate how this mentalitie of zero disconnects humans from making sense of risk.

Workshop Questions
1. Do a search on www.seek.com.au and see how many ways in which the word ‘zero’ has been
substituted for other words such as ‘risk’ and ‘safety’.
2. Do a search of the same job ads and see what key words associated with employment and risk
‘intelligence’ are missing.
3. Join Linkedin and enter into one of the discussions in one of the safety groups and raise the topic
of ‘zero harm’ or ‘all accidents are preventable’.
4. What is the attraction of Utopia? Do a search for the original meaning of the word.
5. Find other examples of utopian dreams in literature and present to your work group.
Transition
Deborah Lupton describes a discourse as a ‘bounded body of knowledge and associated practices’.
When we think about culture the concept of language and discourse are most important. The idea
of discourse captures much more than just words in a culture, it’s about all the symbols, images and
meanings that are attached to those words. Through discourse we understand the cultural world in
which we move. Discourses limit and make possible what can be said and not said in a society.
The next chapter deals with the discourse of zero and the trajectories associated with that discourse.
One cannot just use words and not expect them to be part of a discourse. Each discourse has a
trajectory, it’s going somewhere. Often people join a discourse without knowing where it is going
and then only later learn that they have been entrapped into a moral and ethical problem. This can be
observed with the discourse of discrimination that ends up advocating eugenics. Eugenics is the bio-
social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition
of a population. The Nazi quest to establish a ‘super race’ was a eugenic enterprise and has since led
to the demise of the concept. The philosophy of eugenics was the ideology used to take aboriginal
children from their parents in Australia. The movie Rabbit-Proof Fence captures the de-humnanising
nature of this philosophy. Words of racial discrimination eventually have a trajectory of eugenics.
This next chapter deals with the trajectory associated with zero discourse.

CHAPTER 3
The Discourse of Zero
All truth passes through three stages:
3
First it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as
being self evident. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
We are what we speak. Deborah Tannen
Language that Makes Culture

How Athletes Make Sense of Goals
At 2012 at the London Olympics there were the typical excesses of media and dissection of
every moment, person and event. As each Australian athlete finished an event they had to do
the compulsory media review immediately after the event, within a few minutes. If a medal was
won, particularly a gold medal, the elation and euphoria was relived and repeated each day for the
weeks that followed. Similarly, if there were disappointments the excesses of analysis were painful
e.g. the failure of the men’s 4x100 relay team that were expected to win gold and didn’t achieve a
medal. In all these interviews it was interesting to observe the language of the athletes, careful not
to be arrogant, careful to remain humble and focused, keen to hold an attitude to win but not ‘an
attitude’ that might lead to ‘choking’ and failure.
One common expression used by the athletes is that of ‘going out’ and ‘enjoying’ themselves. I
would hope most people would understand the purpose and sentiments of such language and the
meaning it conveys for the athlete. However, in a country and media obsessed with gold medals
there was then some of the most absurd criticism. On one talkback radio program I heard a
listener say that if the athletes only went over to ‘enjoy’ themselves, they should have stayed home
on the couch. This exchange demonstrated no concept of how the language of gold and winning
plays on the mind of an athlete. So much of sport, athletic endeavour and achievement is about
having the right mindset and setting that mindset through thinking and speaking the right
thoughts and right focus. Athletes, coaches and sports psychologists know that a ‘discourse of
arrogance’ and ‘discourse of absolutes’ is anathema to the ideas of learning, motivation, inspiration,
imagination, improvement and performance.
Chapter 3: The Discourse of Zero 25

In Risk Makes Sense I introduced the idea of cultural trajectories through a Concept Map of Culture
Characteristics and Trajectories, which is re-presented in this chapter at Figure 6. The idea of trajectory
is most important in the discussion that follows. When we choose to omit or include certain language
and words in our communication, these are attached to us in our cultural identity and convey cultural
power. Our discourse conveys direction. Sometimes language and words seem quite innocent to begin
with only to learn later that they have been used as part of some propaganda machine. This is often
observed in tyrannical regimes where words of goodness, national pride and identity are used to mask
domination, exploitation and repression of others. The Nazi regime only espoused a discourse of good
for the German people, promising them economic and national prosperity in liberation from the
legacies of World War I.
The omission of the word ‘risk’ and ‘safety’ from the advertisement at Figure 4 in the previous chapter
says a great deal about the culture that decided to omit such words. In a later chapter I will discuss
the importance of silences in communication, cultural formation and cultural transformation. For
the moment we need to note how the inclusion or omission of words and certain language carries
cultural meaning, purpose and identity. This is why the idea of ‘discourse’ is important and needs to be
distinguished from the ideas of ‘communication’, ‘language’ and ‘words’.
The cultural idea of discourse was developed by Michael Foucault. Discourse conveys the idea of
much more than just communication exchange. It means
the transmission of power in systems of thoughts composed of ideas, attitudes, courses of action,
beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak.
The idea of discourse has special meaning when it comes to culture. Social thinkers understand
discourse to be much more than a conversation or a pattern of talking. To a social psychologist,
discourse is not only about the conversation but the signs, symbols, meaning, worldview, values and
systems of thought embedded in the language and everything associated with it.
This idea of cultural discourse is used to include not only the meaning of words but the power
relations carried with and in words. Who does the language of ‘zero’ give power to? How does your
workplace talk about risk, and what meaning is conveyed in that discourse? What power-knowledge is
embedded in that discourse, and who is favoured or constrained by it? What power is assumed by the
owners of legislative and regulatory knowledge, and what is at risk if the prevailing pattern of power is
broken?
The discourse of zero has only one direction. There is no flexibility, discretion, extenuating
circumstances, culpability or openness about absolutes. If there is an infraction or undesirable
behaviour it must be punished.
Broken Window Theory

Zero tolerance first became popular discourse in 1994 under the myth of ‘broken window
theory’. Zero tolerance was attributed to the (short lived) success of New York Mayor Rudy
Giuliani. Under the mythical ‘broken window theory’, the Giuliani spin machine credited him
with reductions in crime in New York. Research which followed the claims by zero tolerance
advocates showed that changes in society could not be attributed to zero tolerance. Rather,
social improvement fluctuated according to demographic and economic factors which also grew
exponentially in New York under the same policy.
Advocates of zero tolerance in drug reform, driver safety, law enforcement and school safety all

make similar claims about its effectiveness but the research says otherwise. Zero tolerance doesn’t
work. Zero tolerance is expensive and fills gaols. The failed Northern Territory Intervention of
2007-2011 is an example of how zero tolerance doesn’t work. Yet, in a classic case of spin, the
previously named Northern Territory Intervention was renamed in 2012 as ‘Stronger Futures’. The
spin of politicians doesn’t hide the fact that more than $3 billion has not solved the problems of
the Indigenous people of the Northern Territory.
In an attempt to understand culture, people in industry have tended to ‘dumb down’ its understanding
to ‘what we do around here’. Unfortunately, this simplistic definition has led many to believe they are
experts in culture and have subsequently reduced an understanding of culture to behaviour. This is no
more evident than in the way people describe Behavioural Based Safety (BBS) as a cultural program.
Behaviour is not culture and behaviourist strategies fail because they understand the human as the
sum of inputs and outputs. Nothing could be a greater distraction in addressing risk than confusing
behaviour as culture.
The language of culture is bandied about in so many meaningless ways in industry. People claim
to measure culture, talk about culture and even use the word culture in their organisation’s name,
and simply mean behaviour. The three most prominent definitions of culture in the industry are:
behaviour- as-culture, legislation-as-culture or systems-as-culture. Unfortunately, the excessive misuse
of the ‘spin’ of culture in organisations has now made it all the more difficult to really address the issue.
This is partially because there is an excess of armchair expert and because the ‘spin’ associated with the
language has made discussion of culture all the more meaningless as people use the label differently.
McLaren (1996) explains culture as
... value-based interpretations; artifacts; shared experiences; interaction, adaptation, and survival;
social customs and social norms; the expressive forms of social and material life; a distinctive ‘way
of life’ of a group or class; historically transmitted ensembles of symbols; ‘maps of meanings’ that
make social life intelligible to its members; systems of knowledge shared by large groups of people;
the quotidian, self-interpreted conduct of particular groups and communities; historically shaped
forms of consciousness; contradictory forms of ‘common sense’ that shape public and popular life;
everyday activities and patterns of actions; an evolving totality of meanings; a living tradition;
socially transmitted patterns of behaviour; meanings alive in institutional life as well as in ordinary
behaviour; socially embodied differences and ‘performed’ at the level of everyday life; the symbolic
production of material structures; a conception of the world or worldview; ...
For the purpose of this discussion, a narrowing down to some sense of commonality could be:
1. Common and exclusive language/knowledge (cultural discourse);

2. Accepted terms of reference by a group;
3. Clear identifiers of membership;
4. Common values, attitudes and beliefs;
5. Explicit and implicit symbols;
6. Shared experiences;
7. Social customs and social norms;
8. Historically transmitted ensembles of symbols;
9. ‘Maps of meanings’ that make social life intelligible to its members.

The map following in Figure 6 may help give a perspective on the various ‘trajectories’ that exist
within a cultural understanding of risk. Any so-called ‘risk culture program’ which ignores aspects of
this map is not likely to succeed. Models of risk culture programs which offer little more than the
policing of systems are not risk culture programs. No amount of ‘spin’ about ‘generative’ risk culture
or ‘transformational’ risk culture changes much if the discourse, framing and priming maintain old
patterns, habits and sub-cultures of punitive and coercive rule.
Figure 6. Concept Map of Culture Characteristics and Trajectories
It was in response to the malaise of behaviour-as-culture, legislation-as-culture (e.g. NSW

WorkCover so called ‘Safety Culture Survey’) or systems-as-culture discourse across industry that I
developed the MiProfile culture diagnostic tool. The MiProfile Survey is introduced and discussed in
the first book.
The Importance of Trajectories

The concept map at Figure 6 shows the principal factors that comprise culture. Each one of these
factors has its own trajectory. I use the term ‘trajectory’ in this instance to indicate the ‘teleological’
nature of each factor. The idea of ‘teleos’ is from the Greek derivation and has a focus on philosophical
purpose and ‘end points’. When one is exploring a cultural factor, it is important to know not only
starting points and origins but end points and destinations. For example, people may be attracted by
a seemingly innocent starting point such as the necessity for obedience, but are surprised when this
develops into an oppressive dictatorship used to later justify violent extremism. All ideas and language
have trajectory. What might be the trajectory of zero?

The concept map illustrates a focus on behaviours at the top right. There are four sub-stressors which
affect the reading of behaviours. In other words, even the behaviour witnessed may be an aberration
of what is normalised in a culture. In a culture which is stressed, every behaviour in that organisation
could be an aberration. This is most evident at peak times in highly stressed industries.
We also see in the map that language (what is said and not said) sits apart from behaviour and that
this is distinct from history, habits, symbols and artefacts (physical and tangible remains of culture).
This should help explain how language can be used to both undermine a culture and manage/
influence a culture. It is one thing to focus on behaviours in an organisation, to look at what people
do about risk. It is another to observe congruence between behaviour and all the other factors of
culture. This incongruence often explains why organisations don’t change and why and how change is
subverted in organisations.
The more practical, physical or ‘instrumental’ layers of culture, namely symbols, systems, technology
and standards (including legislation and regulations), need to be supported by extensive interventions
in the existential layers of organisations, namely cultural, psychological, social and behavioural
dimensions. This is what has become known as ‘the human dimension’, and what I call ‘the
psychosocial dimensions’ of culture.
It is when there is significant incongruity between the physical and psychosocial aspects of culture
that sub-cultures develop. Sub-cultures are cultures within cultures and have unique identifiers which
are sometimes at odds with the broader culture. Often the sub-culture forms in order for a group to
‘cope’ with the norms of the broader culture. Sub-cultures can sometimes be subversive and undermine
the values, attitudes and beliefs of the broader culture to which they also belong.
When it comes to wanting to change and influence culture or sub-cultures it would make sense
to look at, and understand, the cultural identifiers as presented in the concept map. The symbols,
language, customs and norms in a culture are powerful and filter in and out those who do and don’t
belong.
The process of institutionalisation is such that it locks these things into place over time. It takes an
enormous stress to change culturally entrenched values and beliefs.
Unless the organisation and the culture is able to learn and change, then many of the cultural norms
become historically entrenched, so much so, it seems like they are locked in concrete. In time, old
cultures become impervious to change. Over time they may weaken but still linger about, while new
and more vibrant cultures emerge. Eventually, one culture slowly watches the other die out.
The ebb and flow of unsuccessful business is testimony to this pattern of birth, energy,
institutionalisation, lock-in, fixed position and irrelevance. The culture of the public service and
the church are testimony to the difficulty of adaptation and change in entrenched cultures. Often
entrenched policy, processes and procedures bring their own risks, especially as new technologies are
introduced whilst the culture using those technologies resists change. The larger the organisation, the
more entrenched and immovable the culture.

Cultural Difference and Language
There are many indicators which explain cultural difference. Reading Hofstede (Exploring Culture:
Exercises, Stories and Synthetic Cultures 2002) is a good start. However, the two primary indicators
of cultural difference are language and appearance. Some researchers like Gardner (Risk, The Science
and Politics of Fear 2008) talk about security ‘cosmetics’, i.e. the appearance or veneer of security
without the substance. It’s peculiar that we run about like busy bees worried about blue uniforms on
gates, badges, appropriate suits, ties at executive meetings, scanners and CCTV. But this is not what
the culture of security is about. These things are simply one indicator of culture.
Similarly on a construction site safety officers police the wearing of protective equipment (PPE),
which is the least important of all safety measures. Attacking the cosmetics of safety is easy; it’s a soft
target. Addressing attitudes, values and beliefs is much harder, so little is done about the transmission
of values and beliefs through language and the framing of the safety message.
The Coroner investigating the cause of the Blackhawk Disaster in the ADF in 1996 made it clear
that the main cause of this accident was a ‘can do’ culture. The Coroner investigating the Canberra
Hospital Disaster in 1997 attributed causality to a ‘can do’ culture. A culture which cultivates ‘can do’
language is a culture where saying ‘can’t do’ cannot be imagined.
When it comes to making sense of risk in organisations, not only do we find that psychological
and social issues influence risk, but so do symbols. It is one thing to know what influences culture,
it is another to assess and measure cultural type. This has been demonstrated in the excellent work
of Hofstede.
Hofstede’s work proposes five key indicators to measure type in cultural difference:
1. Power-Distance (PDI)
2. Individualism (IND)
3. Masculinity (MAS)
4. Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI)
5. Long-Term Orientation (LTO)
The measure of variance on this scale according to Hofstede determines cultural difference. Hofstede
has developed an app for the iPhone called CultureGPS which is an amazing tool for measuring
cultural difference. For example, our position on Long-Term Orientation is about whether we think
and act in the short term or have a stronger focus on the long term. In making sense of risk this is
what I call ‘shortsightedness’ or, alternatively, a ‘longsighted’ sense of risk. For example, research shows
that Generation Y culture (people born from the 1970s to 2000) tend to have a shorter focus when
it comes to time and risk, than those who are older in Generation X or the Baby Boomers. This is
evident in how each invests, purchases insurance or lives for the moment, indeed how each generation
makes sense of risk.
Resolving cultural difference is a difficult endeavour. Certainly, enacting any initiative in an

organisation without due consideration of culture is a recipe for disaster.

The Discourse and Trajectory of Zero
When I say that I don’t like the language of ‘zero tolerance’ or ‘zero harm’ people invariable ask,
“so you want to kill people do you?”, or “do you want 5 safety injuries as a target/goal?” In order
to respond to this form of questioning one has to understand much more about human decision
making, learning and organisational culture. One has to be more sophisticated about the use of
language and its discourse. Simplistic binary opposition goal setting simply creates a trajectory for
continued dumbing down of the workforce, increased calculative management by risk ‘experts’ and the
embedding of the discourse of risk elimination via anti-learning and anti-human mechanisms.
If one assumes that human behaviour is determined by “carrot and stick” (reward and punishment),
the simplistic binary line of questioning makes sense. Unfortunately, this line of thinking and
questioning assumes a simplistic understanding of human and organisational development.
Sometimes people just ask the wrong questions. The simplistic and leading question which seeks
to answer simplistic assumptions about risk and what it is to be human simply strengthens the idea
that risk doesn’t make sense. Questions of entrapment are black and white, lack sophistication, are
premised on a naive sense of complexity and seek simplistic solutions. Argument progresses in three
stages: superficial simplicity, confused complexity and profound simplicity. A complete discussion of
binary opposition and the psychology of goal setting will be discussed in Chapter 5.
Mindful organisations and leaders are prepared to struggle through confused complexity to find
profound simplicity. Mindless organisations tend to settle for the first superficial simplicity they
stumble onto and as a result think they have discovered the solution to a complex problem, for
example workplace injuries, breaches in security or defects in quality. Being able to tackle the
messiness of confused complexity requires maturity and adaptability. A system’s willingness to
become aware of complexity and associated problems is associated to their ability and will to act on
knowledge. When people develop the capacity to act on something, they can afford to see it.
Organisations which latch on to Zero Tolerance as their organisational paradigm fail to address the
complexities of human and organisational development. Of course I don’t want injuries/fatalities,
breaches in security or defects in quality, but conversation and language about zero is unhelpful. The
language of ‘zero’ has to lead to intolerance, punishment, scepticism, non-learning and negativity. It’s
the stuff of superficial simplicity.
There are things we know and believe that we don’t necessarily have to talk about. We don’t talk about
those things not because we are naive in beliefs, but we know that culture and belief are generated by
language. There are some things that should not be discussed because they are counterproductive to
the culture. This is not about censorship but simply about being smart in relationships. Some things
may be true but we don’t have to talk about them, because we know what such conversation generates.
My adult children know all about sex, they know of course that their parents have sex, but they make
it very clear they don’t have to hear us talk about it.
Compliance talk will generate compliance thinking, and zero tolerance talk will generate zero
tolerance thinking. If you want to generate learning, maturity, growth, ownership and excellence, then
reframe the language and don’t talk about things which constrain those goals. Goals are not singular.
All goals compete with other goals.

The Meaning of Discourse
The idea of discourse has a special meaning when it comes to culture. Social thinkers understand
discourse to be much more than a conversation, talking or a pattern of talking. To a social psychologist
discourse is about not only the conversation but the signs, symbols, meaning, worldview, values and
systems of thought embedded in the language and everything associated with it. First developed by
the famous social theorist Michael Foulcault discourse was defined to include not only the meaning of
words but the power relations carried with and in them. Foucault argued that power and knowledge
are inter-related and therefore every human relationship is a struggle and negotiation of power.
Foucault further stated that power is always present and can both produce and constrain the truth.
Discourse according to Foucault is related to power as it operates by rules of exclusion. Discourse
therefore is controlled by objects, what can be spoken of; ritual, where and how one may speak; and
the privileged, who may speak. Coining the phrase ‘power-knowledge’, Foucault stated knowledge was
both the creator of power and creation of power. Okay, so enough of academic introduction. What has
this got to do with the psychology of risk?
How does your workplace talk about risk, and what meaning is conveyed in that discourse? What
power-knowledge is embedded in that discourse and who is favoured or constrained by it? What
power is assumed by the owners of legislative and regulatory knowledge and what is at risk if the
prevailing pattern of power is broken?
The discourse of ‘zero’ is a discourse of authority, compliance, absolutes, regulation and enforcement.
If someone does not meet the goal of zero they have failed, if someone makes a mistake they should
suffer under the response of zero (tolerance). The discourse of zero has only one direction, there is no
flexibility, discretion, extenuating circumstances, culpability or openness about the absolute, as in the
Spanish Inquisition, conform or die. There is no room for contingencies, understanding, learning or
openness in the zero discourse.
The discourse of zero reinforces the status quo and centralises power in the hands of the
policing agent, the enforcers, and it doesn’t address the fundamentals of human judgement and
decision making. Rather than changing the culture of risk, the discourse of zero more deeply
embeds the power of regulators, and fails to stimulate the values of ownership, learning and
continual improvement.

Workshop Questions
1. Note how the word ‘zero’ is used and what associations of power are attached to its use.
2. Can you think of an idea that seemed to have an innocent beginning but a terrible end?
3. Can you think of an example where ‘zero tolerance’ is used to win popular support but is
not implemented?
4. If zero tolerance is unhealthy for relationships, what are the attributes you look for in a friend or
partner that have an opposite trajectory to zero.
5. Find examples of job advertisements using the word ‘zero’ and see what words it used as
a substitute.
Transition
Fortunately, there are some who already know that the use of absolutes has a trajectory of exclusion
and discrimination. Those who oppose zero however are marginalised by the ‘zero crowd’. The ‘Zero
Harm Organisation’ cannot not tolerate, must have a trajectory of harm. In the end those who don’t
conform to zero must be punished and hurt (socially, culturally and psychologically) in order to keep
the ideology of zero from being corrupted. Disbelief, scepticism and debate cannot be tolerated in the
absolute, in the ideology and trajectory of zero.
The next chapter looks at those who don’t conform, and the reasons why people like myself dissent
from the ideology of zero.

SECTION
TWO
Zero Dissent
CHAPTER 4
Zero Dissent
4
The problem is, when we try to calculate all the way down to zero distance,
the equation blows up in our face and gives us meaningless answers - things
they tried to calculate. - Richard Feynman
Surprise is a spontaneous response to the unexpected - Robert Burton
The Meaning of Dissent

The concept of ‘dissent’ has been chosen intentionally for this chapter because of its alignment with
the history of religious disagreement. Throughout history those who dared to challenge religious
orthodoxy have been known as dissenters. Dissenters have also been known as non-conformists, and
both terms convey political meaning as well as an imbalance in power.
The Paradise of Dissent

One of my favourite history books is Paradise of Dissent; South Australia 1829-1857 by Douglas
Pike. In the history of Australia, the story of South Australia is unique. The idea of the state of
South Australia was borne at the height of religious reform in Europe. Driven by the energy
and entrepreneurialism of Edward Gibbon Wakefield, the design for land sales and emigration
was conducted in England in what was known as systematic colonisation. In many ways the
foundation of South Australia was a social, economic and political experiment that embodied the
ideas of a number of visionaries and the parliamentary Colonial Office. Systematic colonisation
was not really the idea of one person but was championed by a collection of people including
Wakefield, Torrens, Gouger, Whitmore, Hutt, Bacon and Angas.
Part of Wakefield’s vision included the idea of a ‘perfect pattern of society laid up in the heavens’.
Wakefield was keen to attract the middle classes to the idea of colonisation and prophesied
‘no adoration of wealth, no oppression of the poor, no reason for political dissent’. In the end,
Wakefield did little more than equate prudence with naked self-interest.
Chapter 4: Zero Dissent 37

Young emigrants were carefully selected between the ages of fifteen and thirty, and a fixed price
was placed on land. The systemic colonisation legalities and organisation were set by the South
Australia Act, the South Australian Land Company and the South Australian Association.
The most energetic members of the South Australian Association were utilitarian and
philosophical radicals of the Benthemite school. Some, fresh from their studies at Trinity College,
saw opportunity for the outworking of their idealism and philanthropy. Driven by Benthemite
idealism the idea grew that this settlement would indeed be a paradise on Earth. It was to be
a place of freedom, particularly religious freedom. The system of religious freedom came to be
known as ‘voluntaryism’.
In contrast to the settlement of any other state of Australia, the settlement of South Australia
is unique. Founded on a philosophy and idealism, South Australia was projected to be a ‘model
province’ to illuminate the Asiatic darkness. It was made clear that South Australia was not to be
under the authority of New South Wales.
Of course, when they landed and settled, despite all design and legislative intent back in England,
there was no paradise of dissent. Despite every endeavour to create Utopia on Earth, the
settlement of humans tends not to work out that way. In less than three years they needed a police
force in Utopia.
On 28 December 1836 Captain John Hindmarsh, as Governor, established a ruling Council at

Holdfast Bay. The early years of South Australia were characterised by factionalism and conflicting
political and economic interests in Adelaide and in England. In the early years there was, however,
a sense of cooperation between the clergy, particularly in temperance and education. The sense
of unity by dissenting denominations such as Baptists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Wesleyans,
Churches of Christ and Congregationalists was increased through their attack on Unitarians,
Catholics and Jews who were in the minority. More than fifty percent of the early settlers were
‘low church’ (less Catholic) Church of England. South Australia in its early years had the most
sects and sectarian religions of any colony in the world.
The first Legislative Council was opened on 10 August 1851 and boasted every elected member as
a religious dissenter. However, it didn’t take long before gold was discovered in the eastern states
and, with the influx of convict descendants and an exodus of dissenters, life in South Australia
changed rapidly and the dream of a paradise of dissent and utopia vanished.
The purpose of this brief recount of early South Australian history is to present two key concepts:
utopia and dissent. Those who dissent are often the marginalised; those in power either tolerate them,
legislate against them or victimise them. Dissenters are a threat to vested interests and orthodoxy.
Zero Harm Dissenters

There is not a day goes by that I am not informed by safety professionals across Australia that no
dissent is allowed in their organisation when it comes to the concept of zero harm. Many safety
managers write and tell me of their fear and regret after daring to raise concern or question the
philosophy of zero harm. Most don’t wish to lose their job and so endeavour to work within a system
that they don’t believe in.

There are a number of independent safety experts and critics (not tied to an employer) who in recent
times have dissented publicly by debating the ideology of zero harm. Their arguments are summarised
as follows:
1. Tom Gardner - Zero Harm – Hype or Hope?

(http://zeroharm.info/2011/02/11/zero-harm-hype-or-hope/, accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument – Zero harm needs to be a reality and means what it says or if modified becomes
meaningless. As such it is no more than marketing hype.
2. Corrie Pitzer - Zero Harm is a False Ethic

(http://sheqafrica.com/zero-harm/, accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument - Safety management remains stuck in the ideas of Frederick Taylor’s ‘scientific
management’. Corrie proposes eleven fallacies about zero harm for consideration:
‘Banning risky behaviour’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: Risk-taking behaviour is the root of business evil, and could be banned. In fact, business is
driven by harnessing risk.
‘Identify incident causes’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: incident causes are identifiable and teach us to prevent similar incidents. In fact, the exact
combination of direct causes and unique pathways of any incident are never repeated.
‘Safety rules are productive’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: safety rules support productivity. In fact, there is no causal link.
‘Incident rates prove safety’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: incident measurements prove safety levels. In fact, accident and incident rates result from
luck, and the measurement protocol.
‘Punishment and reward’ are fallacies
Fallacy: ‘safety’ graphs are a basis for reward and punishment of workers. In fact, rewards support
production procedures, but destroy safety management. Rewards are incentives to conceal incidents
and distort behaviour towards the ‘flavour of the month’, making a farce or ‘game show’ of safety, and
detracting from trust in management.
‘Zero aspiration’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: ‘zero loss incidents’ or zero harm is a morally correct motto, equal to a commandment. In fact,
if business and labour did agree on that moral imperative, every organisation would be bound by law
to spend at least half its profit on safety. We could automate all operations with robots.

Failures occur even in nature, due to change
James Reason wrote that “zero conveys a dangerous misrepresentation” of the realities of risk, the
illusion “that your safety endeavours will end in a decisive victory one day.”
‘Zero motto’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: ‘Nobody gets hurt’ or ‘Safety is our core value’ or ‘The goal is zero’. In fact, workers understand
that the glib and cute motto is false. False slogans merely accuse people. Family photos on posters
accuse workers of not caring for their families. Worse, ‘zero’ slogans accuse workers as ‘unbelievers’ and
induce guilt.
‘Rules’ are fallacies
Fallacy: Safety rules give predictable results and save lives. In fact, the complexity of risk management
is proven by our many and diverse interventions. Most rules operate on the traditional ‘logic’ of a
‘hierarchy of controls’ as in engineering, or avoidance by procedures, administration, or personal
protective equipment, but these are all complex to implement.
The ‘human factor’ is a fallacy
Fallacy: behavioural safety’s success proves that worker behaviour is the problem. In fact, behaviour is
caused by many conditions and other antecedents, each subject to change.
Safety management has become false and farcical, and zero harm is the Great Safety Swindle,
perpetuating rules, systems, cards, trinkets, mottos, measurements, rates, indicators, priorities,
commitments. Workers know all this as ‘PowerPoint slides safety’.
Perhaps Corrie’s best quote is as follows:
Knowing that we could not achieve zero is more motivational than the delusion that we could!
3. Phillip Byard - Could ‘zero harm’ be killing people?

(http://www.ferret.com.au/c/Australian-Exhibitions-Conferences/Could-Zero-Harm-be-killing-
our-people-n867277, accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument – Byard argues that the concept of zero harm drives a mindset and shifting focus
from class 1 injuries to class 3 minor injuries. Byard argues this shifts the primary focus to a
disproportionate allocation of resources to minor risk prevention.
(http://www.sia.org.au/browse.aspx?ContentID=issue62_2011-02-22_news1, accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument – When you develop a project built toward zero harm which is underpinned by the
assumption that all injuries are preventable, you have created a self-imposed reasonably practicable
test that cannot be met.
Douglas’ main concern is with practicability but advocates zero harm as a value.

(http://www.amsj.com.au/mine-safety-news/training-and-development/814-zero-harm-just-say-no,
accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument – The two basic problems created by using zero harm are that one, it actually damages
safety culture, and two it can hide serious underlying safety risks … zero harm is a negative and
absolute term, and should have no place in a modern safety focused workplace. Using zero harm to
promote and sell safety harms safety culture and can hide significant underlying safety issues. Stop
using it, engage with your workforce and ask them what they want and what they think is important.
“zero harm”.
(http://safetyatworkblog.com/2012/05/15/do-some-good-sounds-more-effective-than-achieving-
zero-harm/, accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument - Focusing on the safety positive is what I do as a safety adviser but saying that my job is
to “do some good” makes me feel better about my job than if I was minimising the negative, which is
what the zero harm descriptor does.
7. George Robotham – Zero Harm

(http://www.sia.org.au/forums/showpost.asp?ContentID=43081&ContainerID=2960&TopNode
ID=43081, accessed 13 July 2012)
Argument - The concept of zero harm is not practical and drives microscopics in risk assessment.
Zero Harm is warm, fuzzy stuff that is emotionally appealing if not necessarily targetted where it
will do the most good … My experience says people spend inordinate effort on the little things but
it is rare to find a comprehensive attempt to address the big picture items, zero harm just reinforces
this tendency.
8. Shawn M. Galloway - Zero Incident Goals Motivate Risk-Taking, Not

Excellence
(http://proactsafety.com/articles/zero-incident-goals-motivate-risk-taking-not-excellence, accessed
30 August, 2012)
Argument - Zero incident programs and goals are the desires of average safety cultures, not
excellently-performing ones. Organisations that have achieved sustainability of excellent results in
culture and performance define, measure and motivate what they want, rather than what they don’t.
When excellence in safety is measured by zero failures, a self-limiting organisational viewpoint and
very dangerous employee belief is created: ‘If safety means no incidents, then anything that I do that
doesn’t result in an incident or get me hurt, must be safe.’ When this occurs, risk will be overlooked,
complacency will set in, an important and healthy degree of vulnerability of risk will be lost, and
organisations will be surprised by an incident that occurs out of nowhere.

Summary
There are of course more dissenters that just these eight examples. As we will see in the following
section the majority of the workforce, especially those with risky jobs, are zero harm dissenters.
The Evidence of Belief

Human Dymensions have been conducting the MiProfile© safety culture diagnostic survey since
2006, after I developed the survey and methodology in 2003. I then refined the methodology
when working with the WorkWise Group. The MiProfile survey database currently exceeds 21,000
participants (across mining, building and construction, manufacturing and government). The
methodology for the survey was explained in detail in the previous book Risk Makes Sense and a full
methodology (15,000 word paper) is available upon request.The survey results establish the following
regarding zero harm:
1. Only 35% of the workforce believe in the concept of zero harm.

2. This rate of belief declines if workers come from high risk work areas.
3. Most workers find the lack of definition, word gymnastics and redefinition of zero to be confusing
and all have their own interpretation of what zero means.
4. Over 85% of workers believe that zero means nil or nothing.
5. Even though the workforce is 100% committed to managing risk and safety, the majority are not
committed to the ideology of zero harm.
6. Results show that if time is included in the mix, a much lower percentage of people believe in zero
harm the further the time period is extended, e.g. up to 10 years or more.
7. Results also show that 85% of workers don’t know whether zero harm is a goal, an action, a
process, an activity, an ideal or a practical objective.
8. Workers have stated that zero harm is not achievable because of:
R5 Ļ5(./,5) 5"#!"5,#-%51),%
R5 Ļ5)..)'5&#(5) 5*,)/.#)(5*,#),#.3
R5 (+/.5&0&-5) 5,-)/,#(!
R5 Ļ5(5.)5.%5*,-)(&5,-*)(-##&#.35 ),5- .3
R5 )),5+/&#.35&,-"#*5(5-/*,0#-#)(
R5 #!"5#(&#(.#)(5 ),5\)/&5-*%]
9. Most workers feel that systems complexity is also a contributing factor to the unbelievability of
zero harm.
10. Most workers believe that people are not willing to confront others and stop unsafe work.

So the evidence shows that the majority of the workforce do not believe in zero harm. This creates
a disconnect between proponents of zero harm (usually CEOs) and workers. Workers hear the
language and cultural discourse of zero harm and don’t believe it. CEOs, who hardly ever have to
undertake a high risk task, dictate what to believe. Rather than assisting ownership of risk at the
hard end of the workplace, the very mantra of CEOs is driving sentiment and belief in the opposite
direction. This is indeed dangerous and a point made very well by Douglas. The philosophy of ‘zero’
generates a sub-culture of disbelief, cynicism and scepticism. These in themselves erode organisational
trust and influence by those in authority who, by their cultural blindness, exacerbate a culture of
disconnectedness between management and workers.
A strange outcome and by-product of the zero harm discourse is that it also promotes a ‘zero risk’
discourse and this ‘chokes’ learning and imagination in the workplace. Zero harm discourse also
indirectly advocates a ‘no mistakes’ approach to reporting and learning most commonly enshrined in
the mantra ‘all accidents are preventable’.
However, further scepticism and cynicism abounds as workers discover that the standard espoused by
CEOs is only intended for workers, not themselves. When workers make mistakes there must be zero
tolerance, whereas when CEOs make mistakes there must be additional share options, forgiveness and
tolerance. Unless this divide is overcome, there will simply be more disconnectedness, less belief, more
scepticism, cynicism and negativity toward the ‘so-called’ vision from on high.
The problem with believability is how it psychologically disconnects people from supposed
motivational projections of the zero harm goal itself. Regardless of what proponents suggest, if
workers simply don’t believe zero harm then scepticism will result, and scepticism is dangerous for
any culture.

3.4 Zero harm is a nonsense goal.
13% 1. Strongly Agree

38% 2. Agree
19% 3. Undecided
19% 4. Disagree
13% 5. Strongly Disagree
Most of the dissenter’s arguments against zero harm are based on the incongruity of the absolute
of zero with human limitation and imperfection. Whilst some know there are cultural and
sociopsychological issues associated with the idea of zero harm, these are yet to be fully articulated.
The sociopsychological arguments articulated later this book seek to build on the work of the
dissenters against the concept of zero.
Of all states in Australia the state of Queensland is the most prominent in its advocacy of zero harm
ideology. The Queensland Government Zero Harm at Work Leadership Program is perhaps the best
example of state-sanctioned focus on zero harm ideology (http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/workplace/

zeroharm/index.htm). Launched in September 2009 the program is yet to make any difference in
the measurable outcomes of fatalities at work in the state. For the quarter January to March 2012
Queensland has the second highest notifiable fatalities in Australia, second behind NSW (http://
www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/SWA/AboutSafeWorkAustralia/WhatWeDo/Publications/
Pages/NotifiedFatalitiesMonthlyReport.aspx, accessed August 2012).
It is interesting that in 2012 the Queensland Government enlisted the support of the Rugby League
State of Origin coach Mal Meninga to be the ambassador for zero harm. Strange, the imagery
and iconic influence of both rugby league and State of Origin is that of harm. The idea of hurting
an opponent is fundamental to the game,which is why the concept of ‘bring back the biff ’ is so
popular on the Footy Show on TV. One of the fundamentals of competitive rugby league is to ‘beat’
the opposition.
So after three years in Queensland of zero harm rhetoric, there is no demonstrable evidence that
the ideology of zero harm changes anything. Surely what changes is increased scepticism further
generated by the fact that zero harm is not being achieved and is not believed. Indeed when people
count the number of times they don’t achieve a goal, they eventually question the validity of the goal.
The only other choice is to blame the worker.
Since When Did Intolerance Become a Virtue?

A virtue is a character trait or moral quality which is considered to be good. In the world of
relationships the idea of intolerance is rarely considered good. When people make a mistake in a
relationship they want their partner to be understanding and compassionate. Intolerance generates a
breakdown in relationships. The reason why tolerance is normally considered a virtue is because it is
a necessary characteristic required for movement, maturation and learning. The organisation which
understands the dimensions of what it is to be human understands that the language of ‘zero’ doesn’t
accommodate change, reflection, reconsideration, reframing or the power of repentance.
The trouble with zero is there is no place to go. There is no movement in such language. Zero is
absolute. An organisation with policies, goals and a discourse of zero tends to concentrate on the
categorisation of mistakes, not the values and attitudes which lead toward them.
The language of ‘zero’ is in contradiction to the notion of continuous improvement. The peculiar thing
about the advocates of intolerance is that they always framed it as something good for others. Do
managers want zero tolerance for their mistakes in management?
Intolerance and Indoctrination

The opposite of a virtue is a vice. A vice is usually associated with values and actions which ultimately
dehumanise others. When there is no tolerance, there is only conformity and compliance. There
is no imagination outside of the absolute. This is the position of the fundamentalist. There is only
black and white. In a system founded on the language of ‘zero’, humans are expected to be more
like machines, education is traded for indoctrination, and the human is viewed as the sum of inputs
and outputs. This is the position of behaviourism. Feed in the regulations, legislation, rules and
expectations and make people comply. The trouble is, humans are not machines. Indoctrination is
only good for automatons. The quest for zero is the quest to bring everything under control. It is a
fundamentalist exercise.

Woolies and Zero Logic
Woolworths have nearly 1000 petrol service stations (servos) in Australia. Your local Woolworths
petrol station operator now wears a cap with the caption ‘Destination Zero’. Some risk consultants
and CEOs love this language of ‘zero’ but fail to realise what a such a discourse fosters. When the
destination is larger and more important than the journey something unfortunate happens. People
re-write the way they measure incidents so that the destination gets closer. I asked one fellow
wearing the Destination Zero cap what it meant and he told me that last year there were only four
lost time injuries with Woolworths and they want to get down to none. Are there human beings
in their stores? I wonder how they are going to get rid of the remaining four LTIs? What kind of
re-write will be required to get tens of thousands of people to not injure themselves? What kind
of reporting systems and definitions will be required to push those injuries elsewhere? I wonder
how they will be able to control the humanness of everyone in their stores? I wonder how they
will count the injuries associated with the many robberies that happen at their servos? How
will they record and report those injuries? I wonder if the punch up I saw at a Woolies servo on
Saturday makes it into the Destination Zero records? How clever is zero accounting? I wonder
how many fights by impatient or excited people happen in their stores and how are they recorded?
It doesn’t take much to get a person excited. Just the anticipation of seeing someone you love is
enough. Even a flirt, an idea or a comment can get someone excited. The same physical symptoms
for anxiety show up with any form of excitement: a racing heart, dryness of the mouth, sweating,
shaking, difficulty swallowing and faintheadedness. Excitement is hard to control, hysteria nearly
impossible. Just look at the behaviour of people when they snap. Look at behaviour in the mosh pit at
a rock concert or people in religious excitement; they all show the potential for being out of control.
The moment a group of excited people get together with or without alcohol, uncertainty prevails. The
only way to limit hysteria is to constrain human relationships and eliminate all things that drive social
excitement. The only way to get to zero is to make sure no humans are involved.
In the world of risk, quality and security when the stakes are high it is understandable that
organisations are tempted to set goals for zero. No one wants people to get hurt; no one wants the
consequences of insecurity. However, the language of ‘zero’ only inspires perfect people. The rest of us
are motivated by patience, tolerance, understanding and the scope to learn and mature.
The real outcome of a focus on the absolute of zero in organisations is a subculture of cynicism,
scepticism and confusion. ‘Zero’ language drives a quest for the microscopic in risk. It must. The only
way to get zero incidents on a job site is to prevent paper cuts in the office, or redefine injury. The
preoccupation with what is microscopic tends to create a blindness to the macroscopics of risk.
Cynicism, scepticism and confusion ‘white-ant’ organisations. The structure may look okay on the
outside but it corrupts from within. The policy and language of ‘zero’ has a trajectory of absolute
control, risk elimination and anti-learning. Every unachieved goal is a psychological reminder
of failure.
Tolerance and Learning

The learning organisation and learning individual are able to transform and change. Systems and
organisations which focus on absolutes, the black and white of zero, the destination not the journey,
the ends not the process, lack the capacity to adapt. Risk is the enemy of zero, and learning is its
cousin. Unfortunately, in this age of complexity in systems there is a greater need for flexibility,
adaptation and tolerance than ever before. The language of ‘zero’ and language of learning are

antithetical to each other. We need more flexibility and creativity, not less. The organisation with
adaptive complex systems will survive the turbulence of change and uncertainty much better than
organisations stuck in myopia, risk aversion, black and white, absolutes and the microscopics
of fundamentalism.
The organisations and individuals who learn know that growth and development are beneficial, are
motivated by being understood, know that flexibility and understanding need to be present for the
moments when they fall. Mistakes in such organisations are viewed as opportunities for learning. This
is the best way to manage human performance.
Motivation and Learning

It is important that words and language actually have meaning. Our use of language is one of the
primary ways we define organisational culture. If organisations use the word ‘zero’ and try to redefine
it to mean something other than zero, this ultimately generates confusion and cultural cynicism. This
is then the spin of ‘zero’ language. ‘Zero’ rhetoric, ‘zero’ policy and ‘zero’ goals give an organisation
a focus on intolerance, absolutes and unlearning. This being the case, it makes much more sense
for organisations to set policies, mottos and goals which are achievable, and understand the way
humans learn.
In 2010 the Queensland Government launched their ‘Zero Harm at Work’ strategy with the claim
that it was a positive culture strategy. Where is the evidence that ‘zero’ language is positive? In Africa
many safety officials want to ban the language of ‘zero’! I wonder why?
Unfortunately, business leaders, regulators and risk professionals gravitate to the zero harm discourse
without thinking much about its psychological, ethical, cultural or logical spin offs. They often reply
to my criticisms with simplistic explanations or questions about intentions and goals. Their logic is
that if you don’t set a goal of zero harm, then your goal must be to harm people. We are familiar with
similar arguments like this in politics, we were told that if we weren’t in favour of the war against
Iraq, we were terrorists. Such nonsense logic is fundamentalist logic and has no place in sophisticated
sensemaking about risk. Truth is not established by the absence of an opposite.
The reality is that there is no zero risk. To be human and live in the world is to take risks. To innovate
and create, one has to take risks.
The concept of zero is a mathematical philosophy, an ideology more than a number. Multiply any
number by zero and the answer is zero. Zero eradicates, it doesn’t enliven.
As discussed earlier, MiProfile survey results show that 75% of workers don’t believe in zero harm.
Most respondents think of it as nonsense and say they only paid lip service to the language of ‘zero’ to
keep the CEO happy.
Knowledge in the field of psychosocial dynamics or social neuroscience is most likely distant to many
business leaders and professionals who have fixated on the language of ‘zero’. It has become a
blindsided ideology which is now charged with so much emotion that any appearance of denying it
is akin to religious heresy. The cult of zero is now more of a fundamentalist religious quest than a way
of making sense of risk. Indeed, the language of ‘zero’ inhibits sensemaking about risk. To experience
this religious fervour, just challenge the language of ‘zero’ at a corporate level. The responses of
outrage are emotional not evidential.

The new ‘high priests’ of zero discourse are people who claim to be leaders in risk. The zero harm
discourse promotes the safety warrior as a vigilant guardian of compliance and champions of
definition, spin, re-writing and reporting. Interestingly, the Queensland Government ‘Zero Harm
at Work Charter’ doesn’t mention the following words: learning, inspiration, vision, motivation,
perception or risk, but wants to ‘foster the zero harm policy as a workplace principle’.
The discourse of zero harm is a fallacy based on ignorance of heuristics and anchored in simplistic
naivety It is bound to improve very little and creates an insidious sub-culture.
The Essentials of Motivation

The Non-Motivation of Mr Walk
I went to Epping Boys High School in 1966, 67, 68 and 69. It was a large school well known
for its sporting achievements. In those days Epping was on the outskirts of Sydney. When I first
enrolled in the school I was in the highest ‘streamed’ class but for a range of sociopsychological
reasons I began to decline in the order. So I started in 7A and by Year 9 was in 9C and looking to
go into 10D or 10E.
I remember being counselled in Year 9 by the school careers advisor, Mr Walk (pronounced
Mr Wark). Mr Walk was a negative person, known for his ability to mete out the cane. At the
time I had no idea why I was going to Mr Walk’s office but I left his office feeling dejected and
de-motivated to give school any sort of effort. I enjoyed the school band immensely, played in
the school rugby league team at full-back and was keen on athletics. In all these endeavours the
school was amongst the best in NSW. I was in the premiership rugby league team, represented
the school in hurdles and was in the band that won the NSW Eisteddfod. However, Mr Walk
single handedly knocked the wind out of my sails. In that one meeting he told me I would never
achieve anything, should not set my mind to anything challenging and should seek out a future in
a manual job. He made it clear that I was certainly not capable of university studies or any study
at all.
Rather than try at school I decided I was incapable of anything so lost interest in anything
academic. Fortunately, the next year my father took a position as the Minister at Grote St in
Adelaide and my whole life changed. Meeting new people with confidence and positivity and
being able to attend a school in South Australia that allowed me to drop Maths and Science
enabled rapid achievement and learning. Once I was motivated I knew I could achieve.
So what is motivation? How can people be motivated to turn away from myths, make better sense
of risk and develop ownership in how they manage risk? I am going to suggest ten essentials to
motivating self and others.
1. The first essential in motivating others is understanding the climate, culture and environment.
Without understanding the essentials of culture, of acceptance, belonging, respect and integrity,
there is little chance that anyone will be motivated.
2. The second essential is an emphasis on learning. Organisations which don’t emphasise learning are
usually not ‘learning organisations’. When you have a moment, look through your organisation’s
policy and procedures documentation and do a search for the use of the word ‘learn’. The language

of policy documentation always reveals core driving values in an organisation. If learning is not
emphasised in policy then it’s not likely to occur in practice.
3. The third essential in motivation is being long-sighted, rather than short-sighted. Actions which
gain compliance in the short term but resentment over the long term usually result from self-
focused gain, not sustainable well-being.
4. The fourth essential is knowing that motivation can be both extrinsic and intrinsic. Intrinsic
(internal) motivation or self motivation is more powerful than extrinsic motivation (external)
which depends on others and is tied to an external pay-off. If the pay-off stops, the motivation
generally decreases.
5. The fifth essential to motivation is ‘readiness’ (state of desire). Helping people to mature and
catching them at a state of readiness is the key to development, change and learning.
6. The sixth essential to motivation is organisational meaning and purpose. People are rarely
motivated by chaos and meaninglessness. People who feel secure and positive are easily motivated.
The key here is setting desirable and achievable goals, this is the foundation of leadership.
7. The seventh essential to motivation is diminished anxiety and fear. People under distress (not
stress) tend to operate out of their ‘shadow’, their least preferred capacity and skill. Looking over
one’s shoulder for the policeman may coerce compliance but the anxiety associated with the
strategy drives mistakes through anxiety rather than generating effective concentration.
8. The eighth essential to motivation is to meet the needs and wants of the other. Maslow (1943)
discovered that fulfilling this fundamental hierarchy of need is required before people can be
motivated. Whatever the needs and wants of the other may be, they must be achievable. No one is
motivated by unachievable goals.
9. The ninth essential to motivation is positive reinforcement. There is nothing more motivational
than recognition, acknowledgement, encouragement, respect and trust.
10. The tenth essential to motivate others is an understanding of human thinking, judgement and
decision making, and people skills to act on that understanding.
If these essentials are in place then an organisation has a good chance to break away from the delusion
of risk myths and will begin to make sense of risk.

Workshop Questions
1. The idea of dissenting from popular or orthodox trends is nothing new. Can you trace the history
of a concept that was once popular and then the dissenting view became orthodox?
2. Can you find evidence that shows how the zero idea is a utopian and religious-like paradise?
3. Why are CEOs content to be out of sync with the workforce on the idea of zero?
4. If culture is about belief, how is the quest for zero a ‘faith’?
5. Try and find some examples of a zero harm advocate explaining how zero motivates.
Transition
How does the attribution of the absolute of zero make sense when applied to the fallible, finiteness
of being human? The argument of the first book was that the idea of risk aversion doesn’t make sense
in the light of the need for humans to learn. There is no learning or real living without risk. The
denial of risk is the denial of life. In the same way the language of ‘zero’ as an absolute is also a denial
of life and learning. The trajectory of zero is one that seeks to eliminate all risk. It is a trajectory of
total control.
We Live with Risk and so Learn to ‘Risk Safely’

In a minute I will need to jump into my car and post a book. My car is in the driveway where
I parked it last night and it’s a cold Canberra winter. I will need to chip the ice off the window,
warm up the car, drive to the shopping centre and go to the post office. After that I will return,
pack my bag, catch a taxi to the airport and fly to Melbourne. I wonder how many risks I will
navigate and have no control over in the course of my day? Similarly, I wonder what I will learn
today as I engage in these activities. I will see the owner of the post office who I have come to
know better since the publication of my previous book. I wonder if his leg is healing after his
operation? I wonder if his assistant is back after her difficult childbirth. They are such pleasant
and helpful people, I wouldn’t think of going to another shop. They have my loyalty because of
their relational-focused service. They know me by name and sometimes do things for me without
asking. When I am in a rush they will simply take the books, be trusted to post them appropriately
and I pay them later. Then my regular taxi driver will come and take me to the airport. I
have known Jo since 1995 when I used to drive taxis for him, a great way to earn cash whilst
completing the PhD. Jo is from Spain and his whole family drive taxis, they look after me and are
so reliable and friendly. So back on the road with someone else in control.
How on earth could all of the activity of this day be reduced to zero risk? How can so many variables
be controlled? How can zero make sense? and if zero doesn’t make sense, must it then be non-sense?

CHAPTER 5
Making Sense of Zero
I am in a sense something intermediate between God and nought - Rene

Descartes (Discourse on method)
5
Nothingness is being and being nothingness --- Our limited mind can not grasp
or fathom this, for it joins infinity - Azrael of Gerona
Binary Opposites
The absolutist language and advocacy of zero harm is most often premised on an argument from
opposites. This argument proposes that zero harm can be the only goal in safety and risk because to
deny it would be akin to accepting injuries as allowable, even desirable. As Quote 1 in Chapter 2
stated: ‘Any target other than zero means you have a company policy to achieve SOME harm’. Such
an argument is only logical when premised on the acceptance of binary opposition in language and
goal setting.
Denying or remaining silent on an issue does not mean the endorsement of its opposite. Remaining
silent on zero harm doesn’t mean the only other choice is fatalism. Why should we think in such
binary opposite terms in safety and risk when we don’t do so in other walks of life? Why are mining
and construction organisations so constrained by thinking in binary opposition?
Before I continue the discussion we need to explore more about binary opposition and what it means.
Binary opposition is a system by which (in language and thought) two theoretical opposites are
strictly defined and set off against one another. Binary opposition understands the world in terms of
two mutually exclusive terms, such as on and off, up and down, left and right. This is a fundamentalist
way of thinking. It gains its identity from its opposite.
Binary opposition states that if you deny an assertion, you must therefore affirm its opposite. Binary
thinking proposes that if
R5 5)(5)-(].5&#05#(5!)65."(53)/5'/-.5&#05#(5."50#&85
R5 3)/5)(].5-/**),.5\."51,5)(5.,,),]653)/5,55.,,),#-.85
R5 3)/5)(].5-/**),.5!35',,#!653)/5'/-.55")')*")#85
Chapter 5: Making Sense of Zero 51

R5 3)/5)(].5-/**),.5."5,)(5.253)/5'/-.55(5(0#,)('(.&50(&85
R5 3)/5)(].5-/**),.5."5\,#!".5.)5&# ]53)/5'/-.50).5#( (.##85
R5 3)/5)(].50).5 ),54,)5",'53)/5'/-.55(50).5 ),5",'85
We see so much of this simplistic black and white crusading language in the moral superiority of
populist media and the disposition that wills for a fight.
Some of the great debates, wars and conflicts throughout history have been premised on the absurdity
of binary opposites. One example is the debate over creationism and evolution. If there is ever some
part of life over which we are sure we have some control it is our sense of belief or disbelief in god.
There seems to be no other alternative because the proponents of either extreme refuse to recognise
any in-between. This is because fundamentalist-like arguments are deeply infused with the self, ego
and identity. Deborah Tannen explains the problems with oppositionalism in her wonderful book The
Argument Culture, Moving from Debate to Dialogue. The famous Scopes Trial of 1925 also provides an
illustration of how oppositionalism and binary opposition thinks.
The Scopes Trial

The Scopes Trial, also known as the Monkey Trial, was a legal case in 1925 in which high school
science teacher, John Scopes, was accused of violating Tennessee’s Butler Act, which made it
unlawful to teach evolution in any state-funded school. The Scopes Trial is understood as a
watershed in breaking the hold of biblical fundamentalism in American public schools. In many
ways the trial highlights the way binary opposition divides people. The binary mind wants a
‘forced choice’ and connects this choice to a range of loyalties and socio-political allegiances.
Similar debates are had over free will vs determinism, convinced there is no other way. Tannen
notes: ‘two sides gets in the way of solving problems’. The creationism vs evolution debate
continues to this day in Australia and can be observed by surfing the Creation Ministries
International website (http://creation.com/).
Before I escaped from fundamentalism it was made clear that one either believed the Bible
literally or was an evolutionist. To accept any part of evolution was a rejection not only of the
literal Word of God but also a rejection of God and Christianity. Once in the creationism culture
one soon discovers the premium placed on rational argument. Creationists have many PhDs and
scientific experts who support the creationist position; creationism is not an irrational position.
When one accepts the binary assumptions of the creationist community and believes, in faith, the
claims of the literal Bible then what follows is fundamentalist logic and rational argument. If one
understands the fundamentalist then one knows that their position is not irrational.
There are no solutions in adversarialism and oppositionalism. What happens when the evolutionists
and creationists get together is not a lot of learning or listening. There is little mediation of learning
in the debate between the adversarialism of opposites. Fundamentalism, whether religious, political
or managerial, demonises the opposite. There is no need to listen because the evil of the other side
has nothing of value to say.
The binary opposition argument often articulates its strategy with such confidence when it proposes
that the only other way of thinking to zero harm is to accept three deaths or two injuries, or a
little injury as the only other alternative. Several video presentations on YouTube are excellent
examples of such thinking (Is Zero Harm Possible? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_

embedded&v=UYwPMIpXMmM#!; Zero Harm Message. http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=Q9OA23lD9_0, accessed 25 July 2012). What is strange is that this argument is only applied
in the field of safety. The same binary logic is not applied to any other area of organisational life such
as leadership and management. What then occurs in zero harm organisations is a commitment to
strange language gymnastics and tortured logic. This logic says that in safety we think in absolutes
and binary opposites yet in leadership we think in terms of maturation, development, journeying
and empathy.
Anyone who chooses to be silent on zero harm doesn’t endorse or approve of injury. I can desire that
no one be injured but don’t need the language of absolutes to articulate my view. Indeed, I think my
approach as proposed in this book, of omitting such language from my cultural discourse, is both more
honest with language and much more motivational. What is most interesting in observing experts
in medicine, mental health, addictions, psychological injury, faith-based organisations or any of the
human helping professions, there is no discussion of ‘zero’ but rather harm minimisation. Does this
mean they all want to hurt people?
Figure 10. Rationalist, irrational and arational thinking positions.
Zero Harm Anti-Zero Harm

Rationalist Argument Irrational Argument
No-Zero Harm
aRationalist Argument
The problem with the binary opposition position is that it cannot imagine a third or indeed any
alternative ways. Binary opposition is a rationalist argument that supposes any opposition is an
irrational one. In fact, there are other positions to hold that are non-rational but not irrational. Non-
rational or arational argument particularly addresses the psychological and cultural dimension of
human character. Arational approaches to thinking are where much of our unconscious functioning
is situated and where intuition, gut knowledge and implicit knowledge are exercised (Hassim, 2005).
These forms of knowledge are how most human judgement and decision making are made. Therefore
we need a form of goal setting and culture in managing risk that accommodates this dimension.
Arational thinking precedes and functions underneath rationalist and irrational thinking on this
subject (as is illustrated in Figure 9).

If binary opposition logic is to be applied consistently by its advocates, then, if one believes there can
be zero harm, one must also believe that ‘all accidents are preventable’. If this is so then one must
believe that all risk can be controlled. If this is the case, then one must not believe in uncertainty, and
must deny the very meaning of the word ‘risk’. This would make people who assert such conclusions
‘risk fundamentalists’. Consistency in binary opposition cannot be selective.
The expression and belief, ‘all accidents are preventable’, has also become part of the zero harm
ideology. This expression is now part of the absolutist discourse of zero harm organisations, redefining
the meaning of the word ‘risk’. Recently in a First Aid competition in Queensland the team called
‘Risk Averse’ were proudly announced as the winners (http://www.safetyculture.com.au/news/index.
php/07/team-risk-adverse-wins-queensland-rail-first-aid-challenge-regional-final/, accessed 29 July
2012). Risk aversion is anathema to learning, adventure, inspiration, creativity, leadership and living.
How could one think that such a concept was good?
I am quite happy not to accept the assertion that all ‘accidents are preventable’, and this does not
make me fatalistic. I am quite happy not to talk about zero harm, but this does not mean I desire
injury. There are more than just two ways address the issue of harm at work. There is more to thinking
than just being black or white. Tannen argues that binary opposition sets up an ethic of aggression.
Rather than enabling discourse, essential for learning, listening and thinking, its absolute alienates
and triggers oppositionalism.
Of course, there are many practical and far more inspirational alternatives to the nonsense statement,
‘all accidents are preventable’. Such a statement is nonsense because it denies the realities of risk,
human limitation, learning by mistakes and the fundamentals of learning. The whole scientific notion
of ‘trial and error’ is basic to how humans learn through experience. Hallinan (2009) chronicles the
amazing inventions and advances in human history that have been developed by mistake. There can
be no learning without risk, there can be no creativity or innovation without uncertainty.
Goal Strategy
At this point it is important to discuss goal setting and goal pursuit and their relevance for the debate
about zero harm.
At the outset of this discussion, we must clearly make the distinction between the idea of a goal and
the language of goal setting. Much of my concern about the psychology of goal setting is not so
much the intent of the goal but more about what the language involved in goal setting ‘primes’ in the
mind of the receiver.
Zero harm, if set as a goal, is an avoidance goal: one knows goal success by the absence of something
rather than the presence of something. Avoidance goals are not only not positive but also not
inspirational (Moskowitz, and Grant, 2009). Avoidance goals tend to be punitive in nature, whereas
performance goals are much more positive and successful. In the framework of understanding
motivation and learning, leaders should be talking much more in cultural discourse about ‘keeping
people safe’ than ‘preventing harm’. Later discussion shows how such discourse ‘primes’ others. Why
does the safety community think that avoidance goals are so inspirational?
Again, we need not think or talk in binary opposites. I do not ‘plan’ for accidents just because I deny
the statement that ‘all accidents are preventable’. Our goal formation and thinking should be far more
sophisticated than this binary nonsense. The denial of the zero goal is not an assertion that I welcome

injuries. I do not accept accidents but choose not to talk in terms of the absolutes of zero. Those who
commit to zero in binary opposition thinking have to then carry on with the most absurd semantic
gymnastics and redefinition to try and make reality fit their discourse. We need to be far more
intelligent in the way we influence culture than what is offered by the nonsense of binary opposition.
A story from Galilee might be helpful.
The Entrapment of Binary Logic

When I started the Galilee School for high-risk young people in 1997, I accepted many young
people who had very sad and dysfunctional lives. As well as 6 heroin addicts, 10 homeless young
people, 4 violent sexual predators, and 5 habitual criminals, I accepted the enrolment of two 14
year old boys who had sexually assaulted a dog and killed it. The other kids persecuted these two
boys by not addressing them by name but rather by calling them ‘dog fuckers’. I can’t apologise for
their offensive language as this is critical to the story and the importance of cultural discourse.
Now, while the phrase used by the young people was true, it was not helpful for the culture and
goals of the school. As language is one of the main carriers of culture, I sought to influence such
discourse. So I insisted that such language was not acceptable in Galilee; we did not need to
regress to the past or label others just so we could make ourselves look good. My insistence took
the form of modelling and reframing. I worked hard to eliminate such language in the school
by reframing everything in positive performance goals. Then the kids tried to tag me with the
accusation that I therefore accepted the behaviour committed by the two boys. So here I was
teaching young people in a school not to think in binary opposition, as a critical pathway to
establishing a healthy school culture. As long as the school thought in fundamentalist black and
white, no one would be helped or break free from many years of victimisation and abuse.
The success of the Galilee School speaks for what was achieved by not allowing binary opposition
language to dominate the culture.
Some experts talk about the importance of a Just Culture and yes, such a focus on reporting is
positive. However, we should also be thinking much more about how zero harm binary opposition
language in risk drives a ‘deception culture’. An organisational culture that is characterised by
scepticism, cynicism, under reporting, lack of debate and fear of openness, is insidious and destructive.
If zero harm ideology drives sub-cultural values such as fear, indoctrination, closed-mindedness and
censorship then it is indeed dangerous. Indeed, it is even more so, because zero harm ideology often
masks itself as being the ‘angel of light’ in the midst of the ‘evil of harm’.
Goal States
Rather than measure what we value, we tend to value what we can measure
It is naïve to believe that goal setting is both simple and objective. How many times have you set a
goal, e.g. to give up something, to stick to a diet or to make less mistakes, only to fall back into old
habits? The failure of New Year’s resolutions is testament to the psychological difficulty in setting
and keeping to goals. Goals do not sit in isolation; all goals are competing goals. There needs to
be some balance. If we set goals to eliminate risk, then we also compete with goals that seek to
produce learning.

We set goals all the time consciously and unconsciously. A goal is a desired end state that is
constrained by factors of time, feasibility, other competing goals, motivation, desirability, ‘life space’,
framing and disposition.
Goal setting is complex and multi-dimensional. There are three main goal-states. These are:
1. High-order goals, e.g. ‘I wish to be a better person’

2. Mid-order goals, e.g. ‘I want to give up sugar’
3. Low-order goals, e.g. ‘I want to achieve 85% in my mathematics test’.
These three levels of goal-states all command various levels of measurement. Goals also compete
against each other. Low-order goals tend to be easily measurable and high-order goals less
measurable. Mid-order goals tend to be semi-measureable. Each of these goal-states operate at
conscious and unconscious levels. Each goal-state also tends to have either a promotion or prevention
focus. These goal-states, levels and foci are represented in Figure 11 Human Goal States.
Dumping TVs and Counterintuitive Motivations

The invention and manufacture of low cost flat screen TVs has been a boon for white goods stores.
The enjoyment of sitting back and watching sport or a movie on a 105cm TV is a new experience,
but what to do with the old TV? In Canberra, the problem first manifested with many TVs
showing up at the Canberra Rubbish Dump mixed in with landfill. As the tide of TVs being
dumped turned into an avalanche the government realised they had a huge problem on their
hands. The cost of recycling TVs for parts was expensive, and so the dumping of a TV was singled
out for a surcharge. To dump a TV would cost $25. If a household had three TVs the dumping
costs could be $75. Soon TVs began showing up on the roadsides, only the conscientious greenies
seeming inspired to pay the levy. Where was the motivation to do the right thing? Extra costs
mounted as government workers were required to pick up dumped TVs from curbs and parks. It
became a nightmare. The same problem still exists with charity clothing bins. Sometimes it costs
charities more than it’s worth to put out their bins, so they stop doing so.
Setting goals in isolation from what we know about how humans behave and think is a nonsense.
In the end it became much cheaper for the government to subsidise the dumping of TVs, and now
all old TVs are recycled free of charge.
A similar problem existed in the 1980s when the government used to charge for the use of public
BBQs in National and local parks. The management of the system of paying for maintenance and
repairing vandalism was more expensive than if gas BBQs were to be provided for free. It didn’t
take long before the pay system was ceased. It seems that it’s much more economical to provide
some things for free.
Goal setting is neither simple nor straightforward. There always seems to be secondary and
competing goals to be considered before embarking on some ‘you beaut’ idea. Unless those setting

the goals understand the fundamentals of the psychology of risk and of goal setting, it is likely they
will end up going back to the expensive learning ‘drawing board’. Binary goal setting that does not
consider possibilities and the nature of humans is bound to fail.
Figure 11. Human Goal States
Conscious Unconscious
Conscious Un-conscious
Non-measurable High-Order High-Order
Goals Goals
Semi-measurable Mid-Order Mid-Order
Goals Goals
Measurable Low-Order Low-Order
Goals Goals
Prevention Prevention
Promotion Promotion
Focus Focus
Unconscious and conscious goals are neither good nor bad. However, we must acknowledge that there
are times when we surprise ourselves with our own behaviour when non-conscious goals are revealed.
It was Karl E. Weick (1995) who said, ‘How can I know what I believe, until I see what I do’. Weick,
like many scholars in social psychology believe that most of human behaviour is generated in the un-
conscious, not the conscious mind.
Research by Libet, Wagner, Bargh, Frith and Burton and many experts in neuropsychology show
that action and electrical impulses in the brain are slower than bodily action. In other words, most of
what we do is sub-consciously and unconsciously generated and we simply attribute the feeling that
our mind generated the action, when in fact it could not (based upon the measurement of electrical
impulses from the body part to brain). It seems to us that we consciously cause what we do, when
the evidence demonstrates this to be far from the case (Bargh, 2007). People often feel like they are
causing an act but the evidence shows that the act had already occurred before we had the ‘will’ to
make it happen.

Our unconscious is not only powerful but also difficult to control. If I were to tell you not to think
about or visualise black snakes (Figure 12) for the next few hours something peculiar would happen.
Figure 12. Black Snake
You have been asked to not think about black snakes (prevention focus) yet before you have finished
reading this article, you will think about black snakes again. Indeed, the more we try to suppress
thoughts about black snakes, the more that vision returns. It is counter-intuitive but sometimes
a preoccupation with suppressing something tends to activate it. This is how the subversion
of prevention and avoidance goals works. This is often the experience of people trying to give
up addictions.
So when it comes to goal states it is naïve to think everything is simple and easy. Goal setting, pursuit
and activation are both complex and highly subjective. This is why setting a goal like zero harm in a
binary opposite bubble is simplistic, as if it doesn’t compete with other goals such as learning goals
and maturation goals.
The language and discourse of zero harm is neither singular nor non-competing. The language of zero
harm as a low-order measurable prevention-focused goal also competes with numerous high-order
goals such as the pursuit of learning, ethical practice, development and well-being and, the necessity
to take risks. All goals interact between goal-states and affect each other.
The focus on a non-promotion goal such as zero harm also triggers sub-conscious negativity and
resultant scepticism, as evidenced in the final discussion of this paper on believability. If the by-
product of the language and cultural discourse of zero harm is scepticism, cynicism and negativity,
then the by-product is culturally dangerous. Scepticism acts subversively in sub-cultures and
erodes the supposed gains of the orthodox culture proposed by CEOs and those who set goal-
state trajectory.

On many occasions people espouse a goal only to find out later that hidden forces have subverted the
goal-setting process. We may set a goal to lose 5kgs of weight in 2 months, and this triggers other
dynamics of sacrifice, peer dislocation and self-regulation. When goal-state realities influence the diet
discipline process, somehow things fall apart. Unconsciously, the very thing we have tried to achieve
has become subverted by the by-products of our goal setting. This is represented in Figure 13 The
Subversion of Goals.
This disruption to our espoused goal trajectory often leads to disappointment and depression when
our goal is not realised. Nothing is more deflating than the realisation that a goal has been unrealistic.
It is then that most people reframe their goal and develop a new view of what they thought they
had set out to achieve. If an organisation does not achieve its zero harm goal it has several choices: it
sometimes reframes its definition so that the injury and harm doesn’t fit reality, or it denies the reality
by cognitive dissonance so that the goal can be maintained despite the evidence that it doesn’t work.
When people cannot face up to the fact that their goal has failed, they create new delusional excuses
and deny that the goal has failed (Festinger, et.al., 1956). Rather than admit that the goal was the
problem, they project ‘spin’ about time factors and reasons why the goal was good but just failed this
time, rather than admit the goal is a failed goal. This is most common in how fundamentalist cults
deny the reality of unachieved goals.
Figure 13. The Subversion of Goals and Goal By-Products
The purpose of the diagram in Figure 13 is to show that goals are neither singular nor non-
competing. It is important in goal-setting to understand the dynamics of competing, subversive and
hidden by-product goals.
Where does this leave us with the concept for zero harm? The fact is, prevention and avoidance goals
like zero harm are more open to goal subversion than promotion goals (Moskowitz, and Grant, 2009).

The goal of zero harm actually sets up its own subversion and failure. Every time you don’t achieve
your goal you demotivate employees to the motivational sense of the goal itself.
Unless the safety community is prepared to become more sophisticated and less simplistic about goal
setting we will continue to fuel scepticism via prevention goals like zero harm, rather than safety
promotion in the workplace.
It is strange to observe safety non-leaders as the main group who set an unattainable goal of
perfection as a target goal for the organisation and then try to explain why it is motivational through
the non-endorsement of its opposite?
Good Goal Setting

If you put a search in Google for ‘good goal setting’ you will get approximately 22 million results.
Look through the first 100 results and see what many scholars, experts, researchers and blogs suggest
as an effective and successful way of setting goals.
Every written piece on goal setting demonstrates the need to set achievable and measurable goals.
Every paper and presentation stresses the importance of setting goals as a key to motivation,
achievement and confidence. Nearly every article mentions the importance of setting SMART Goals.
SMART goals are:
S - Specific (or Significant); M - Measurable (or Meaningful); A - Attainable (or Action-Oriented);

R - Relevant (or Rewarding); T - Time-bound (or Trackable).
The big emphasis in effective goal setting is setting realistic goals to foster motivation. It’s only when
you achieve a goal that you are motivated to develop, improve and continue with the effort. Nearly
every expert in goal setting discusses the relevance of setting goals which are achievable. Moreover,
unless we consider the psychology of goals in our goal setting, our goals will remain simplistic and
ignorant to by-products of competing goals and the subversion of goals (Moskowitz and Grant,
2009). Unachievable goals drive frustration, cynicism and negativity, which in themselves diminish
effort, energy, resilience and persistence. Absolutes are not achievable for humans, only for machines
and gods, and even machines decay and wear out in time. Uncertainty is the fundamental risk
challenge for humans. The quest for certainty is a fundamentalist quest for control.
So with all we know about motivation, learning and humans, why do so many in the risk industry
contradict the fundamentals of goal setting? It’s as if someone has paid thousands of researchers and
experts to devise a scheme for success in undertaking a task (goal setting), then deliberately ignores it.
One of the major higher order goals for humans is the goal to create, imagine, innovate and learn.
Robinson (2009) and Csikszentmihalyi (1990) both argue that unachievable goals and unreal goals
take people out of the ‘zone’ of creativity, imagination and learning.
One of the strange contradictions of the zero harm movement is the dissonance between goal setting
and ‘lag’ indicators. This is what happens. zero harm advocates set the goal of zero as their aspiration
and then document and develop reporting systems to tell them every time they don’t achieve it. How
demotivational is that? What does such dissonance prime in the workforce?
Proponents of zero harm are yet to demonstrate how an unachievable goal inspires or motivates
people to ownership for their own safety and management of risk. Indeed, the OSHA Field
Directive to OSHA Regional Managers regarding Employee Safety Incentive and Disincentive

Programs specifically warns against awarding rewards for Zero Harm (http://www.osha.gov/as/opa/
whistleblowermemo.html, accessed 30 August).
Workshop Questions
1. Find examples of binary opposition arguments. What is the nature of entrapment in their
questioning?
2. How do religious organisations use binary opposition arguments in their pressure to evangelise
and ‘convert’ others?
3. What are your current goals for career, family, relationships, finances and hobbies? How are they
measurable? Does it matter to you if you have no clearly articulated goals for some activities?
4. What are some of the by-products of your goals?
5. List the things in life that you find mysterious, things that for you have no explanation, yet you
believe in them. They need not be religious.
Transition
Humans do many things for enjoyment, and this ‘feeling’ is highly subjective and difficult to measure.
Indeed, sometimes the idea of measurement ruins the enjoyment and aesthetic value of the activity
itself. When I go to the art gallery or to a rock concert I don’t want to ruin my enjoyment and the
mystery of the activity by trying to quantify my enjoyment. When I see people dance I am amazed
at this because it is a form of communication, expression and energy that I know so little about.
Dancing was an activity that was rejected by my fundamentalist upbringing, and I have next to no
consciousness of it nor understanding of it. I have no tools to even measure it or appreciate it. This
doesn’t mean I cannot ‘feel’ the energy and power of its performance. However, in many ways I don’t
have words to describe my feeling and pleasure from aesthetic activities. I certainly felt this way
when each of my children were born; there were no words to express what I had just witnessed. The
mystery of life and living are sometimes spoilt by the mechanistic quest to eliminate the mysterious.
The engagement of the unconscious and subconscious in risk is also something that is mysterious. It is
worth repeating Karl Weick’s comment: ‘I don’t know what I believe until I see what I do’.
Sometimes the quest for certainty and control can rob us of the mysterious joys of life. Of course I
know of the biology of reproduction, chromosomes, ovulation, sperm, fertilisation and genes, but the
coming together of all these things and how each cell ‘thinks’ is so mysterious. How can two cells
reproduce in such a way and with all the information to trigger the growth of a cell in the brain or a
cell in the eye? When our best computers can’t even mimic the power of the human mind and brain
or its energy use in computation, how can we think that the brain is just a calculator? There are many
things that are just beyond our comprehension and control. That is the lot of the fallible finite human.
The quest to control the human enterprise and eliminate all risk is a fundamentalist activity. The quest
for certainty and absolute control is a trajectory of rigidity, closed thinking, non-learning and cultic-
like ideology.
The next chapter takes an important diversion into the nature of fundamentalism and its
characteristics. The trajectory of zero, of risk aversion and religious-like commitment to zero is best
understood as a fundamentalist quest.

CHAPTER 6
The Nature of Fundamentalism
It’s often safer to be in chains than be free - Franz Kafka

6
Almost always it is the fear of being ourselves that brings us to the mirror -
Antonio Porchia
The Branch Davidian

It was a quiet Sunday morning in Mount Carmel at the Branch Davidian Ranch on 28 February
1993. People went about their routines: breakfast, showers, prayers and devotional meetings. Like
most days at the ranch things were dictated by the leader, David Koresh. The Branch Davidians
were a schism from a sect called the Davidians. The sect grew out of a prophecy by Florence
Houteff in 1959 about the imminent return of Christ. Following the failure of the prophecy the
sect grew stronger under the influence of cognitive dissonance and she groomed Vernon Howell,
later known as David Koresh, as her chosen successor. In 1984 a meeting led to a division of the
group with Howell leading one faction, calling themselves the Davidian Branch Davidians, and
George Roden leading the competing faction. After this split, George Roden ran Howell and his
followers off Mt Carmel. Howell and his group relocated to Palestine, Texas.
On the morning of 28 February a commotion in the camp was raised by a phone call from David’s
brother-in-law, a postal carrier who had just been asked directions to the ranch by a media person.
Koresh immediately told Rodriguez, an agent of the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms (ATF) who thought he was under cover, that he knew about the approaching raid.
Rodriguez immediately left the compound. Koresh then asked the male members to get arms and
take up defensive positions about the compound whilst the females were to wait in their rooms.
Koresh was going to wait and see what the intentions were of the ATF before he went any further.
Theoretically, the ATF were out to execute a search warrant but had the compound under
surveillance for many months prior to the raid. The affidavit of the ATF warrants a search under
suspicion of dozens of illegal firearms and the operation of a methamphetamine lab. Davidian,
Paul Fatta was a federal firearms licensed dealer (FFL) and the Davidians operated a retail gun
business called the Mag Bag.
Chapter 6: The Nature of Fundamentalism 63

The ATF agents arrived disguised in cattle trucks, and what followed was an initial gunfight
leaving four agents and six Davidians dead. A ceasefire was reached mid-morning. As a result
of the fatalities the FBI took control of the situation. Then ensued a siege that lasted for 51
days. Soon, rumours spread that children were being abused by Koresh and that a Jonestown
mass suicide was planned. An assault was finally made on 19 April 1993, involving tanks, gas,
demolition machinery, armoured vehicles and heavy weapons. The assault left 76 dead
This was not the first gunfight in the history of the sect. In 1987 George Roden, the leader of
the other Davidian faction, dug up the casket of one Anna Hughes from the Davidian cemetery
and had challenged Howell to a resurrection contest to prove who was the rightful heir to the
leadership. Instead, Howell informed the authorities and attempted to access the chapel at Mt
Carmel only to find Roden armed with an Uzi. Later Roden was admitted to a mental hospital
after killing a follower with an axe for challenging his claims to be the messiah.
During the siege a number of experts in apocalypticism and fundamentalism in religious groups
attempted to persuade the FBI that the siege tactics being used by government agents would only
create cognitive dissonance within the Davidians and excite their belief that they were a part of
Biblical ‘end-of-times’ scenario with cosmic significance.
Figure 14. The Burning Compound of the Branch Davidian Ranch
The Branch Davidian story is an extreme example of the fruits of fundamentalism. The trajectory of
fundamentalism has the potential for all dimensions of extremism including psychopathology justified
by demonisation of the opposite.
Many examples of various levels of fundamentalism abound within orthodox and unorthodox
religious groups in Australia. The case of Agape Ministries in Adelaide in 2010 is an example closer
to home.
On 21 May 2010, ninety heavily-armed police swooped on twelve properties owned by the Agape
Ministries sect in Adelaide. The leader of the sect Rocco Leo - known to his congregation as ‘Brother

Rock’, went into hiding. Former members said that Leo was behind a fraud involving millions of
dollars donated by sect members. Fifteen illegal firearms and extendable batons were found in the
raids as well as tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition. A core group of about 60 believed the cult
leaders would use their money to buy a Pacific Ocean island to build a Christian colony. The Agape
Ministries believed the world would end in 2012, and has attracted several hundred people to its
‘House of God’ at Oakden, in Adelaide’s northeast. Yet another quest for perfection and Utopia.
Figure 15. Doomsday Cult in South Australia

Sociopsychological Characteristics of Fundamentalism
It is important to note that the telling of these stories is in no way intended to link the pathological
aspects of utopianism to the ideology of zero harm but rather illustrates the propensity for extremism
in all absolutist fundamentalist ideologies. The point of these stories is to illustrate the mentalitie
of fundamentalism. The idea of mentalities comes from the French Annales School of History and
refers to the history of attitudes, mindsets and dispositions. It denotes the sociopsychological and
cultural nature of history, particularly the distribution of power through cultural mechanisms and
relationships.
The common characteristics of these fundamentalist stories are:
R5 ().,#(.#)(
R5 ,5) 5)/.
R5 -)&/.5)( ),'#-'
R5 &# 5#(5-)&/.-
R5 &#!#)/-7&#%5)''#.'(.
R5 #(,35)**)-#.#)(5."#(%#(!
R5 ')(#-#(!5."5('3
R5 -3")7*.")&)!3
R5 -)&/.5,#!".)/-(--
R5 Ļ5,.#(!5) 55(15&(!/!5(5#-)/,-
R5 )'#((5) 5/."),#.,#(5*,-)(&#.#-
R5 /-.#ŀ52&/-#)(
R5 )!(#.#05#--)((5(6
R5 ,)/*.#)(51#."5.,(-((
The concept of fundamentalism is not selected lightly in application to the ideology of zero harm.
A more in-depth discussion of fundamentalism follows. However, first let me demonstrate my
experience of fundamentalism first hand.
Venturing for Victory

In 1973 I was selected to go on a basketball tour of the Philippines and Hong Kong. This was no
ordinary tour; this was a mechanism for evangelical outreach. The tour was part of an evangelical
enterprise called Venture for Victory (VV). VV had been in operation for many years, supported
by a range of Christian evangelical denominations with the same mission as a Billy Graham
crusade. The primary role of VV is not to play basketball but to convert people to Christianity.
Basketball is the drawcard but the purpose was evangelisation and conversion to Jesus Christ.
It was my first time overseas and an awakening to the world. You will see in the photos in figure
15 and 16 a much younger (and skinnier) Rob. Figure 16 shows me in the centre of the photo
playing the guitar at half time and some sense of the crowd that attended. As basketball is
followed religiously in the Philippines this was the perfect mechanism to gather a crowd. In some

instances whole villages and communities came to see us play. Crowds of up to 15,000 people
gathered about rough courts to watch the visitors play, hear the evangelical appeal at half time, and
after the game sign up for a course in the Christian faith. I can still remember the songs we sung
in Tagalog, the native language - ‘Jesus is the way to the Father’s house’.
In Figure 16, the person closest to the camera is Paul Newman who played for the Philadelphia
96ers, and on the other end were two American college players who were brought into the team to
bolster up our ability to win games. We played and defeated many first division and professional
teams on the tour. The VV team was coached by an Australian Olympian and the team came
from all over Australia. You can see in front the Director of Campaigners for Christ giving the
Christian message. The Director, Bruce, and my father were lifetime friends and colleagues in
evangelical endeavour.
Figure 16. Half Time Evangelicalism
So, my experience with fundamentalism is not some removed, non-lived academic exercise. I
understand the trajectory of fundamentalist certainty. On the VV tour I had some amazing
experiences and we all took some high risks. It was the time of the Marcos military regime and
of an evening it was martial law, the streets patrolled by the army and police. On the last evening
before we flew home we took a risky drive through the back streets of Manila by taxi because our
bus was delayed. We believed we were kept safe because of prayer and local Christians who knew
how to bypass the military. On one occasion I remember people struggling with an extremist at a
game and wrestling a gun off him.
I was billeted in the homes of people with chooks in the kitchen and fighting roosters out back,
who assured me I was safe and showed me their guns to prove it. This was also the first time I
saw an active volcano and was shocked by its rumblings. I never was able to bring myself to eat
‘baloot’, half incubated bantam eggs, to enable the replication of chewing gum, a cultural influence

of American occupation during World War II. In retrospect, I had made some significant risk
trade-offs, but these were considered insignificant when put beside the urgency and commitment
to evangelical belief. The commitment of people to ‘mission’ and missionary work is not illogical
but profoundly spiritual, risk trade-offs being common ‘for the sake of the gospel’. All of the risks
associated with missionary work is undertaken ‘for the love of God’.
In figure 17 you can see the team lined up on a cracked bitumen court for our second game of
the day (Rob is closest to camera on the right). We had already played one village team in four
quarters and thought we had finished when the Mayor of the town came out and informed us that
that was not the real team but the ‘curtain raiser’ team. We then played on for four more quarters
with more half-time songs and Christian messages. The tour was of the Philippines and Hong
Kong and we never lost a game. There were also thousands of ‘converts’ made on the tour.
Figure 17. Game Number Two with Fresh Team
So I can tell you all about the trajectory of absolute certainty and fundamentalism, because I have
experienced it and, thankfully, escaped from it. Fundamentalism is an ideology that seeks total
control and dehumanises the very nature of what it is to be human. There is no freedom or love
in fundamentalism. There is no tolerance or faith in absolutism. There is no openness, learning or
listening in fundamentalism. Any ideology that promotes absolute control, absolute certainty and
perfectionism is a dehumanising ideology.

Understanding the Mind of Fundamentalism
It is common in the media to dismiss fundamentalists as ‘crazies’ and idiots. Such an approach
insulates us from taking the mindset of the fundamentalist seriously. The discussion of this chapter
reviews the common characteristics of fundamentalism in an attempt to better understand the
mentalitie (whole disposition) of zero harm as religious ideology. This discussion is important for a
number of reasons:
R5 )5/(,-.(51"35-/"5').#)(5#-5#(0-.5#(5)."5-#-5) 5."5.
R5 )5/(,-.(5."5#--/-5--)#.51#."5."5*-3")&)!35) 5)(0,-#)(
R5 )5/(,-.(5."5**&5) 54,)5",'5#)&)!3
The work of Marty and Appleby in the Fundamentalism Project in 1991, sponsored by the
American Academy of the Arts and Sciences is a foundational source to begin an understanding of
fundamentalism. The discussion that follows builds on the work of Marty and Appleby and work
undertaken in my PhD. Comments and examples that illustrate the fundamentalism of zero harm
ideology have been highlighted in italics and indented.
Key Characteristics of Fundamentalism

The following provides an outline of the key characteristics of fundamentalist knowledge and practice:
1. Extremism, whilst not objectified in individuals or institutions, is a precondition for breaking

away. Extremism is seen as an ideal typical impulse characteristic of the separatist or sectarian
spirit. This is not understood by fundamentalists as separatism but as refusing fellowship with
unbelievers, as not being yoked with unrighteousness, or as not communing with darkness.
The degree of extremism varies, depending on the religious tradition that dominates the group.
Separatism can occur in thinking as well as in practice and is strengthened by secrecy and
cognitive dissonance, which will be discussed further at the end of this article.
The idea of breaking away is evident in the advertisement at Figure 4. Here we observe the logical
progression of a religious-like commitment to an ideology. In this advertisement all references to safety,,
risk and learning are omitted. This is evidence of separation from the orthodox language of risk to a new
paradigm of total zero harm ideology.
2. Religious idealism is a central characteristic, for the transcendent realm of the divine is made
normative for religious community. The power of the group to solidify the resolve and conviction
of the fundamentalist is critical, and also plays a critical role in cognitive dissonance. Religious
idealism alone provides an irreducible basis for communal and personal identity which is
perceptible in the way fundamentalists respond by a habit of mind. The fundamentalist believes
that only an identity founded on “the fundamentals” can remain free from erosion and corruption,
impenetrable and immune to substantial change and aloof from the vicissitudes of history
and reason.

So much of zero harm language is about an ideal, belief, trust, hope and aspiration. All of these expressions
are transcendent. The sentiments expressed in Quote 10 in Chapter 2 shows how the language of Nirvana
and Heaven assimilates with the ideology of ‘zero’ and associated absolutes. Once the ideal of ‘zero’ is
locked in place it then becomes the new fundamental and must not be questioned.
3. Identity is understood as ontological, as rooted in the very nature of being in relationship

with an absolute (God or other) and therefore beyond the reach of human temporal and
spatial considerations and the relativising force of history. For example, ‘born-again Christians’
understand their life to be a participation in “a new creation”, having “put on Christ” by the
“renewing of the mind”, and they enjoy the benefits of a new status as “righteous servants of the
Lord”. The fundamentalist understanding of such Bible passages, tempered by separatism, leads
to exclusivism.
The idea of zero harm has now become rooted in the very nature of risk discourse. Many consulting
organisations know that they must use zero harm language or they will not get work. The logic of zero
harm also extends beyond the spatial and rational considerations fundamental to the limitations of what
it means to be human. In many ways zero harm ideology has developed its own literature, marketing
and separatism from safety orthodoxy. The idea of ‘putting on’ and ‘putting off ’ is similar to the nature of
silences to be discussed later in this book. There is a sense of exclusivism to the zero harm ideology identified
against those who don’t believe it.
4. Revealed truth is depicted as a unified, knowable and undifferentiated whole. This is affirmed by
identity and the social group.
The idea of ‘revealed truth’ is apparent in zero harm ideology. The ideology is considered complete and
unquestionable and endorsed by ‘club-like’ membership.
5. An intentionally scandalous disposition is espoused. The fundamentalist does not expect the
outsider to understand the trans-rational claims of “the believer” because those beliefs are
considered to be a stumbling block. These are however affirmed and understood within the
group. Indeed, the “average person”, according to the group and its mentality cannot discern or
understand the things of God. In this sense it is rational to not even discuss beliefs with those who
cannot understand, so a silence of articulation quickly develops and conversation about the truth is
saved for the initiated.
The nature of silence is most important for the fundamentalist. First, because their opponents are silent
on things that they think matter, e.g. zero harm. Silence on zero harm for the fundamentalist is the key
indicator that the opponent is a ‘non-believer’. Second, the fundamentalist then develops their own form
of silence despite the fact that silence for them is an indicator of non-belief. The zero harm fundamentalist,
once a believer, doesn’t need to discuss risk, uncertainty, accidents, human fallibility or ‘safety’. The
language of the zero harm believer is absolute.
6. There is opposition to historical consciousness, especially if it is interpreted and translated by

modernists into foundational principles of relativism. This partly assists the fundamentalist to
maintain immunity from absorption of relativist ideas. Fundamentalists reject the notion that
belief and practice are historically conditioned and contingent. Were fundamentalists to concede
that the human mind conditions and limits the truth of revelation, their truth claims would
stand for nothing and they would be susceptible to tests of relative adequacy and foreign criteria
of evaluation.

The zero harm believer is committed to absolutes and the idea of relative truth is anathema. Once the
absolute is believed any idea of contradiction to the absolute is no longer interpreted as reason to disbelieve
the absolute. Separation from accepted orthodoxy and the language of minimisation is also avoided.
7. Whether rhetorical or actual, an extremism exists that serves as a litmus test to separate true
believers from outsiders. This is evident in a vocabulary of belief and a stereotyping of non-
believers.
The idea of separation is important to the fundamentalist and having a zero harm language and discourse
becomes the measure of this separation.
8. There is a claim to privileged access to absolute truth and an associated rejection of all other forms
of knowledge, with the insistence that the fundamentalist is correct. The primacy of truth is crucial
to fundamentalists. They see their existence as a bulwark against error and theological compromise.
The actions of indoctrination and exclusion are important for the zero harm fundamentalist. Other forms
of knowledge no matter how well researched or academic are counted for nought against the truth of zero
harm. In zero harm organisations the mantra and ideology must not be questioned. Those who do question
or disagree with the mantra must leave.
9. The understanding of an either/or identity of elect and reprobate allows the fundamentalist
to divide the world into kingdoms or provinces of darkness and light. This is coupled with an
intense personalism. Individuals feel they have known God, not through priestly intermediaries
but directly. This gives a feeling of certainty for what God wants for them and the world. This
guidance is often gained from reading sacred writings for advice, resulting in an extreme form of
a magical approach in thinking. Thus, whilst intensely individualistic, this guidance results in high
absolutist moral expression.
Those who follow zero harm are those in the light, and those who are in darkness are yet to ‘see the light’.
The identity of binary opposites creates this either/or thinking and demarcation.
10. A position of no compromise with other doctrines or practices is adopted along with an insistence
on the purity and integrity of their doctrine.
The following is a quote from an email to me from Tom (pseudonym)
I have obviously not yet read your book, however the outline to your book resonates with many things I
have been reading of late including Weick, Kahneman, Snowden, Taleb, Geller, Schwartz etc. The more I
read, the closer the answer appears to get to the outline of your book. However, unfortunately, the further
it gets from the direction the company I work for is moving. For example, zero harm has reached cult-like
status with our CEO as the high-priest of the cult. Anyone who does not absolutely hold to the belief of
zero harm has become an outcast and misfit. Absolute faith in the risk-matrix is another one. Dumbing
down is rife...
This email is similar to many I receive. The absolute of zero harm must inevitably lead to absolute
intolerance of the human condition and of humans. ‘Zero tolerance’ and zero harm are partners in an
ethic of non-learning, under-reporting and no compromise. It is a contradiction to demand ‘zero’ and then
expect open reporting. It is fuzzy logic to demand ‘zero’ and then expect people to be motivated to take
risks and be accepted if they make mistakes.

11. The repudiation of secular scientific notions of progress and gradual historical evolution allows
fundamentalists to reject humanistic notions of science and any form of relativist argument.
Even though the ethic of minimisation as a humanising ethic abounds in the research literature in many
fields of endeavour this is of no consequence to the zero harm ideology. The religious nature of the ‘zero’
absolute rejects the scientific sense of psychology, education, motivation, learning and anthropology when
it comes to the nature of humans. There can be no tolerance in ‘zero’.
12. Dramatic eschatology shapes their identity. Scenarios of the apocalypse are invoked to justify
various programs. Fundamentalism is basically messianic and apocalyptic.
The idea of being other worldly is foundational for ‘zero’. It is set as an ideal that must be life denying if it
is to be achieved. One of the fundamentals of ‘zero’ is fear and the apocalypse is any harm. The mantra of
‘zero’ is used to justify any range of dehumanising initiatives as long as ‘zero’ is the goal. ‘zero’ saves from
the apocalypse of harm.
13. A consciousness of a particular historical moment is matched to sacred writings with an

extraordinary interpretation of time and space.
One of the interesting things about zero harm is that no one seems to know where it originated. It
seems to have no history, yet the ideology and discourse of ‘zero’ has only been around in industry for
approximately 10 years.
14. Fundamentalists name, dramatise and even mythologise their enemies. Dualistic readings of
sacred writings allow renderings of a meta-history which provides fundamentalists with a cosmic
enemy. They tend to think in polarities. This gives activities an apocalyptic urgency and fosters
a crisis mentality, which helps to justify missionary zeal and extremism. Belief in a real Satan
assists in locating a cosmic conspiracy by the enemy and all non-believers are perceived to be
accomplices, either consciously or unconsciously, in the work of Satan. However, fundamentalists
are often more afraid of people who claim the same religion but who deviate from the true belief
than they are of pagans or atheists, because such behaviour casts greater doubt on their own
convictions. One of the most visible qualities of fundamentalism is its tendency to split into
quarrelling sub-units who contend with each other over minor theological issues.
The culture of zero harm organisations is characterised by confusion. This is because so few people actually
believe in the ideology. The mantra of ‘zero’ tends to be that of CEOs, not people ‘on the tools’. This leads
to a range of expressions of zero harm that are qualified by other words that water down the extremism
of the ‘zero’ absolute. It then becomes a ‘journey to zero harm’ or a way of thinking. This allows for dozens
of different interpretations of the discourse and the reduction of it as an absolute. Regardless of the
interpretation, those who deny ‘zero’ are ‘demonised’ as non-believers.
15. An orientation of contrast against other cultures is evident. The identification and elaboration of
the enemy is often the initial step in the rhetoric of negation. Fundamentalists need to name and
locate the enemy, an urge which is evident in anti-other-group-as enemy polemics.
The language of developing a ‘zero harm culture’ is popular amongst the proponents of zero harm but it is
never defined. It mostly identifies itself by its language rather than any particularly different behaviours
in other risk-conscious organisations that are silent on the language of ‘zero’.

16. Fundamentalists set boundaries, protect the group from contamination and preserve its purity.
This is done through the maintenance of gatekeeping language and processes of indoctrination.
Once zero harm ideology is in place there then commences a range of indoctrination initiatives including
‘zero harm policy’, ‘zero harm training’, ‘zero harm leadership development’ and so on. Soon enough a
range of orthodox language about risk has been substituted for the ‘spin’ of zero harm. The aim is to have
people speak the language without definition or sense and creating a barrier to analysis. In the end the
language becomes the gatekeeper for those in and out of the fold.
17. Turning the nation around is the goal of the fundamentalist. Fundamentalists yearn for a
theocratic state. This is evident in extreme reconstructionist language.
There is nothing more bothersome to the religious fundamentalist than those who don’t believe. The
fundamentalist once indoctrinated cannot understand why anyone would oppose the ‘zero’ ideology.
Rather than a theocratic state, the zero harm fundamentalist yearns for an absolute state, a state where
all risk is engineered out of human activity. For example: Zero Harm Mould (http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=g3aGwlHaShI, Accessed 3 August 2012.)
18. A totalitarian impulse is evident in the mobilisation and organisation against the enemy.
Fundamentalists seek to replace existing structures with a comprehensive system and are dogmatic
about it.
Zero has no room for tolerance or messages of harm minimisation. Armed with the mantra that ‘all
accidents are preventable’ it mobilises against the enemy and is dogmatic about it.
19. Fundamentalists are selectively traditional and selectively modern. They carefully select, from the
plethora of doctrines, practices and interpretations that are available in their religious tradition,
those that suit their subculture.
The idea of selectivity is important to the zero harm fundamentalist. ‘zero’ only applies to selected aspects
of work, not the whole work environment. This fundamental contradiction they find easy to accommodate.
zero harm doesn’t apply to mental health, psychological health, social health or a host of other modes of risk
that are difficult to control.
20. They employ ideological weapons against a hostile world. The ideology of ‘naive realism’ is the
fundamentalists weapon against the world.
The arguments of binary opposition and simplistic realism are the weapons of the zero harm camp. The
idea of systems and human complexity as ‘wicked problems’ in safety and risk management is essentially
ignored by the zero harm position.
21. Charismatic and authoritarian male leadership is idealised. Fundamentalists repudiate traditional
religious leadership, institutionalised religion and the scholarship associated with it.
The absolute nature of ‘zero’ and intolerance seem to lend themselves to masculinist cultures where the
model of Fit In or Fuck Off (FIFO) dominates. ‘zero’ lends itself most to authoritarianism.
22. Fundamentalists are institution builders with a comprehensive plan for society. These independent
agencies become the organisational replacement for ineffective denominational affiliation.
The overarching and totalist nature of ‘zero’ lends itself to the idea of kingdom building.

23. A rationalistic assertion of the truth which comes about by the objectification of revelation. There
is a curious and perhaps awkward imitation of the perceived empiricism of the enemy (secular
rationality). Even though fundamentalism has a religious basis, in its anxiety to secure credibility
in an empirical position it tends to rob religion of mystery, imagination, mysticism, complexity,
ambiguity and situational character.
The mysterious nature of the human unconscious and decision making are totally omitted from the zero
harm discourse. The idea that all of risk and safety management as rational is essential for this position
regardless of the fact that very little decision making comes from rationalist origins.
24. Role conflict is prominent in fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is essentially a psycho-religious

state therefore, it cannot be solely explained sociologically. This is why an understanding of
cognitive dissonance is critical in developing an understanding of the fundamentalist mindset.
The semantic, dialogical and language gymnastics associated with espoused zero harm culture are a good
demonstration of how cognitive dissonance works. It is because zero harm is accepted as a psycho-religious
belief that it is difficult to explain as just a fad or motto.
The claim that zero harm is a fundamentalism is supported by the evidence in this book and
correlation between these accepted 24 characteristics of fundamentalism and the experience of those
who clash with the ideology of zero harm.
The quasi-religious nature of fundamentalism, however, seems to make little difference to behaviour
in the real world. Zero harm is a set of words to espouse but there are no indicators that it drives
any different behaviours in contrast to organisations who don’t adopt such an ideology. In other
words, it is a form of cultural schizophrenia that allows a bi-polar approach to human development
and learning, and rhetoric about risk. It is able to maintain its many contradictions through the
mechanism of cognitive dissonance.
Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance theory is concerned with situations which confront groups holding strong
convictions with clear and undeniable disproof of those convictions. The theory maintains that
even when groups are confronted with falsifying evidence they seem to respond with increased
evangelistic fervour.
There is some evidence to suggest that advertisements for motor-cars are read most frequently, not in
the days and weeks prior to a purchase when a decision is being made, but in the days which follow
the purchase. The advertisements do not seem so much to influence the decision itself as to confirm
the decision which has in fact been made. It is after the commitment that one is plagued by the most
serious misgivings. Many friends and neighbours offer congratulations and express their admiration
for the new vehicle, so confirming us in our wisdom and judgement. Others, however, express
reservation or even surprise. It appears that there may be certain problems about this particular make
of which we had not been aware, or that a certain different style is gaining ground and the purchase
we have made is likely to become quickly out of date. At this point two or more of our cognitions,
or items of our knowledge, or views which we hold believing them to be true, seem to be in conflict.

(1) I am a sensible person whose practical judgement and “common sense” can always be relied upon.
(2) I have made a decision which could be considered hasty and even foolish. These propositions jar
upon one, setting up an uncomfortable feeling of attention, embarrassment or discord. The dissonance
is cognitive in the sense that it has to do with the coherence of our knowledge, and the dissonance
is experienced as being disagreeable because the items which constitute our universe of knowledge,
the world of beliefs, attitudes, opinions and so on which form the known world of any individual,
are integrated into a system. This is the dynamic of cognitive dissonance at work. Attempts will
be made to alleviate the feeling of self-criticism and discomfort caused by the appearance of the
conflicting beliefs. These may be described as techniques for the reduction of cognitive dissonance. In
certain circumstances, reading advertisements seems to be one such technique. Fundamentalists seem
particularly vulnerable to cognitive dissonance, since if they take their religious commitment seriously
they are likely to experience tension within their world of alleged knowledge.
Festinger, Riechken and Schachter’s work When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study
of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World was the first attempt to describe the
dynamic of cognitive dissonance. Although the authors were aware of a lack of detailed empirical
evidence needed to demonstrate their theory, they proposed five conditions which seem necessary for
dissonance to occur.
1. A belief must be held with deep conviction and it must have some relevance to action, that is, to
what the believer does or how he behaves.
2. The person holding the belief must have committed himself to it; that is, for the sake of his belief,
he must have taken some important action that is difficult to undo.
3. The belief must be sufficiently specific and sufficiently concerned with the real world so that
events may unequivocally refute the belief.
4. Such undeniable disconfirmatory evidence must occur and must be recognised by the individual
holding the belief.
5. The individual believer must have social support.
The cycle of cognitive dissonance is explained diagrammatically at Figure 18.
In addition to these circumstances there are three kinds of cognitive dissonance: dissonance that
occurs within the belief system itself, conflict between a system of belief and an alternative system,
and reduction of belief owing to criticism by significant parts of society that hold those beliefs as
trivial, irrelevant and expressions of immaturity.
The stress associated with cognitive dissonance in fundamentalist organisations is dealt with by
individuals in the provision of psychological consistency rather than logical consistency. Most
argument for the establishment of a separatist group is structured in this way.

Situations of shock or dissonance are opportunities for learning situations. If the conflict takes
a fairly moderate form, in which it is perceived to be a challenge, then cognitive dissonance may
stimulate new discoveries and may inaugurate a realignment of the whole system in a more realistic
and coherent way. Most people find it extremely difficult to give up trying to solve a puzzle once a
certain amount of time, energy and prestige has been committed to its resolution. The explanation for
this stubborn refusal to give in lies deeper than the mere curiosity about the answer. What we want
is to get it right, and our persistence in struggling with the puzzle may be thought of as a form of
dissonance-avoidance by anticipation.
Figure 18. The Cognitive Dissonance Cycle

Understanding Cognitive Bias and the Unconscious
Much of our decision making comes from the unconscious and subconscious. This is how we are able
to do so many things on automatic. We all know about the power of our unconscious; we surprise
ourselves regularly with things we do and decisions we make. Consciousness is what we lose when we
go to sleep and regain when we wake up and become aware of our surroundings.
What Happens When I am Unconscious?

Every year now, because of a family history of bowel and oesophagus cancer, I have a minor
investigation with cameras at both ends. The procedure is nothing really as we have now become
so sophisticated with the skills of anaesthesia. The tough part is the days of preparation prior to
such a procedure.
The anaesthetist walks in, has a chat, then inserts a catheter in the wrist and leaves. Then the
surgeon comes in, has a chat and wheels you into theatre. As you lay back and chat in full
consciousness the nurse shuffles something about and the anaesthetist comes over for another chat
and begins to hook up the catheter. I begin to think of that pleasant feeling of slowly waking with
a nurse offering a drink and a sandwich. The anaesthetist comments about a sensation in the arm
and next thing I know 40 minutes later I am awake and conscious in a bed with no recollection
of any of the last 40 minutes. What happened in that 40 minutes, in that state of suspended
unconsciousness? I don’t remember dreaming; it all seems blank. What a wonderful technology,
and such a long way from cutting, leeching and primitive medicine of 100 years ago. I fall asleep
each night and wake up to my consciousness in the morning.
We have much to learn about human consciousness, unconsciousness and subconsciousness. The truth
is, the unconscious brain activity of humans makes sense, its just that not many study or understand
it. The constant labelling of others as stupid, irresponsible and irrational is often a reflection that the
person making the comment has next to no idea about the way human unconscious and subconscious
decisions affect what humans do.
Married to a Synesthete
My wife is a mother, grandmother and musician. She has been playing the piano for about 48
years and has been teaching piano for 40 years. Helen has an excellent ear for music and is skilled
in musicianship. I was never taught music formally and even though I have written musicals and
composed many songs, I do not understand the complexities of music like she does. Helen is
also a nature and outdoors person. She loves bush walking and comes from a family of naturalists.
Her father Dudley was famous in South Australia for being one of its first naturalists and
environmentalists. Dudley was a tree nurseryman for over 40 years. Helen connects with nature,
colour and sound at a far more advanced state than I. Her moods are conditioned by the wind,
temperature and environment.
It was not until recently that I discovered my wife was a synesthete. Helen automatically attaches
colours and images to sound. This is called synesthesia and it happens unconsciously. Synesthesia
is a neurological condition in which stimulation of one sensory or cognitive pathway leads to
automatic, involuntary experiences in a second sensory or cognitive pathway. Sometimes artists
and musicians show this subconscious and unconscious capability. It is certainly not a form of
knowledge that many share, myself included.

Many of our unconscious values and beliefs are arational. The arational is neither rational or irrational
but non-rational. Much of our arational processing resides in the unconscious. The reality is that
current research and knowledge about human unconsciousness is significant. We know a great deal
about the workings of the unconscious (Bargh). This is why knowledge of language, priming and
framing of ‘zero’ have been emphasised in this book. Knowing how to influence the unconscious is a
critical aspect to making sense of risk and understanding the dangers of ‘zero’ ideology and discourse.
One of the things that makes humans fallible is bias. Over the years we have all accumulated many
filters that affect the way we make decisions, perceive reality and understand the world. If you do a
search on Wikipedia for ‘list of cognitive biases’ you will find hundreds of different ways humans filter
their world. There is no objectivity. Rather, all humans are the make up of their history, heredity, gene
pool, social history, sociopsychological influences, parenting, culture, personality and a range of other
influences that comprise the nature of fallible humanity.
When we look at the long list of cognitive biases we see why we differ from others in our perceptions
in even the most simple things. How amusing is it to have those restaurant discussions about the
‘correct way’ to hang a toilet roll or the order of procedures in making tea or coffee.
Figure 19. The Great Toilet Roll Debate
If we are biased in such minor things it’s amazing that we learn to cooperate and collaborate with
others in much more major things. Well indeed we don’t, as the many wars and atrocities of the
day demonstrate.
Biases also come from various processes that are sometimes difficult to observe. These include
mental shortcuts (heuristics), unconscious and subconscious machinations of the mind and its
limited processing capacity, emotional, spiritual and moral motivations and a host of social and
religious influences.
For the purposes of this book I will only explore one fascinating cognitive bias known as the ‘sunk
cost effect’. The sunk cost effect is when people invest something significant about themselves such
as their ego, money or reputation into something, making it more difficult to admit a mistake or poor
judgement. The more we invest in a commitment the harder it is to escape or withdraw from it.

Billy Graham and the Sunk Cost Effect
In May 1959 the American evangelist Billy Graham led a crusade in Australia “to bring
Australians closer to God”. During that visit he and his associates preached to at least 3.5
million people who attended meetings all over Australia, with more than 142,000 people making
“decisions for Christ”. On the final day of the crusade, May 10, a total of 150,000 attended the
meeting, greater crowds than attended the grand final of the Victorian Football League. Even
though the major meetings were in Sydney, all other capitals and many regional centres were
covered by his associates, with Graham conducting the last night of several major city campaigns.
Graham had exceptional evangelistic exposure to the Australian public as well as significant
impact on the life and theology of evangelical churches, through practices such as the use of
women as trained counsellors at his meetings, the admission of women to the “men only” stand at
the Melbourne Cricket Ground for the first time, and Graham’s willingness to hold silent on some
issues of church dogma. The elevation of the role of women was a watershed for many churches
and attracted strong condemnation from extremist fundamentalists.
In 1968 Graham returned to Australia for another crusade series at the invitation of the
Archbishop of Sydney, the Very Rev. Marcus Loane. Despite the bitterly cold conditions
attendances increased by 30,000 on the 1959 visit. It would be difficult to overestimate the
enormous impact of this event. Many meetings in succession exceeded 60,000 people, and there
were significant traffic jams, extra buses and police services required, wide press reports and solid
TV coverage. Each rally was broadcast by radio to at least four states and 137 towns by landline.
The total cost of the crusade, $220,000, was met before it was over. During the course of Graham’s
visit, the local churches visited one million homes and distributed 1.5 million leaflets in the
Sydney area. (Graham returned to Australia again in 1979 but the response was markedly down
compared with his first two visits).
Graham’s main message was that of repentance and conversion. This was always sought within
the context of preaching on contemporary topics such as the breakdown of traditional Christian
values in modern society and the rejection of the Bible and biblical values. He blamed the
divorce rate and deterioration of society in general on career women who did not stay at home.
He condemned sex outside of marriage and blamed the general permissiveness in society on the
breakdown of the home and traditional family. The former Prime Minister, Sir Robert Menzies,
was quoted by Graham as an advocate of traditional Christian family values.
On special “youth nights” Graham spoke on the problem of hippies, problems of youth and
television. He called lust and materialism the gods of the age. On Thursday 25th April, Mr
Graham spoke to over 57,000 people at the Sydney Showground about the threat of nuclear
holocaust and communism. All these issues in Graham’s preaching served as ‘signs of the times’
for the second coming of Christ, which was the topic of his sermon on the seventh night of the
crusade. The point of evangelical preaching on the second coming of Christ is to be found ready
and converted at that approaching moment.
The year after Graham’s visit church attendances in Australia increased by 7%.
The success of Billy Graham is unparalleled in Australian history and occurred at a time
when the census revealed that 89% of Australians claimed to be Christian. Christian Today
Australia comments:

At the Melbourne Cricket Ground in 1959, Reverend Graham drew in 143,000 people. In the
final day 150,000 people attended the Sydney Showground and Cricket Ground to hear Billy
Graham preach.
More than 130,000 people (almost 2% of the Australia population at that time) made a
commitment to Christ. Historian Stuart Piggin used the Australian Bureau of Statistics figures to
show a drop in alcohol consumption, extra-marital births and crime statistics during that time.
Today the converts who made a commitment to Christ in 1959 are found within the ranks of the
clergy and church leadership; with the most well known being Sydney Anglican Archbishop Peter
Jensen, and his brother, Dean Phillip Jensen.
Other well known converts include Graeme Pearson, the former chairman of MYOB and current
chairman of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association who wrote that after the Billy Graham
Crusader, he made a decision to follow Jesus Christ which has impacted on his family, business
and community life.
Robert B. Coles, former Coles Myer Director spoke of his experience when at the age of 24,
he attended the Crusade and after hearing a second appeal from Dr. Graham about making a
commitment to Christ; he ran down to the front where he was counselled and prayed a prayer of
commitment to Christ, to which he described as the most important decision in his life.
(The Effect of Billy Graham Crusades in 1959 Still Being Felt Today - http://au.christiantoday.
com/article/the-effect-of-billy-graham-crusades-in-1959-still-being-felt-today/2838.htm
accessed September 2012).
One of the techniques employed by Billy Graham and evangelicals in general is the ‘public confession
of faith’. This involves people getting up out of their chair and walking to the front of the meeting
and ‘making a stand’ through an open confession of faith in Jesus Christ. This is prominent, visible
and audible. Making such a commitment and further commitments to follow is a major ‘sunk cost’
for anyone. Commitments range through support groups, church attendance and meetings. A major
strategy of the Billy Graham meeting is that once someone walked to the front of the meeting and
made a public confession, they signed up to a course of study, were assigned a mentor and were linked
to a local church. Once these have been put in place it is very hard for someone to turn around and
say ‘I made a mistake’ and give it away.
Car salespeople try to get some kind of commitment even if they can’t get a signature, knowing that
that phone number or pamphlet taken is a wedge to work on toward further commitment. Caldini
(2009) seems best at explaining how commitment and the ‘sunk cost effect’ work. The sunk cost effect
and cognitive dissonance both work on the power of consistency. Even if the commitment is small
and builds to larger commitments, it is hard to recant and escape the embarrassment of inconsistency.
The important thing is to get the right trajectory first, then lead to deeper commitment. This is how
salespeople ‘get you in’, often using binary opposition thinking and language. Billy Graham was a
master at binary opposition language, leading to no other choice than a commitment to Christ.
Caldini documents how the Chinese were so successful at drawing out collaboration during the
Korean War (pp. 61ff ). Often commitment starts with something quite trivial and then once a
trajectory is engaged then that trivial thing allows a much stronger building point. The trick is to
extract a small commitment to what seems like a harmless concept and thereby begin to manipulate a
person’s self image. Once you are able to get a person’s self image where you want it, you can then find
‘collaborators’, ‘converts’ and ‘customers’. The key is getting the first ‘harmless concession’.

Amway discovered that there is something magical about getting someone to sign or write down a
commitment. In a sense the written commitment, though trivial, becomes quite powerful later on.
This has been used by sales people to leverage further commitment. Often loyalty and inconsistency
are leveraged off small and trivial commitments as is demonstrated by the many experiments of
Caldini and many other social psychologists (Abelson, 2004) recount.
The Psychology of Conversion

Commitment to a fundamentalist quasi-religious ideology triggers the beginning of ‘sunk cost’. Once
the investment of ego and commitment has been made, no amount of logical rational argument
or evidence will sway the person committed to their cult, belief or value. The documented events
of the Jonestown mass suicide or the Heaven’s Gate Suicide illustrate the power of ‘sunk cost’ and
cognitive dissonance.
There are many psychic forces at work in the psychology of conversion. Conversion is neither a
rational or irrational process but, again, an arational one. Christians attribute conversion to the
Christian notion of ‘grace’. Some Christians believe grace is the mysterious choice of God to ‘save’
someone. Evangelical fundamentalists believe that salvation (conversion) is the choice of the person
who elects to be saved by God. In conversion, a person ‘repents’, that is, turns in direct opposite
direction by acknowledging their ‘sinfulness’ and desire to become a disciple of Christ.
Conversion begins with acknowledgement and recognition. People are brought to a stage of ‘readiness’
through a range of factors. Some people are ‘converted’ because of relational pressures and the need to
belong to a certain group. Furthermore, it is also important not to be disconnected from a group that
one finds attractive. This is how peer pressure or ‘group think’ works. The power of belonging, of being
acknowledged and recognised, is critical if one is to be converted. Sometimes the need to belong
is accompanied by a deep physical and moral need. Sometimes unresolved suffering is the cause
for conversion.
Auto-imitation also deserves mention as a cause of conversion. Auto-imitation involves sympathetic

and sometimes trivial acts that signify a change in trajectory, a sign that a new journey is about
to begin. Auto-imitation is often accompanied by feelings of dissatisfaction, loss of meaning and
purpose, disappointment or feelings of emptiness. Sometimes this is described by those looking for
converts as ‘searching’. Auto-imitation is often detected by people who are keen to convert others and
is somewhat like the state of ‘readiness’ a salesperson identifies in a customer. Experienced people in
the conversion business recognise the psychological signs of readiness.
Conversion in the Bible is designated by the Greek word metanoia, and designates an ‘awakening’
or ‘regeneration’ to a new way of seeing things. In the New Testament St Paul’s conversion is most
dramatic. As an official persecutor of Christians on behalf of the Hebrews he has a vision ‘on the road
to Damascus’, rejects his crusade and becomes one with the people whom he persecuted. St Paul then
goes on to become the most prominent evangelist in the New Testament record, writing letters and
making missionary journeys and planting Christian churches from Rome to Jerusalem.
Kleespies (1932, p. 24) identified eight motives or forces impelling someone to conversion:
1. Fear (of hell or consequences such as death or punishment)

2. Other self regarding motives such as approval of others or a desire to meet dead relatives

3. Altruistic motives, do good to the world, influence others to be good
4. Following out of moral idealism
5. Remorse and conviction for a previous wrongdoing, (purging)
6. Response to the rational logic of an argument or teaching
7. Example and imitation
8. Urging and social pleasure
The moment of conversion is sometimes accompanied by overwhelming emotion. But there is no

recipe, and some are converted gradually over time. In some sense one is not converted but is always
being converted. The idea of sliding backwards is also common to evangelical conversion and so one is
expected to cultivate and ‘work on’ faith.
How does one get converted to, or escape from, the ideology of ‘zero’? Whatever the reason, the
conversion to a quasi-religious ideology usually commences in a small trivial commitment. The
arguments at Quote 9 in Chapter 2 are typical of commitments not to harm others, not to set
fatalities as goals etc. By the time one commits to advertising for ‘zero harm managers’ and deleting
the words safety and risk from language and maintaining the delusion that ‘all accidents are
preventable’, one is then fully committed to the ‘zero’ ideology.
The Escape from Fundamentalism

The escape from fundamentalism is an escape to learning and an escape from fear. The attraction of
positive goals in learning then becomes the motivation to learn rather than the aversion of outcomes
through fear of uncertainty.
The quest for learning begins with the ability to question and doubt. Conversion in and out of faith
is always stressed under the pressure of cognitive dissonance. So the key to helping someone escape
from the tyranny of ‘zero’ is to present the evidence, show the contradictions, appeal to person-
centredness, focus on learning and motivation, highlight the nature of goal setting and argue for non-
perfection absolutes in making sense of risk.
One thing we do know about fundamentalism and its ideology is that rational argument,
regulation, patronising dismissal and superiority don’t work. All of these measures simply drive the
fundamentalist into a more deeply entrenched position (through cognitive dissonance) than before.
The more the fundamentalist is pushed into battle with evil and Satan, the more extreme become the
resultant position and actions that can be sanctioned and ‘make sense’. It is counter-intuitive to think
that regulation, rigidity in policing, zero tolerance and rational argument could do more damage
than good.
The key to gaining a better understanding of the issue is surely in developing relationship with the
fundamentalist and taking a longitudinal approach to resolving the issue. Unfortunately organisations
spend an extraordinary amount of money on physical (engineering) solutions and development of
barriers to the fruits of fundamentalism rather than addressing root causes in belief. In some cases it

is evident that this short term approach simply stimulates further the creativity of the fundamentalist
mind to new solutions and responses to commitment to the zero harm ideology.
Much more work and energy needs to be applied to the psychosocioreligious nature of zero harm
ideology. The kind of research required to fully evaluate the insidious nature of zero harm ideology is
yet to be undertaken.
Workshop Questions
1. Have you observed the common characteristics of fundamentalism in ‘zero’ ideology?
2. Give examples of how the zero harm rhetoric sounds evangelical in appeal.
3. Explore the Sociopsychogological Characteristics of Fundamentalism as listed and see if many are
apparent in your organisation.
4. Raise the discussion of the toilet paper rolling direction at work and see what develops.
5. Research a cult either in the newspaper or on the Internet and document the key characteristics
of fundamentalism against their activities. Then compare this to the activities and language of zero
harm ideology and see what you discover.
Transition
Can you imagine a conversation about risk without the word ‘zero’? If we eliminate the word ‘zero’
from our discourse will the world end? Could it be that we can’t take a leap in learning because the
discourse of ‘zero’ blinds us from seeing a landing?
There are many companies that maintain safety, security and risk records that are as good if not better
than ‘zero’ organisations and yet don’t speak the language of zero harm discourse. ‘Zero’ is not only
non-motivational, it drives subcultures of scepticism, cynicism and pessimism in organisations. These
powerful subcultures subversively erode the credibility of ‘zero’.
It is possible to have strategies in making sense of risk that don’t need the discourse or ideology of
‘zero’. This next section provides solutions, examples and sensemaking that demonstrate that risk
makes sense without ‘zero’.

SECTION
THREE
Strategies Without Zero
CHAPTER 7
Strategies without Zero
7
Where there is the Infinite there is joy. There is no joy in the finite - The
Chandogya Upanishad
You don’t destroy the mystery of a rainbow by understanding the light processes
that form it - Anne McLaren
Strategic Silences in Safety

How Athletes ‘Choke’
Sian Beilock wrote a great book called ‘Choke: What the Secrets of the Brain Reveal
About Getting It Right When You Have To’. It’s a book that helps explain how goals work
psychologically and how athletes ‘choke’ when they allow wrong messages to get into their
head. In sports, there are some things you just don’t talk about or think about; that’s the
key to motivation. This is one of the problems with being the ‘favourite’ team or individual.
Psychologically such thinking is poison to success. I have lost count of the times when I was on a
team that ‘destroyed’ the opposition all year, only to lose in the final. Adam Scott’s recent ‘choke’
at the British Open 2012 is similar to Greg Norman’s ‘choke’ in 1996 and demonstrates the
importance of not being constrained by the ‘tight collar’ of avoidance goals. Dobbs (2012) shows
how avoidance goals ‘choke’ success. There is nothing more damaging to effort than the belief and
language that talks about ‘having arrived’. One of the great things about Australian culture is its
hypersensitivity to ‘bragging’.
One of the key skills in communication is respect for silence. Learning to not label silence or argue
from silence is one of the key skills of critical thinking (Sloan, 2006, Paul, 1993). Listening and
observing silences are just as important as telling and acting. This is the key to not being trapped by
binary opposition thinking.
When it comes to influencing, motivating and learning we also know that some things are best
not said. We know that some messages are demotivating, or inspire wrongful thinking. Some can
fill the mind with unproductive ideas or drive sceptical sub-cultures. We see in sport how ‘choking’
does this. Defeating, negative and uninspiring messages ‘prime’ athletes for failure, whereas positive
and inspiring messages motivate them for success. Mental athletics is just as important in sports as
physical athletics.
Chapter 7: Strategies Without Zero 87

Good athletes are able to block out bad messages; they just don’t need them. This doesn’t mean they
are naïve or stupid. They know there is such a thing as failure, but they just don’t need to talk or think
about it. Goals that promote failure debilitate people’s ability to be motivated and be successful.
Athletes, teachers and coaches know the importance of silence. Athletes know that if you fill the
airwaves with unattainable perfection goals, such ‘noise’ diminishes effort and drives complacency.
James Magnussen shot to international fame in 2011 when he won the 100m freestyle at the
World Championships in Shanghai. In a country with a media hungry for gold, Magnussen was
touted as the great hope for the London Olympics in 2012. The media dubbed Magnussen as
‘the missile’ in the tradition of ‘the thorpedo’ (Ian Thorpe). However, such sports psychology is
not healthy. Magnussen was being ‘primed’ by language that would totally break him after the
100m final at London. He set his sights on breaking the 100m world record of 46.91 seconds, set
in 2009 by Brazilian Cesar Cielo in the now banned polyurethane super-suit. He finished in the
final at 47.52 seconds, winning silver, only one hundredth of a second behind American Nathan
Adrian. Magnussen was devastated. For him and all he had been ‘primed’ by, an Olympic silver
medal was failure. It was clear that his motivation and mind had not been served well by all the
‘noise’ of the media about ‘the missile’ and ‘the king of the pool’.
When we raise our children we are also careful about silences. We don’t introduce some ideas into the
heads of children because we know they are unethical and non-motivating. It is because we care so
much about the things that influence, or prime, children that we choose to be silent in some things.
This is not censorship, but smart education, motivating children for the right things and remaining
silent about others. Being silent on things ought not to be opportunity for entrapment by binary black
and white logic.
We also know that setting unattainable goals creates depression and anxiety. The moment the goal
is not achieved the child perceives that they are not good enough. Psychologists also know that the
absolutes of perfectionism are criteria for obsessive-compulsive disorder and often shows up as a
cause of various addictions (Sack, 2012). Indeed, filling the heads of humans with ideas that they will
only be accepted if they are perfect is in itself a delusional avoidance goal. Demands for absolutes and
the language of absolutes are demotivating for humans. Let’s save the language of gods for gods.
Believability and the Destructiveness of Unhealthy

Scepticism
This issue of believability is fundamental to the notion of ownership. Unless there is risk ownership by
the workforce the policing of risk taking will simply become unaffordable. Without ownership, there
can be no real change.
The language of zero primes the workforce into a cycle of cynicism, microscopics and scepticism.
Scepticism and cynicism are destructive for creating any sense of ownership for managing risk and
safety. Workers who don’t ‘own’ their own safety only act safely when policing is around.
Indirectly and counterintuitively, zero primes the workforce to also accept failure. Zero not only sets
up the acceptance of failure but punishes failure because it is perceived as bad. Failure is primed not
only through scepticism but also by the counting of lag indicators as demonstrated failures of the zero

goal. In the scope of human learning however failure is not bad. If failure is accepted and supported
properly, it can be a learning opportunity rather than an opportunity for judgementalism and
rejection. The ideology of zero rejects failure as unacceptable, but in so doing, promotes its acceptance
while labelling it as ‘bad’. The ideology of zero spontaneously generates a counterintuitive dynamic. It
seems odd to some that setting what seems to be an admirable goal, actually drives the very opposite.
Absolute goals, regardless of their excuse as aspirations, break the first rule in the fundamentals of the
psychology of goal setting - achievability. The only ones who can talk about zero are gods - Buddha,
Jesus and Mohammed. Do managers of organisations set such goals for themselves? I wonder if the
managers of zero language in organisations are punished for every management mistake? Perhaps
zero managers are inspired by zero language, but the rest of us are human, and are motivated by
achievable goals.
The goal of learning is not zero; it is more learning. The goal of learning is not perfection; it is
development and maturity. The goal of learning is not the solution to the problem but ownership
of the problem. The goal of learning is not the end point but the route and the journey. The goal
of learning is the process not the goal. Strangely enough if you think about learning this way you
might incidentally get ten out of ten. But if you set the goal of learning as ten out of ten, you lose
the perspective on learning, put your focus on measurement, ‘choke’ on the process, and this makes it
difficult to learn.
The more the language of failure is used at work, the less workers listen to the influence of those in
authority, and the more they listen to the generalisations on the work floor. So, nod to the bosses,
tell them what they want to hear, then once they have left, do what you like. This is the kind of
psychological schizophrenia the language of zero creates. This generates unhealthy scepticism.
Unhealthy scepticism rejects the evidence and knowledge of leadership, promotes ‘doublespeak’ and
adopts ‘common sense’ knowledge as superior to that in authority.
The research shows humans can be positively and negatively primed. We know from research in
sports science that setting achievable goals and priming the thoughts of sports people makes a huge
difference in outcomes. This is called ‘response priming’ and is all about what is called ‘visio-motor
priming’. Sports people are assisted by various forms of motivation to visualise what they can achieve.
They are not given impossible goals, like run the 100m in 5 seconds, but achievable goals such as
shaving 0.03 of a second off a best time in a 5000 metre swim.
Choking failure comes from ‘paralysis by analysis’. The language of zero drives such microscopic
analysis. In a nutshell, paralysis by analysis occurs when people try to control every aspect of what
they are doing in an attempt to ensure success. The results are clear: sports psychologists can show
conclusively how negative and positive language influence ‘choking’. Sometimes you will hear good
coaches urging players just to ‘enjoy themselves’ rather than thinking too much about their score or
ambitions. Why don’t we believe this applies in the workplace?
The problem of contradiction is a significant obstacle for the maintenance of zero harm ideology.
The fact that many companies fervently espouse the zero harm principle while firmly believing in the
use of risk assessments is problematic. As you will be aware, risk assessments consider consequence
and likelihood. I have seen many risk assessments that identify (and accept) risks that deem an LTI
outcome as likely or possible. So on the one hand they say they want zero harm and on the other
hand say (through their risk assessments) that a lost time injury is possible. Humans are neither
inspired or motivated by such contradictions.

Results from the MiProfile survey show (discussed in Chapter 4) that many in the workplace do
not believe in zero. Even if the believability rate was 50% what kind of unhealthy subculture in such
organisations would exist to erode the mainstream message?
Healthy Scepticism and Entertaining Doubt

One of the attitudes required to make sense of risk is to entertain doubt. Cultures that arrogantly
project superiority, perfectionism and the absolutes of zero, don’t doubt. A study of some of the major
disasters like Piper Alpha, BP’s Deepwater Horizon Disaster, Challenger, Verbrugger and Bhopal
all demonstrate how hubris (blind overconfidence) drives risk arrogance and the dumbing down of
organisational sensemaking about risk.
The Little Boy Lost

One of the keys to understanding risk is the entertainment of doubt. Is it possible I could have
done this wrongly? Is it possible that I wasn’t thinking straight? Is it possible that my perception
could be wrong? These are the kinds of questions that help ‘sensemake’ about risk.
How many times have you driven away from home on the way to a holiday and wondered, Have
I remembered the tickets? Did I switch off the power? Did I lock the back door? Entertaining
doubt is the beginning of wisdom and learning. Arrogance is blind to learning.
I remember as a child travelling by car with family and relatives to Katoomba to see the Three
Sisters and the other delights of Blue Mountains National Park. In 1960 the drive from Epping
to Katoomba was a slow and winding process, a one-lane highway with many hairpin bends and
a car full of kids, four in the back and two or three in the ‘back ’. Dad had a station wagon and in
those days the idea of seat belts was not considered.
One of the tough tasks for parents is keeping track of lots of kids, while maintaining some sense
of freedom for kids to play and space for parents to relax. This trip to Katoomba was no exception.
In my family there were seven kids on this excursion and my relatives and friends comprised
another ten. We all had large families back then. Of course, as kids it was always a novelty to travel
in a different car, and this made the task of keeping track of the kids more difficult. In hindsight it
was probably a large enough group that we should have had a roll, but what kind of boring school
master would take a roll on a family picnic?
When it was time to go home and we all got in the cars, each of the drivers assumed that
the other had Graham in their car. Graham was a rather shy and quiet brother. As he had
bronchiectasis in both lungs, he was often unwell and was neither fit nor noisy. Rob the extrovert
on the other hand was annoyingly noisy and if I was not about you would know it; the space
would be too quiet. However, in Graham’s case it wasn’t for several hours at the first rest stop that
it was discovered he had been left behind. Graham was eight years old at the time.
Reflecting back on those days my parents must have been most distressed. Here we were 2 hours
away from Katoomba and it would take 2 hours to go back and look for Graham. He would
have been left alone at the picnic grounds at Katoomba for 4 hours. Imagine a parent’s anguish
at such a prospect: a small eight year old child alone amongst a crowd of tourists with no way of
communicating his distress. This was the same year as the kidnap and murder of Graham Thorne,
a case that shocked a very trusting nation at a time when people didn’t lock front doors, or have
alarms or mobile phones.

I remember driving back and the delight at finding Graham at the same place where we had
parked our cars at the picnic ground. Aparently he simply walked up and down looking for our
cars feeling lost and alone, however he didn’t wander. The personality that made him so likeable
was the same personality that kept him unnoticed for many more years. It was also the personality
that kept him safe over that time.
The story about losing Graham is not intended to be a story about personalities but rather one
about the importance of entertaining healthy doubt. Rather than assuming the other has it right,
a conversation is needed. This is why our talk matters. On the other hand, making ‘noise’ is not
conversation; this was my lot as a child. There was no way that I would be lost as a child; you would
know within a minute if Rob wasn’t around.
The language of zero is not a trajectory that promotes conversation. The discourse of zero has no
consciousness of what it ‘primes’. The rhetoric of zero is essentially ‘noise’ that has no place for
mutuality or conversion. Conversational dialogue is the outcome of an ideology of community and
human-centeredness. The ideology of zero is an ideology of perfection that knows all, needs not listen
and knows only the fundamentalism of ‘black and white’.
The beginning of learning is discovered in the fundamental ‘i-thou’ as articulated by Martin Buber.
The Absurdity of Commitment to Binary Absolutes

Generates ‘Selective Zero Harm’
Thinking in binary opposites creates scepticism and dynamics that erode any chance of establishing
effective safety culture and risk ownership. Binary oppositional thinking perceives any variation or
silence on zero as affirmation of its opposite, that is the desire for injury. The logic works on the idea
of contradiction in a simplistic black and white way. If such a logic is adopted it creates huge problems
for the zero harm proposition and naturally must lead to the problem of ‘selective zero harm’.
‘Selective zero harm’ is achieved by the nature of narrow definition. If one only counts certain
definitions of harm then it is possible to live in the delusion that no one is being harmed on site.
This can only be done by excluding all forms of psychological harm, mental health injury, social
dislocation, psychosocial harm and self harm.
The Reality of Self Harm

I was on a plane last week and sat beside a woman who was fidgeting with her phone. I noticed all
the scars on her wrists and it reminded me of what I learned from years of work in Galilee School.
I remember young Kate when she first came to Galilee. She used to cut up razor blades and
swallow the pieces to intentionally cut up her stomach. Kate had regular operations and stomach
pumping sessions which she found comforting. We used to bring her school work in Z Ward that
required secure entry. Most of the young women in Galilee cut themselves or burned themselves
in acts of self harm, a cry for help. The boys self harmed mostly on alcohol and a cocktail of
various drugs. The woman on the plane obviously had a history of self harming.
Self harm is about intentional and unintentional harm to self with or without suicidal ideation. It
was first described in 1913 as self-mutilation. We have since dropped the pejorative expression, as
we know that such language is not therapeutic or helpful. Self harm varies in intensity from picking,

biting, cutting, ingesting, self flagellation, puberty rites, genital mutilation, head banging, body pain
marking and constricting.
It may be hard for some to understand but many forms of self harm are associated with pleasure and
satisfaction. The causes are related to depression, anxiety, distress, guilt, eating disorders, bereavement,
self-loathing, perfectionism, workplace victimisation, harassment and abuse. Self harm is often treated
by the acceptance of replacement ‘medicated’ toxins, prescription drugs. In adulthood we often ‘self
medicate’ on a range of accepted substances of choice, most commonly alcohol and tobacco. The truth
is that mental health issues, anxiety and depression, are at high levels in our society, as is self harm.
Many of us self harm.
Self harming is often associated with young people (aged 12-35) but in reality there is an evolution to
adulthood in self harming which progresses to various forms of accepted self harm. There are a range
of self harming practices of which our society approves, including religious rites (including genital
alterations and flagellation), alcohol and substance addiction, smoking and over-eating. Anyone in
the health and welfare industry knows that only harm minimisation and tolerance work. People with
addictions, psychological concerns and disorders are not motivated by nonsense goals and language
of zero. Small measurable and achievable steps are the key to improvement and motivation. When
it comes to self harm we know to set SMART goals. We also know when to be silent about the
attraction of self harm. We know counterintuitively that talk about self-harm needs to be strategic
and thoughtful because of psychological by-products.
What is most amusing about nonsense non-human zero harm goals is that such goals promote
unrealism and mythology. People preach such zero harm goals (with their own inbuilt psychology
of scepticism and cynicism) then leave at morning tea to self harm on cigarettes or sugar. During
the day organisations sing the hymns and sermons of nonsense goals then, after hours, their stressed
executives hit the bottle to cope with the pressure of having to work under such goals. Prescription
and ‘self medicated’ substances are also in high use. And what philosophy and values are exhibited
towards this behaviour? Not intolerance, but tolerance.
Of course the contradictions go much deeper. Recent research by Morris (2012) established that the
whole practice of Fly-in Fly-out/Drive-in Drive-out (FIFO/DIDO) Work Practices has injurious
consequences for all participants. The mining industry, which seems most passionately fixated on zero
harm, thrives on FIFO/DIDO work practices. Morris’ (2012) report shows that such practices are
only on the increase, so much so that by 2015 it is estimated that 62% of the workforce in the Pilbara
region will be FIFO/DIDO people.
Whilst I understand the need to build more airports and create more FIFO/DIDO workers, let’s not
imagine that this sits well with the absolutist delusion of zero harm. Morris (2012, p. 8) presents the
following list of harm resulting from FIFO/DIDO work practices:
Impact on FIFO employees and their families
Among the adverse effects suggested in the literature are:
R5 (,-5-.,--5&0&-5(5*)),5"&."5#(&/#(!5*,--#)(65#(!5,#(%#(!65,,.#)(&5,/!5/-5
and obesity
R5 )),5+/&#.35,&.#)(-"#*-5&#(!5.)5#(,-5,%7/*-5(5#0),5
R5 '#&35#-,/*.#)(5(5-.,--

R5 /5-)#&5(5)''/(#.35#(.,.#)(535 51),%,-
R5 /5-)#&#-.#)(535*,.(,-
R5 &#(!-5) 5&)(&#(--5(5#-)&.#)(
… Between 55% and 79% of respondents considered that FIFO based mining operations impact
negatively on:
R5 )/-#(!50#&#&#.35(5Ŀ),#&#.3
R5 )&5#( ,-.,/./,
R5 )&5-,0#-
R5 ,.#)(&5'(#.#-
R5 )&5'*&)3'(.5)**),./(#.#-
R5 )&5/-#(---5(5."5&)&5)()'3
R5 ,#'5(5$/-.#
R5 )''/(#.35- .3
R5 # -.3&
So the evidence shows that ‘zero harm’ is indeed ‘selective zero harm’ which in the end shows that the
ideology and mantra becomes a nonsense. No wonder workers don’t buy the message. One cannot
use the strategy of binary opposite contradiction to support one’s zero harm view, and then ignore
this same logic when applied to seemingly ‘invisible’ forms of harm. The more one fuels this kind of
contradiction, the more workers become disconnected, sceptical and cynical about the whole exercise
and language. As a consequence, ‘selective zero harm’ spontaneously generates denial and fosters
selective under-reporting.
Let’s now apply the idea of selectivity a bit further in order to show how a range of harmful activities
are not included in the zero harm ideology. For example, zero alcohol - no that wouldn’t work, zero
porn - no that wouldn’t work, zero violence - no that wouldn’t work, zero abuse - no that wouldn’t
work, zero drugs - no that doesn’t work. In fact if you look at any aspect of life where humans seek
pleasure and risk the concept of zero for humans doesn’t work.
My Target Goal is Zero Death

I find it amusing that so many people are attracted to the goal of zero harm, when in fact it’s a life
denying goal. If there is no learning without risk and no creativity or innovation without risk, why
are people attracted to a goal which drives the fear of risk? If we seek to engineer out all risk, are we
simply creating a population of workers who lose the skills required to learn from risk?
One of the absurdities of setting unachievable goals is that they are non-motivating. The fundamental
mismatch between an absurd goal and reality is that it drives scepticism and cynicism. Both these
dispositions form the dynamic of sub-cultures that undermine and subvert the very goals that have
been set. That is, the goal and ideology of the goal undermines itself.

Research tells us that avoidance goals, e.g. avoiding injury, breaches, problems and mistakes, are not
as effective as approaching goals, e.g. seeking benefit, attraction and positive outcomes. Even the
attraction to avoidance goals demonstrates something about the punitive and regulative nature of the
organisation and the person who sets such goals. Avoidance goals are loss/non-loss goals, whereas
approaching goals are gain/non-gain goals. When not achieved, avoidance goals drive punishing
emotions, whereas approaching goals drive disappointment emotions.
One way to show the absurdity of goals is to take them to a logical trajectory and to show that such a
trajectory doesn’t make sense. So the following argument shows by exaggeration the absurdity of the
logic of zero harm:
My target goal for living is zero death! What an admirable aspirational goal: to never die. You never
know, I might even succeed with my goal for 75 years and if I live longer I can then brag about how
good my goal was. Even if the goal was successful for 100 years that doesn’t make it a sensible goal.
Indeed, such a goal would quash life and retard endeavour and learning. Even if one was successful in
getting to 100 years of age, without risk what kind of life would have it have been anyway?
A Focus on Zero or a Focus on People

We can have lots of meetings and not be present with the other in the meeting. There may be talking,
noise, information, and sharing content, but no real understanding of the other. This is what comes
of an ‘instrumental’ focus on outcomes rather than a ‘process’ focus on outcomes. An instrumental
focus on outcomes looks at the quantifiable measures, where the process outcome looks at the quality
outcomes of the process. The instrumental focus sees ‘mistakes’, ‘failure’ and ‘shortcomings’, where the
process focus sees ‘learnings’, ‘development’ and the making of ‘maturity’.
Martin Buber and i-thou

It was Martin Buber who best articulated the importance of process learning in his book ‘I-Thou’.
Buber left Germany in 1938 after year of Nazi oppression and, like many social psychologists,
educators and philosophers, made significant contributions to science in the understanding of the
human condition through their engagement with the Nazis.
Buber made it clear that many of the times we get together with others we don’t really ‘meet’.
Yes, a meeting taking place but it is an exchange in monologue, there being little empathy and
no real dialogue (which requires empathy and understanding) or being ‘present’ with the other.
A meeting without ‘meeting’ is consumed with results and perceives people as getting in the way
of them. Buber describes the monological view as the I-It world; the Nazis gained compliance.
Their control was absolute and their paradigm of life was focused on power. This view treats others
as objects in a project. The project takes priority over the people and gets far more focused on
indicators, KPIs, zero and measures than on learning and maturity. There are those who comply,
and those who don’t. Those who don’t comply are the agenda for enemy discourse.
The I-Thou view is focused on mutuality; it understands and is ‘present’ with and for the other.
This view has insight into the world of the other, whereas the I-It view sees the other as an object
in order of process to outcome. Essentially, the I-It view is self-serving and object-serving. There
is no leadership in the I-It view, but high levels of management. People don’t follow the I-It
manager. Rather, they comply, but there is no “heart” and ownership in their compliance.

What has Buber got to do with the psychology of risk? Can you join the dots? The I-Thou world
prioritises motivation, ownership, learning, relationships and dialogue. The I-It world prioritises
control, power, compliance, monologue and zero. The I-Thou view knows that understanding the
social psychology of human judgement and decision making is critical if one is to lead so that others
want to follow. One view meets and understands and is present with the other. The other meets and
doesn’t need to be present with the other, indeed the other gets in the way of achievable objectives.
This is why minimalist approaches to legislation, regulation, standards, coercion, control and
management are so limited. Zero endorses and promotes a focus on minimums and microscopics.
It is focused on physical counting injuries and misses the big picture of learning, maturity and
relationships. Zero doesn’t really motivate, it doesn’t prioritise learning or ownership. Zero may
achieve results and short-term outcomes but in the long term it drives dangerous by-products such
as denial, scepticism, cynicism, pessimism, indoctrination, distrust, and ignorance. All these are
overlooked in the instrumental focus on zero. Learning is overlooked or at worst is a competing goal
with zero.
One of the most significant contradictions in the discourse and trajectory of zero is the naive belief
that zero and learning are complementary, when indeed they are competing trajectories. Where one
trajectory opens up learning, the other closes down and finds solace in indoctrination.
The undercurrents of subcultural discourse are lost on the instrumental view. The 12 year old
stormtroopers kept fighting outside Hitler’s bunker while the managers inside committed suicide.
The Importance of Learning

Learning is essentially about change in one’s thinking, knowledge, behaviour, values, skills and/
or capability. Learning is not just about a response to what is overtly ‘taught’ (surface learning) but
includes the ‘hidden curriculum’, i.e. covert messages and information which are learned indirectly.
Indirect or covert messages are often contained in what is not said or by inadvertent messages
conveyed in strategy, actions, and subliminal and unconscious messages. There are 5 key things we
need to know about learning:
1. Implicit, Incidental Learning

Implicit learning results in what Polanyi (1967) calls tacit knowledge, that which we know but
cannot tell at the moment but which can be made explicit later. It may be that no knowledge is
exclusively implicit or explicit. Six forms of knowledge should be encouraged:
R5 %()1&!5+/#,535#'*&##.5&,(#(!5) 51"#"5."5%()1,5#-5/(1,5) 51".5#-5+/#,
R5 %()1&!5)(-.,/.5 ,)'5."5!!,!.#)(5) 52*,#(-5#(5&)(!7.,'5''),35.",)/!"5
interaction with visualised data
R5 %()1&!5#( ,,535)-,0,-5.)55*&5) 5,*,-(..#)(5-5#'*&##.5."),#-5) 5.#)(65
personal constructs, schemas, through focus group discussion
R5 %()1&!5.".5(&-5,*#65#(./#.#05/(,-.(#(!5),5,-*)(-

R5 %()1&!5(.#&5#(5.,(- ,,#(!5%()1&!5 ,)'5)(5-#./.#)(5.)5().",
R5 %()1&!5'5#(5.%(7 ),7!,(.5.#0#.#-65*,*.#)(-5(5(),'-5#(5
group interaction.
Tacit knowledge provides much of the basis for the way we interact with people and situations.
Implicit learning methodology encourages an ‘unthinkingly’ or reactive engagement of
assumptions, values and knowledge through situated learning, that is experiential learning through
its interface with concepts and visual representations.
2. Situated Learning
Informal learning is also an important part of situated learning. The notion of situated learning
takes us beyond understandings of learning as being internal, or ‘within the skin’, of individuals
towards an understanding that takes in the social, contextual and distributive world.
Much of the experimentation and theorising concerning cognitive processes and development
have treated cognition as being possessed by and residing in the heads of individuals. Those
interested in distributed cognition have looked to the tools and social relations ‘outside’ people’s
heads. They are not only ‘sources of stimulation and guidance’ but are actually vehicles of thought.
In this way one can speak of not only living in community and experiencing community but
‘learning through community. It is not just the individual who learns cognitively, but the
community can also learn as a whole system of interrelated factors. People think in relationship
with others and use various learning tools in context which stimulate learning. Different
cognitions therefore emerge in different situations.
So it is that we can talk of ‘situated learning’. It can be seen as involving participation in
communities of practice. Situated learning involves the whole person; it implies not only a relation
to specific activities, but a relation to social communities – it implies becoming a full participant,
a member, a particular kind of person in context. In this view, learning only partly – and often
incidentally – implies becoming able to be involved in new activities, to perform new tasks and
functions, to master new understandings. Activities, tasks, functions and understandings do not
exist in isolation; they are part of broader systems of relations in which they have meaning.
New people in a social context enter at the edge; their participation is on the periphery.
Gradually their engagement deepens and becomes more complex. They become full participants,
and will often take on organising or facilitative roles. Thus, knowledge is located in the
community of practice. Furthermore, in this view it makes little sense to talk of knowledge
that is decontextualised, abstract or general as in the way people often refer to the notion of
‘common sense’.
Four propositions are common to the range of perspectives that now come together under the
banner of situated learning:
R5 #!"7&0&5),52*,.5%()1&!5(5-%#&&5(55!#(5 ,)'50,3352*,#(-5.51),%65
and in community or family.
R5 )'#(7-*#ŀ5%()1&!5-5(--,35 ),5."50&)*'(.5) 52*,.#-5B#885'/"5) 5

expertise relies on detailed local knowledge of a workplace, locality or industry).
R5 ,(#(!5-55-)#&5*,)--8
R5 ()1&!5-5'5#(5*,.#5(5.,(- ),'5.",)/!"5!)&7#,.5"0#)/,8
Implicit learning occurs at several levels:

R5 /,#(!5."5.,#(#(!5*,)--65."5.,#(#(!5'.")5#-5'51#."5."5&,(#(!5)(.(.5-)5
that participants learn by the way the training is ‘performed’ as much as the content that is
delivered. For example, in training on conflict, the experiences of conflict are embedded in the
way people are directed in their experiential activities.
R5 Ļ,)/!"5."5*&)3'(.5) 5&,(#(!5!,*"#5.))&-651"#"5.5."5.#'5&3550#-#&5(5#(0#-#&5
foundation for the ongoing penetration of image-based learning to take effect.
R5 Ļ,)/!"55)'*,"(-#05*&)3'(.5) 5#(.!,.5(5.,!.5\&,(#(!5."()&)!#-8
R5 .,/./,#(!5."5/-5) 5-*5(5)(.2.5-/"5.".650(5#(5."5-.5/*5) 5."5,))'65)(!,/(.5
learning is engendered by the way people are managed into relationships.
R5 Ļ5 )/-5#-5&13-5)(5*)*&5(5#(.,.#(!51#."5&&5&,(#(!5#(.&&#!(-8
R5 Ŀ)&5&,(#(!5B),5)#&5)!(#.#)(5-5.,'5353!).-%35goijC5-")/&55'5#(5
experiential learning activities and uses a range of tools which build and support learning.
R5 &#0,35) 5#(#(.&5&,(#(!5.",)/!"5."5*-3")&)!35) 5()/(.,5B%()1&!#(!5."5
importance of learning through play, simulation and role).
The use of semiotics and Metaphor Learning, e.g. the iceberg ‘above and below the line’.
From the above we can see how discussions of incidental learning become linked not only with
situated learning but with an array of subtle learning methods which are embedded and seemingly
invisible to the learner. As an example, the focus on communities of practice rather than a
dedicated learning environment engages implicit learning through relationships, interactivity
and conversations.
3. Experiential Learning (Learning in Doing Activities)

The use of simulated and experiential activities (also gaming) in training is becoming recognised
by some organisations as a vital way of embedding learning and triggering change, but has been a
widely accepted practice in schooling and education for 50 years. Experiential learning or learning
simulations promote the following:
1. The ‘real”’or virtually real. Activities simulate something so well that real learning takes place.
In fact, ‘virtual reality’ is now a widely recognised term whose implications are important
to education.
2. ‘Hands-on’ learning, so that participants become activators, not just listeners or observers.
3. Motivation, participant involvement in the activity itself is so strong that interest in learning is
triggered by the activity itself.

4. Simulations are targeted and designed to take into consideration developmental (learning
maturity) needs of participants.
5. Inspiration by valuing the input (knowledge and experience brought to the context) of the
participant which encourages participants to enhance the activity through their own ideas.
6. Simulations accommodate the maturity level of participants.
7. Empower participants to take on responsible roles, find ways to succeed, and develop problem-
solving tools as a result of the activity.
The use of simulations puts the trainer into a new role, one that is the inevitable result of the
evolution of the role of the teacher in education. Most trainers should recognise that their role is
no longer that of a presenter of information but a facilitator of learning and that trainees are no
longer sponges for facts.
4. Learning and Multiple Intelligences

Any training or education should engage as many of the Multiple Learning Intelligences
(Gardner 1983) as possible. These are:
R5 #(!/#-.#5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.535-3#(!65",#(!5(5-#(!51),-8
R5 )!#&I ."'.#&5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.535.!),#-#(!65&--# 3#(!8
R5 *.#&5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.5350#-/&#4#(!65,'#(!65/-#(!5."5'#(]-538
R5 /-#&5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.535,"3."'65'&)35(5'/-#8
R5 )#&3I #(-.".#5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.535.)/"#(!65')0#(!65#(.,.#(!51#."5-*
R5 ./,&#-.#5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.535-./3#(!5(./,&5*"()'(8
R5 (.,*,-)(&5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.535-",#(!65)'*,#(!65,&.#(!65#(.,0#1#(!8
R5 (.,*,-)(&5 ,(#(!95&,(-5-.5351),%#(!5&)(65)(5#(#0#/&#-5*,)$.-8
5. The Essentials in Learning
In order for any learning to be successful the following conditions should be in place:
(a) Trust
There can be no change, development or transition without the establishment of trust. To
establish trust takes significant time and skill. The emphasis here is on relationships, what Buber
called the I-You in meeting. In the psychosocial approach to learning, the development of the
dynamic community is central to the establishment of trust. Each participant group becomes
that dynamic community through the interaction of shared visualised and conversational (focus
group) knowledge.
(b) Climate (Ethos, Place and Space)

The rate and pace in embracing change will be limited unless people come into an atmosphere

(climate) which generates trust, engagement, motivation, recognition, resilience and learning.
A climate of acceptance and respect is foundational to establishing a positive climate. The
importance of confidentiality in Keypad response is important in this regard. Whilst respondents
can see the group’s response, they cannot know how any particular individual has responded to any
particular statement.
(c) Structure
Change relies upon a structure (providing a degree of certainty, security and meaning) which
demonstrates through the methodology of organisation that people are valued and supported. A
structure which disempowers people and limits freedoms and choice is essentially de-motivating.
(d) A Change Culture

The essence of all change requires the inclination to change: the “want” or “will” to change.
Recognition and reward in a measurable form are critical to this process, as is the methodology as
to how people are engaged.
(e) Engagement
The key to engagement is acceptance of “the other” and valuing people’s contribution despite
circumstance and history.
(f ) Meaning and Purpose

People will not change unless they see sense in the change and some positive outcome for
themselves. The change management process needs to be a “sensemaking” one which is
intertwined with other key change elements such as trust, motivation and engagement. It is
meaning and purpose which drives the development of resilience.
(g) Ability and Capability

Change will not be effective unless the change agent has the ability to drive and direct change
(without overpowering others) and unless the participant has the capability/capacity to change.
Realism is not Fatalism

There is an assumption made by the proponents of zero harm that to not endorse zero harm is
a commitment to fatalism. This binary supposition discounts the validity of another view, that
of realism. Australians seem to have a special mindfulness when it comes to delusion; we call it
colloquially ‘the bullshit radar’. People who are not realistic are branded as ‘dreamers’, they are soon
dismissed and their language is tolerated as ‘noise’. Perfectionism pretty quickly alienates others, the
projection of perfectionism creating isolation.
A great deal of my work is in heavy industry, and one of my clients has been quite frank about the
necessity of managing the three drivers of their business. They have turned their thinking into a
graphic triangle showing that the only way to get the business right is to appropriately manage cost,
production and safety. The realism of this triangle, presented at Figure 20, demonstrates the reality of
running a business. It is not a case of ‘either-or’, but ‘all in balance’. It would be ludicrous to say that

risk has no trade-off. The real message of business is not ‘zero risk’ but rather ‘risk safely’. The costs
of eliminating all risks is absurd from the standpoints of both learning and cost. Businesses exist to
make profit and there are limits to the risk-trade off and risk equation. Sunstein (2002, 2005) presents
an excellent study of this dynamic.
Figure 20. The Balance of Cost, Risk and Production
Human Error and Luck

There is a range of expressions and words that can be used as a litmus test for the sincerity of the
‘zero harm organisation’. The ‘zero harm organisation’ cannot believe in or tolerate accidents, luck,
mistakes or any discourse that recognises human fallibility. When one is committed to the zero idea
that ‘all accidents are preventable’, one is locked in to the ideology of perfectionism. Zero ideology is
committed to the total elimination of all risk. For this position, risk doesn’t make sense.
It is a nonsense to propose zero harm on Friday and hope for luck with your football team or racing
bet on Saturday. It is a nonsense to aspire to zero on Monday after acknowledging fallibility on
Sunday. The litmus test is this: listen for language of ‘luck’, ‘mistakes’ or ‘fallibility’ in all the language
of zero harm advocates, and then challenge the inconsistency. Listen for arguments for the total
elimination of risk, and ask how this makes sense in the light of learning and living.
The discourse of zero is also at odds with the language of ‘human error’. Even though I have a
problem with the obscure language of ‘human error’, it is nonetheless a form of language used in
popular culture that excludes zero. I don’t like the language of ‘human error’ because it is often used in
an obscure way that has little meaning. Sometimes the language of ‘human error’ is simply used as a
way to apportion blame. Along with expressions like ‘common sense’, ‘can do’ and ‘be careful’, it lacks
definition and simply creates confusion in trying to make sense of risk.
Unfortunately, the discussion of human error in the literature seems to totally miss the importance of
the unconscious and subconscious in human judgement and decision making. Many proponents of
human error are also seduced by the idea of absolute control, and come to the conclusion that human
error is either intentional (violation) or accidental.

The discourse of human error tends to focus on generic and poorly defined ‘causes’. These are often
described as ‘mode error’, getting lost, lack of coordination, communication error, lack of perception,
stress, workload, automation surprise and overload.
On the surface, all of these expressions attempt to explain choice or mistake in choice, but essentially
do not describe psychological, cultural or sociopsychological factors in event activity. At best, most of
them make about as much sense of risk as ‘Murphy’s Law. Most texts on ‘human error’ fall back on
the old emphasis on systems perfection and policing.
Figure 21. The Human Error Fault Tree
Slip Attentional Failures
Unintended Action
Lapse Memory Failures
Unsafe Acts
Rule-based Failures
Mistake
Knowledge-based Failures
Intended Action
Violation Routine Failures
If there is human error, fallibility and imperfection, there can be no zero.
Steve Bradbury and Olympic Gold by Error

Steve Bradbury is an Australian short track speed skater who holds an Olympic gold medal for
the 1000 metre sprint at the 2002 Winter Olympics. Bradbury won gold based on the mistakes of
others. He only got to the final on the strategy that others would make mistakes. It doesn’t really
matter what the circumstances or strategy, Bradbury is the gold medalist for speed skating for the
2002 Winter Olympics. After his final he stated that he thought the quest for perfection by his
opponents would make them take too many risks, and his strategy paid off. In the final, all four
competitors in front of him crashed, leaving him to cruise through for a gold medal. Bradbury was
the oldest competitor and he knew he could not beat his opponents by speed alone. Instead he
relied upon perfectionism and human fallibility to do the trick for him. His strategy paid off.
The denial of human error and fallibility is a denial of the unexpected, a delusion of absolute control
and the utmost fundamentalist faith in absolute certainty.

Workshop Questions
1. What are your silences? What things do you not talk about so as not to influence others?
2. Why is entertaining doubt such a challenge for people? Have you ever had to turn back after
leaving the home because you thought you had not switched something off ? Why did you do it?
3. What happens when the language of zero just turns out to be meaningless rhetoric? Is this how
the word is used in your experience? Can you give some examples?
4. Think of something that you have learned recently. What circumstances helped the learning?
5. Do you believe in luck? Do you think some people are luckier than others? Do some people seem
to win more than others? Why do people seem to have a lucky streak?
Transition
The language and trajectory of zero is a quest for a perfect place. I wonder in what ways perfect goals
exclude humans. What happens to people who can’t perform like others? Is there any place in our
society for people who were born harmed? Do people with disabilities have a place in an organisation
that sets its goals in perfection and absolutes? How do people with disabilities manage to avoid harm?
These questions and questions of luck pose difficulties for the zero advocates. The quest for zero is not
a quest that is sensitive to the needs of fallible humans, it’s a quest for super humans. The next chapter
outlines the dispositions and qualities of a humanising organisation, an organisation without zero in
its discourse.

CHAPTER 8
The Humanising Organisation
The great consolation in life is to say what one thinks - Voltaire.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen -

Einstein.
The Humanising Organisation

8
Whatever language and discourse we choose for our organisation, it needs to be humanising, not
dehumanising. Learning organisations and humanising organisations are people-centred, not
product-centred. It is a delusion to think that zero is a person-centred ideology. It is a content- and
numerical-centered ideology that professes to care about people, professes to want no harm but
has a trajectory of absolute control, fundamentalist certainty and, counterintuitively, mechanistic-
centred trajectories. The logic of zero is calculative.
Observing and Listening for Learning

I often respond to requests to meet directors and managers in organisations. My first encounter
with the organisation is all about observation, mine of them and theirs of me. It somehow
happens that I am always required to wait for at least 15 minutes before the meeting begins, just
long enough to observe and listen for cultural signals. What language and symbols are present
and absent from walls on rooms? What do the toilets and kitchen facilities tell me about the
organisation? How do people talk? Is learning in the air? What do the artefacts of culture
tell me?
One of the best ways to determine if yours is a humansising organisation is to see what is done in
the space of disability and learning. There is no room for mistakes, failure and learning in a zero
organisation. There is no tolerance, acceptance, support or understanding in an organisation that can
only countenance zero.
I am often asked to present to organisations about what I do. I don’t sell training packages or off-
the-shelf solutions as if one size fits all. Rather, I prefer to get to know the organisation and let the
organisation know me, and see if there is a ‘fit’. If there is no ‘fit’ there is no relationship, and if there
is no relationship there will be no learning. Training is about content-retention. Learning is about
maturity and capability.
Chapter 8: The Humanising Organisation 103

When you first encounter an organisation you should listen for what is not said. Listen for silences
and ‘noise’ and what is more than rhetoric. Does the organisation ask questions or is it a ‘telling’
organisation? What demonstrates that the organisation is interested in learning? Does the word
‘learn’ appear anywhere in its cultural indicators? There will be little learning if there is no willingness
to learn, and little maturation if the organisation believes it has ‘arrived’.
So I sit in the waiting room and observe the cultural artefacts on walls, looking for slogans, symbols,
words, language and other cultural indicators. I find it interesting to read vision statements and
mission statements on walls and observe if words like ‘learning’ are missing. When only words like
‘compliance’ are repeated, it tells me a great deal about the lack of vision in ‘vision statements’.
How Language and Discourse Shape Behaviour

The language we speak affects our perceptions of the world. We know this from observing the
development of language in small children, as they learns to connect objects and subjects with words.
We observe how a child’s knowledge of her environment shapes her language, and how her language
shapes her developing knowledge. Language is such a strong element in the formation, identity and
management of culture.
Buddhism provides a good example of how language shapes behaviour. There is no concept of ‘self-
esteem’ in Buddhism, so how can you talk about it? It is a construction of western individualism. We
in the West see a presenting behaviour and interpret it as a loss of self esteem, whereas in Tibet it is a
social behaviour related to relationships in the village and to the environment.
Why does this matter?

In some work cultures it is normal to engage in ‘doublespeak’, saying one thing and doing another.
The language says one thing but the discourse is really one of scepticism, cynicism and negativity.
When we have a conversation, the things we say can ‘prime’ the minds of the listener. If the real
message is ‘ignore the message’, then no wonder nothing changes and nobody learns. The way we
‘frame’ the message is a critical influence in how the listener is ‘primed’. If a subculture of ‘tick and
flick’ is endorsed, then this is what really ‘primes’ the culture (after all the inspectors and auditors
have disappeared). The subculture in this case is much stronger than what is espoused because it is
so closely associated with belonging with peers. Even more surprising, the more the regulator rules
with the big stick (rather than education and learning), the more the union wields its authoritarian
(rather than community) discourse, the more power they give to the subcultural norm. The subculture
has enormous subversive power because it stands so clearly against the ‘out of touch’ discourse of the
authority (union or regulator who visit but don’t ‘belong’).
What can be done about this?

The first thing is to recognise the dynamic of counterintuitive forces at work in the subcultures of
workers. Leaders need to be much smarter about what the psychology of risk/neuroscience teaches us.
Management without a knowledge of cognitive dissonance, autosuggestion and framing (particularly
loss and gain framing), and skills associated with an understanding of human judgement and decision
making, will continue to endorse the status quo.
The authoritarian approach makes lots of ‘noise’, enjoys short term success based on fear, but in the
long term there is little ownership.

Your Talk Matters
We finally come to the discussion about the fundamental problem with zero harm discourse and
language. Leaders need to be far more sophisticated and astute about blind advocacy of messages
rather than simply adopting any form of language as if it has no influence on workers. Zero harm
language is not neutral, and leaders should be far more aware of how such language ‘primes’ workers
psychologically and culturally.
Priming refers to the sometimes passive, subtle and subconscious ‘shaping’ of people’s thinking to
receive and extract information. A range of stimuli can ‘prime’ (affect) people’s behaviour and decision
making such as the environment, language, social behaviour of others, peer pressure, fear and sequence
of events. The interesting thing about priming is that we are mostly unaware of the way our mind is
shaped and influenced by things external to us.
Anything which stimulates our senses can influence the way we are ‘primed’. A scene of a
quiet running stream, gentle nature sounds, comfortable temperature, soft waves caressing the sand -
all have a way of de-stressing us, helping calm us down. When we are primed in this way, it influences
our behaviour. The colour of a room, the tone of voice, atmospheric temperature, scratching sounds,
thrash metal music, the feel of softness on our face, a gentle breeze on a hot day and the noise of
screaming children, all affect our mood and decision making. The research overwhelmingly recognises
the way framing and priming affect knowledge acquisition and response (Bargh, 2007).
Ambrose Bierce said in his Devil’s Dictionary (1906), ‘to decide, was to succumb to the
preponderance of one set of influences over another’. This is why our behaviour changes when we go
on holidays, when we sit in a lounge chair after a hard day’s work and enjoy a drink, and when we
hear ‘musak’ in shops containing subliminal messages. Casinos spend millions of dollars investing in
the design of ambient sounds for their venues. If these things didn’t change mood and behaviour, why
would they do them? All the subliminal messages in shopping centres that stimulate our senses to
‘buy’ and ‘stay’, have been carefully worked out to intentionally ‘prime’ our subconscious. The words,
the signs, the personal greetings when one enters a shop all influence our positive decision making,
just as an unwelcoming, unfriendly shop influences us to leave.
The experimental evidence for the priming of goals, decision making and memory recall is
overwhelming. Researchers Moskowitz, Hassin, Claxton, Wegner, Fine, Slovic, and Plous show that
mood and decision making can be easily influenced by external factors, such as language or objects.
In a famous experiment, Bargh set up people for a job interview in which an interviewee had a chance
meeting with a person in the lift. The experiment involved a person with a cup of hot coffee or ice
cold coke having their hands full of folders and bags. The unsuspecting interviewee was asked for a
favour, to hold the cup whilst the person juggled their belongings. In a post-experiment interview
it turns out that the hot or cold temperature had radically influenced the participant’s perception
of the interviewer. In another experiment the scent of cleaning fluid was filtered through the air
conditioning system of an office that influenced people to tidy up when eating at their desk. In a
prison dilemma scenario, the presence of a briefcase or a backpack on a table influenced the level of
competitiveness in various activities.
A wide variety of environmental triggers have been demonstrated to show that verbal stimuli
semantically ‘prime’ people.
It is a peculiar contradiction that people in the construction industry build structures with carefully
designed aesthetic considerations because the designer knows how the building will affect behaviour.

Designers know how space distributes power, how colour and shape influences organisation and
security (Soja, 1994). How can construction workers working in cluttered site sheds and bare tin huts
not realise that this has a part to play in how they behave or are primed on the job? Then managers
wander about the job with punitive gaze and harsh language, negatively priming the way workers
view risk.
We know too that autosuggestion is very powerful. It works in advertising and the media; this is how
‘pitching’, ‘framing’ and ‘priming’ works. Priming is received in the subconscious and transfers in the
unconscious to enactment in the conscious (Hassin, 2005).
‘Priming’ hearts and minds is sometimes intuitive and at other times counterintuitive. The television
program ‘The Gruen Transfer’ is a great place to learn about counterintuitive thinking, pitching,
framing and priming human behaviour. Advertisers as social psychologists know how thinking can
be primed intuitively and counterintuitively. It takes some skill in psychology and social psychology
to know when something works counterintuitively in the negative, when in fact, on the surface the
message looks as if it’s a positive. This is the problem with zero harm language. It’s non-motivational,
non-inspirational and counterintuitively primes workers for failure.
We may think it’s wonderful to build up the ego of someone with false hope. We may do so in some
grand idea that puffing up their self-esteem is always good. Then, watch them ‘crash and burn’ when
reality hits and the delusion drives them deeper into self-defeating depression.
Autosuggestion is very powerful. We know that news reports about certain behaviours and ideas
create ‘copycat’ behaviours that sometimes ‘go viral’, like ‘planking’. At the height of the ‘planking’
craze, people were losing their jobs because of copycat behaviour. Whilst the reports about planking
were intended to be negative, it counterintuitively was attractive. Now that the planking craze and
airwaves have gone silent, the behaviour has diminished. This is how ‘priming’ works, this is why
silences make sense.
So when people don’t use certain language and are skilled in silences, it is absurd for others to argue
that such silence proves ignorance and belief in its opposite. Qantas doesn’t use the language of zero
harm, so does this mean they desire injury? Hospitals don’t use the language of zero harm, so does
this mean they want people harmed? No, they use promotional goals, not avoidance goals, to drive
their vision for safety and management of risk.
When I do on-site coaching of managers and leaders I try to help them listen to the ‘silences’ as much
as to the noises on site. It is just as important to know what is not said and why, as it is to be alert to
what is said. It’s relatively easy to observe and hear the visible. These rarely hurt you. It’s much more
sophisticated and skilled to be able to observe and listen to the invisible.
Cultures that strategically know their silences are more sophisticated than cultures that fill the
airwaves with meaningless zero harm noise. Cultures that are full of meaningless slogans and
nonsense unattainable mantras ‘prime’ confusion, create sub-cultures of scepticism and frustration
in the minds of workers. Such cultures fill the airwaves with doublespeak and minds with cynicism,
creating a climate of demotivation and constant re-qualification of what the messages ‘really’ mean.
In the end, workers make the message mean whatever they want in some kind of act of mental
gymnastics. As a result the atmosphere is demotivating and people play the doublespeak game of
acknowledging the mantra but thinking the opposite.

Right Language and Goals in the Psychology of Risk
Whatever goals, targets of language are used in a attempt to develop ownership or motivation
to ownership in the management of risk, they must be promotional goals. Researchers in social
psychology know that gain-framed messages are much more effective that loss-framed messages.
Avoidance goals drive negativity and the acceptance of failure as the measure of effectiveness. It
seems strange in the zero harm model that safety effectiveness is only known by the negative of
non-injury. How strange is it to count mistakes, errors and injuries and use these as a measure of
cultural effectiveness. This negative mindset contradicts all the research literature on how people
learn (Claxton, 2011; Butterworth and Thwaites, 2005; Paul, 1993; Sloan, 2006; Neville, 2010;
Robinson, 2011).
Goals and targets that speak about the ‘safety journey’, ‘harm minimisation’, ‘management of risks’
and gain-framed messages associated with family and welfare are much more effective than avoidance
goals that prime the mind on the negative of failure. One should not enter the zero debate without
having some understanding of how cultures omit or commit in the priming of language. The reality
is, talk matters, language matters and cultural discourse matters. Leaders in safety should be aware
of how language works intuitively and counterintuitively before they commence goal setting and
goal pursuit.
Examples of Promotional Goal Organisations

A number of organisations that I work with manage risk and safety as well or better than others and
find no need to embrace the delusion of zero. Here are five some examples of excellent ways to use
langauge to both prime and promote safety and risk management in your organisation:
1. Baulderstone (Victoria) have a mantra of ‘Safety Matters’ and the ‘Safety Journey’
2. Built Constructions have a play on words and use the motto ‘Built on Safety” and
‘Building Relationships’
3. Castlemaine Gold use the three words ‘Safe, Cost and Production’
4. Hindmarsh Constructions have a focus on ‘Leadership at Work’ and use such mottos as ‘Don’t
walk by’.
5. UGL have a play on the letter U in all their language and have risk and safety language such as
‘USafe’, ‘UWalk’ etc.
There are of course many more organisations than these that know that motivation, learning,
reporting, trust, and engagement with the workforce are critical for organisational culture and safety.
The point is this: there are creative options to form promotional goals for risk management and safety,
and there is no impediment for remaining silent on zero. Indeed, one cannot infer from the silence of
these organisations that they are any less concerned about risk than organisations that are preoccupied
by zero.
In some ways these organisations are ‘world class’ and ‘generative’, as termed by Patrick Hudson, or,
as Karl Weick described, High Reliability Organisations (HROs). Organisations can be ‘world class’
without the mantra of zero. Indeed, organisations fixated on zero at best, can only be calculative
organisations. If an organisation desires to be ‘world class’, an HRO or ‘generative’ it must be a
humanising organisation.

Can an Organisation be ‘World Class’ Without Zero?
The concept of ‘world class’ usually denotes someone with a skill or attribute that puts him or her in
the highest class in the world. We think of world class as leaders in the world in an area of expertise,
e.g. athletics, design or medicine. We speak of ‘world class’ swimmers, ‘world class’ design in vehicle
manufacture or a ‘world class’ award such as the Nobel Prize. A ‘world class’ organisation is therefore
an organisation that as seen as the highest class in the world. The aspiration to be among the best in
the world in any field suggests a commitment, energy and dedication like few others in the world.
This is indeed a scary proposition for what it suggests.
The idea of being ‘world class’ in safety is not a new idea. Prof. Karl E. Weick (1999) proposed the
idea of High Reliability Organisations as the pinnacle of the organisation at the peak of mindfulness,
sensemaking and related matters such as safety and quality. Weick (1999, p. 81) comments:
The processes found in the best HROs provide the cognitive infrastructure that enables
simultaneous adaptive learning and reliable performance.
When people refer to HROs they usually have in mind organisations such as nuclear power-
generation plants, naval aircraft carriers, air traffic control systems and space shuttles, to list a few.
HROs operate in an:
...unforgiving social and political environment with high potential for error and where the scale
of consequences precludes learning through experimentation, and where to avoid failures in the
face of shifting sources of vulnerability, complex processes are used to manage complex technology
(Weick 1999, p. 2).
The opposite of an HRO is a High Hazard Organisation (HHO) exemplified by being known by
their failure to remain reliable, such as BP Horizon One, the ESSO Longford explosion and Bhopal.
An HRO is known for its sustained reliability in its field of expertise at a standard that is the envy of
most of the world.
This final section of the book provides a definitive argument for what constitutes ‘world class’ in
managing risk and safety. The section uses the work of Prof. K. E Weick (HRO) and Patrick Hudson
(Generative) to outline the qualities, dispositions and characteristics of what it means to be ‘world
class’. It introduces the Human Dymensions Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix and shows what
an HRO or generative organisation needs to attend to in order to be known as ‘world class’. The
word ‘matrix’ in this context is used to mean ‘the cultural, social, or political environment in which
something develops’. The section discusses risk and safety maturity, the importance of reliability and
regression to the mean, as important facets in the argument.
The Characteristics of a World Class Safety Organisation

HROs understand complex adaptive systems and aspire to maintain human-centred safety in an
environment of regulation, legislation and policing by various authorities. Regulation and legislation
tend to foster calculative organisations. HROs are conscious of obligations and the necessity of rising
above mere primary approaches to managing risk. HROs comply with regulations but also enable
simultaneous adaptive learning and reliable performance. HROs are person-centred in mentalitie.
Karl Weick introduces the term ‘mindfulness’ in his article ‘Organizing for High Reliability:
Processes of Collective Mindfulness’ (1999). According to Weick, highly mindful organisations
characteristically exhibit:

a) preoccupation with failure
b) reluctance to simplify
c) sensitivity to operations
d) commitment to resilience, and
e) deference to expertise.
These five dispositions are what Weick describes as ‘collective mindfulness’. Collective mindfulness is
one of ten fundamental characteristics of an HRO.
Weick (1999, p.1) comments:
These processes reduce the inertial blind spots that allow failures to cumulate and produce
catastrophic outcomes.
Weick (2001) defines mindfulness as:
The combination of ongoing scrutiny of existing operations, continuous refinement and

differentiation of expectations based on newer experiences, willingness and capability to invent
new expectations that make sense of unprecedented events, a more nuanced appreciation of
context and ways to deal with it, and identification of new dimensions of context that improve
foresight and current functioning.
Weick (1999) denotes the following as core characteristics of an HRO:
1. Complex high risk environments

2. Consequences of error would be serious
3. Collective mindfulness across organisation
4. Positive safety culture
5. Continuous improvement
6. Learning culture
7. Highly trained and well-rewarded staff
8. Creative ways to cope with errors - (risk safely)
9. Regular checks – redundancy of processes (chronic unease)
10. Flexibility to deal with change
11. Demonstrated ‘sensemaking’.
For the moment a brief explanation of each of the five dispositions of collective mindfulness
is instructive.
A Preoccupation with Failure is not a negative ‘fixation’ on failure but refers much more to the
importance of prioritising imagination in the life of the organisation and how it embraces risk. The
HRO lives in the realm of possibilities more than actualities. HROs encourage imagination in the

life of the organisation and know that the believability of sensemaking is critical to the management
of risk. HROs know that success breeds over-confidence (hubris), narrows perceptions and
rewards fantasy.
HROs have a Reluctance to Simplify operations. That is, they obsess about what they ignore and pay
attention to silences as much as ‘noise’. HROs know that those on the front line, those most at risk,
are most likely to catch early unanticipated warning signals but have the least argumentative power
and skill to persuade others that the signal should be taken seriously. This has been the case with
many disasters such Challenger, BP’s Horizon One and Piper Alpha.
Sensitivity to Operations is about strategy with the front line in mind. This is why it is critical
for board members and executive staff to walk the front line, conduct regular conversations and
understand work at the lowest levels of the business. Often, decision makers are caught in the ‘big
picture’, yet this is not where humans are exposed to the highest risks.
Commitment to Resilience is a disposition that commits to learning. HROs know that humans are
fallible, and understand that the unexpected happens. Resilience is about bouncing back from errors
and about coping with surprises. Such a disposition aids diagnosis, critical analysis and detection, and
minimises defensiveness.
Deference to Expertise is about an understanding of sociopolitical power. HROs don’t get caught up
in hierarchical rule and power distribution. Deference to expertise is not deference to the powerful.
Power is usually established in organisations through political dynamics rather than knowledge
and expertise. With every problem, someone sees it coming. But those people tend to be low in the
organisation, invisible, unauthorised and reluctant to speak up.
Weick also discusses the essential tools and filters we use to make sense of information. These are:
1. Self Esteem: Your own confidence in yourself, personal identity and what you think of yourself in
relation to others will affect the way you interpret information.
2. History: Your past story, from where you were born and lived to how you got to where you are.
All things in your personal history have some influence in what you know and how you interpret
the present.
3. Social Context: Where you are in relation to others, what is happening around you, the nature
of those around you and the way they relate to the same information all influence the way you
interpret information.
4. Confirming Evidence: We act something into belief, even creating a bias in our minds so that
when something happens it confirms the belief. For example, if we rev up our own car in response
to the hot car full of young men mentioned earlier, we enact a new scenario which may confirm
or disconfirm what we believe. If we hold our finger up or tactically ignore their behaviour, each
act brings into being a new act. Something new changes the sense of what is happening.
5. Cues and Indicators: What we see, hear and feel doesn’t necessarily carry information with it. We
recognise indicators and cues which give us information similar to things we have experienced
before. We recognise the importance of the revving motor and know it means power, provocation
and aggression. All information is subjective and interpreted.
6. Believability: Isn’t it peculiar that when something unexpected happens we express surprise,

amazement and disbelief ? Our capacity to imagine is directly linked not only to what we believe
but also to what we are willing to believe. Our ability to imagine extends or limits our ability to
make sense of things. Believability is an important part of prediction, and combines with past
experience and cues to help us imagine what is possible. If we don’t think something is possible,
we don’t plan for it and certainly can’t imagine the risks associated with it. We now know a
tsunami can kill 250,000 people, we now know in Australia that a bushfire can kill 250 people
and we now know that an earthquake and tsunami can put a country into nuclear crisis. Such
evidence changes the way we interpret new information.
7. Flow: The final tool we use to make sense of things is flow. The pace and speed of events affects
the way we interpret them. Much of what we sense goes quickly to our subconscious and triggers
a rapid intuitive response. Our intuition or gut feeling bypasses the need to process things step
by step in a slow logical pattern. Our intuition gives us the ‘flight or fight’ response we need in a
crisis.
According to Weick, HROs are organisations that normalise collective mindfulness and sensemaking.
Hazard, Risk and Safety Maturity

There are many organisations and programs that advertise about ‘safety leadership’ , risk management’
and ‘safety culture’, but advocate little more than tightening up systems, vigilance in policing and
raising penalties for non-compliance. Whilst systems, policing and compliance are important,
they are not highly complex strategies for human management, and function on a binary trading
dynamic which at times seem to be developed as if humans are not involved. We see evidence of the
supposed neutrality of primary controls in the ineffective flooding (cognitve overload) of humans
with excess safety bureaucracy. Cognitve overload is becoming an increasing problem in the over-
bureaucratisation of risk management and safety systems. Over-regulation and over-bureaucratisation
drive humans to default ‘micro-rules’, intuitions and heuristics that tend to be simplistic and risky, but
enable them to cope.
Physical controls are the fundamental focus of safety and risk professionals. Physical controls are what
I term the ‘primary’ level of safety and risk response (behaviour). Whilst primary controls are the
fundamental building block of hazard and risk management, they are not the only controls. Compared
to more complex responses, primary controls are relatively quick and easy.
Risk and safety maturity should include the full spectrum of available controls and influences. This is
illustrated in Figure 22, The Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix ©. The Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix
shows how controls increase in complexity and intensify over time. As one ‘steps up’ in safety and risk
maturity, one realises that the fundamentals of Primary Controls are insufficient on their own to
manage risk.
Secondary Influences are more complex than primary controls because they understand the
secondary layer of human response as critical to the effectiveness of primary controls. For example,
whilst it is good to have checklists and systems to manage risk, it is also good to know how ‘checklist
thinking’ and ‘checklist fatigue’ affect humans. The psychosocial dimension of risk response is complex
because it involves knowledge of the many heuristics, biases and ‘effects’ that make up human counter-
intuition. Safety risk maturity and leadership begins with an understanding of human judgement and
decision making. Learning to influence controls associated with secondary hazards and risks involves
a longitudinal view of ‘risking safely’.

Tertiary Influences are the most complex, intense and longitudinal in nature. This is because tertiary
controls involve group inter-relationships. Human socialpsychological and sociopolitical interactions
are most evident in workplace discourse and the transmission of power. Observing and listening to
tertiary hazards and risks involves a sophisticated understanding of community and power awareness.
This is what Lefebre calle mentalities. When one is attuned to observing and hearing tertiary hazards
and risks, then one is able to begin to influence and exercise tertiary controls. This is where a mature
sense of safety leadership is most demonstrated.
The peak of safety maturity is the state of an HRO, and is the standard one should apply if one is to
aspire to being ‘world class’ in safety.
The Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix illustrates the 10 steps that compose the journey to ‘world class’
(total risk maturity, HRO). Maturity is a psychological term used to explain how a person responds
to context and environment. In this model one never ‘arrives’ or speaks of ‘arrival’ and knows that
talk of perfection is what limits maturation and learning. The capability and ability of that response
determines the level of observed maturity. It is often through embracing risk safely that humans
learn to ‘let go’ of mentalities that ‘hold back’ maturity. The middle line in the matrix indicates the
defining marker between technical, mechanistic and calculative approaches to risk (and safety) and
the beginning of a more human-centred approach. When one ‘steps above’ the demarcation line from
technocratic risk response to human-centred risk response, then one realises that learning has been
retarded due to holding onto the security of mechanistic management (zero) too tightly.
When one is more able to influence secondary and tertiary controls, the emphasis on primary controls
is put in proper perspective. As leaders in risk ‘step up’ to the journey in human-centred risk and
safety maturity then the influence of technocratic safety cascades down the risk spectrum and the
fixation on primary controls diminishes. The calculative mindset observes this journey as being either
‘irresponsible’ or an abandonment of regulation. The journey below the middle line is primarily fixated
on quantitative risk, measurement and punishment. The journey above the line is focused on people,
culture, learning and ownership. An organisation will never be mature in managing risk if it does not
attend strategically to the human-factors ‘above the line’.

Figure 22. Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix
Hudson’s Safety Maturity Model

Hudson (1999) proposes an evolutionary framework for the development of safety culture. Hudson
equates his Generative safety state with the Weick’s concept of an HRO (1999, p. 1). Hudson states:
Safety culture is seen as a way of ensuring high levels of safety performance in organisations, in
contrast to the systematic engineered management of hazards and effects.
The Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix indicates the Hudson model superimposed on the left of the
the Human Dymensions World Class Safety Model. Hudson’s evolutionary model proposes that
organisations evolve in five stages:
1. Pathological - caring less about safety than about not being caught.
2. Reactive - denial until forced to comply, emphasis on engineering out hazards ‘naturally’.
3. Calculative - command and control, knowledge and compliance with legislation and regulations.
4. Proactive - beginning to embed ownership of risk in all organisational life as an owned process.
5. Generative - safety is seamless, creative and sustainable integrated with organisational life.

Figure 23. Risk and Safety Maturity with Hudson’s Model
The generative state of safety maturity is characterised by trust, confession, open reporting, no
blaming, flexibility and learning. Hudson adapts the values from Reason’s (1997) five cultures to
establish the qualities of generative safety maturity.
For the purposes of this discussion and for clear alignment with the concept of an HRO, Weick’s
characteristics of mindfulness and sensemaking will be used to define the meaning of ‘world class’.
Weick’s High Reliability Organisation shares similar characteristics with Hudson’s Generative
Organisation.
The Importance of Reliability

Many organisations get stuck at what Hudson describes as the ‘calculative stage’ in the evolutionary
model of risk maturity. This stagnation tends to be conditioned by a disposition of fear, a mechanistic
worldview, preoccupation with measurement and delusional risk denial. The ideology and response
of zero, by its very calculative nature, must entrap an organisation to stutter at the calculative stage.
When an organisation is deluded into thinking that measuring Lost Time Injuries (LTIs) is a
measure of safety culture then counting is the priority. When one is fixed on the number zero, this
necessitates the counting down to zero in practice and mindset.
The calculative organisation is fixated on ‘repeatability’ as a definition of reliability. That is, any repeat
of harm becomes a measure of unreliability. The organisation preoccupied with ‘repeatability’ counts
LTIs as a primary measure of risk culture, this despite the fact that the research evidence shows
that such a view is erroneous (Wagner, 2010). The taken-for-granted definition of repeatability
as a measure of safety culture is generated by the ‘safety engineering’ perspective. Weick (1999, p.
35) states:

The singular focus on repeatability as the primary defining quality of reliability in traditional
definitions, fails to deal with the reality that reliable systems often must perform the same way
even though their working conditions fluctuate and are not always known in advance. For a
system to remain reliable, it must somehow, handle unforeseen situations in ways that forestall
unintended consequences.
The calculative view misunderstands reliability as a lack of variance in performance. The problem is
that unvarying procedures can’t handle what they didn’t anticipate. What happens in HROs is there is
variation in activity, but stability in the cognitive processes that make sense of this activity. An HRO
is more able to manage fluctuations than the HHO which develops anxiety and a ‘reactive’ culture
because it is paranoid about fluctuations and attributes cultural determinism to those fluctuations.
This is the problem of what Kahneman calls ‘regression to the mean’.
Regression to the Mean

Failure to appreciate ‘regression toward the mean’ is common in calculative organisational cultures
and often leads to incorrect interpretations and conclusions of lag indicator data. One of the best
examples of regression to the mean is provided by Nobel Laureate and founder of ‘Prospect Theory’
Daniel Kahneman in his autobiography.
Kahneman, world expert in risk and probability, was attempting to teach flight instructors that praise
is more effective than punishment. He was challenged by one of the instructors who relayed that
in his experience praising a cadet for executing a clean maneuver is typically followed by a lesser
performance, whereas screaming at a cadet for bad execution is typically followed by improved
performance. This, of course, is exactly what would be expected based on regression toward the mean.
A pilot’s performance, although based on considerable skill, will vary randomly from maneuver to
maneuver. When a pilot executes an extremely clean maneuver, it is likely that he or she had a bit
of luck in their favour in addition to their considerable skill. After the praise, but not because of it,
the luck component will probably disappear and the performance will be lower. Similarly, a poor
performance is likely to be partly due to bad luck. After the criticism, but again not because of it, the
next performance will likely be better.
Kahneman (2011, p. 176) comments:
The discovery I made on that day was that the flight instructors were trapped in an unfortunate
contingency: because they punished cadets when performance was poor, they were mostly
rewarded by subsequent improvement, even if the punishment was actually ineffective.
Furthermore, the instructors were not alone in that predicament. I had stumbled onto a significant
fact of the human condition: the feedback to which life exposes us is perverse. Because we tend
to be nice to other people when they please us and nasty when they do not, we are statistically
punished for being nice and rewarded for being nasty.
To drive this point home, Kahneman had each instructor perform a task in which a coin was tossed at
a target twice. He demonstrated that the performance of those who had done the best the first time
deteriorated, whereas the performance of those who had done the worst improved. This is illustrated
in Figure 24. Regression to the Mean:

Figure 24. Regression to the Mean
Calculative organisations regularly attribute competence to what is little more than luck and
circumstance. What often happens is that such an organisation gets shocked by a series of poor lag
indicators (under the assumption that they indicate safety culture performance) or a serious event,
and call in a consultant, often a Behavioural Based Safety (BBS) expert. A program is undertaken, lag
indicator records improve and everyone parades the results at conferences attributing success to the
effectiveness of the program. The moment the calculative organisation achieves this new perceived
standard, they establish this as a new mean and then set target reductions based upon the best result.
The organisation in subsequent years then develops a problem. If the newly establishes mean is not
the actual mean they then become disappointed by regression to the real mean, rather than critique
themselves or the arbitrary mean they attributed. Some organisations that are more reactive and
pathological in nature (to use Hudson’s descriptors) then manipulate the data, redefine risk and/or
injury to maintain the delusion of improvement.
Lag data can be so easily manipulated that it becomes meaningless. Wagner’s research included
interviews with twenty CEOs of Australia’s largest companies. Wagner (2010) states:
Most CEOs no longer relied on the Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTIFR) and OHS audits
as primary performance measures. All reported some difficulty in measuring the effectiveness of
their programs and most were exploring lead measures.
The idea that lag indicators are a measure of performance is based upon the ideas of Herbert
Heinrich (1931) and similar approaches to incident prediction, causation and mechanistic approaches
to understanding risk. Heinrich was an insurance salesman and sought to impose a scientific
approach to an understanding of risk. Heinrich’s Safety Pryamid (Figure 25), whilst popular
in the safety industry, has no validity either as a predictive or explanatory tool of how humans
and organisations manage risk. Heinrich’s approach is tayloristic and in the genre of ‘scientific
management’. There is no evidence to show that the ideas of Heinrich or of later Behavioural-Based
Safety (BBS) disciples, equate to reality or explain socialpsychological or neuropsychological evidence
about human judgement and decision making.

Figure 25. Heinrich’s Safety Pyramid
Heinrich’s Safety Pyramid is present in the discourse of most calculative organisations. The HRO is
not fixated on mechanistic approaches to risk but rather understands the nature of humans to be far
less predictive and knows that claims to be able to ‘tame the unexpected’, ‘zero harm’ or ‘all accidents
are preventable’ are delusional. Rather, the HRO knows that with humans and risk, one never arrives
but journeys on in a state of ‘chronic unease’. Indeed, any claim to have arrived demonstrates that one
is calculative rather than generative.
Cleopatra’s Nose, Circumstance and Predictability

Pascal comments in Pensées that ‘Cleopatra’s nose, had it been shorter, the whole face of the world
would have been changed’. What he meant was that had Cleopatra not had a dominating nose
(considered attractive and powerful at the time) then history would have evolved differently. Coins
minted by Mark Antony show that Cleopatra was far from the Hollywood portrayal of her by
Elizabeth Taylor. She has a pointed chin and rather large nose.
Cleopatra was only twenty-one when, in 48 BC, she is said to have seduced Caesar (by being
delivered nude wrapped in a carpet), who was more than thirty years older. Caesar was to stay with
her in Egypt until the next year, when she gave birth to Caesarion. At this point, Caesar abandoned
his plans to annex Egypt, instead backing Cleopatra’s claim to the throne. After Caesar, Cleopatra
seduced Mark Antony, who wanted her support against the Parthians, and bore three children to him.
With Antony’s power and help she had him kill all threats to her power including her sister Arsinoe.
The rest, including her suicide by an Egyptian cobra, is history.
What has the story of Cleopatra to do with risk and safety? I will get to that shortly. First let me
introduce my love of history. The study of history and historiography is a wonderful place to learn
critical thinking. My first subject at university was History and my first lecturer was Dean Ashenden,
later to be come well known as the originator of the Good Universities Guide. Dean opened up
the world of history to all his students, challenging thinking and using critical theory to interrogate
evidence. Three of my degrees have majors in history. One area of interest is Church History, and

what a fascinating study of humanity it is. During my early career I taught History in schools for
more than 10 years. History is not about dates or civics but is the subject that teaches people how
to think. If you found history boring, then perhaps the teacher had no idea, but you weren’t doing
history. History is about people and social reality; it is about how social psychology influences
human judgement and decision making.
Students of history know the reality of circumstance, unpredictability and uncertainty as the
phenomenon of ‘Cleopatra’s nose’. It is amazing how such little things can influence the course
of history: the size of a nose or the personality of a leader. Had Gough Whitlam not decided
to sulk over a meat pie following his dismissal, Australia would be a different place. Had some
fundamentalists not flown planes into the twin towers, the world would be a different place. Who
could have predicted the USA would have a black president? This is the stuff of history. This is why
they likened the election of John Howard (who enjoyed the second longest rule as Prime Minister
in Australian history) to ‘Lazarus with a triple by-pass’. In 1995 no one predicted his election as
possible, and his time in office is now historically referred to as ‘The Howard Years’. History has
a strange way of proving that circumstance and the improbable are indeed possible. Like many
witnessed at the end of this year’s Australian football season, a game can be won on the odd bounce
of an oval shaped ball.
The idea of predictability and certainty has a strong appeal to those with a fundamentalist mindset.
There is nothing more appealing to the fundamentalist than promises to have ‘everything in control’.
There is nothing so cozy as having the solution to every threat ‘in hand’, to have ‘black and white’
answers. This mathematical-like thinking is what Hudson referred to as being ‘calculative’.
We see the calculative mindset in the preoccupation of counting LTIs and frequency rates as if such
have some connection to safety culture. How bizarre, like measuring effective parenting by the
number of smacks administered to children. How on earth do numbers of incidents demonstrate
safety culture? The idea of measuring LTIs as a predictor of safety culture is a delusion of the
calculative mindset. BP Deepwater Horizon One claimed to have millions of LTI free hours
before it killed 11 people and poured billions of tonnes of oil into the Mexico Gulf. The rig owner,
Transocean, was said to have had a strong safety record with no major incidents for 7 years. The
reality was that a culture of denial and related circumstances blinded leaders to ‘warning signs’ that
generated the explosion.
The calculative mindset understands safety and the management of risk as a ‘science’. Indeed, the
idea of ‘safety engineering’ and ‘safety science’ seems to appeal to some people as if humans are
machine-like in what they do. Such calculative thinking appeals to the lovers of Behavioural Based
Safety, as if humans are the sum of inputs and outputs. What a shame for them that history shows
this is not the case.
The fundamentalist mindset thinks crazy words such as ‘all accidents are preventable’ are somehow
motivational and attractive. Such thinking and words are a denial of the evidence of history.
Absolutist and perfectionist language should have no place in the world of risk and safety. Such
language can only lead to delusional anti-human thinking that denies that the shape of a girl’s nose
can change the course of human history.

Explaining the Risk and Safety Matrix - The ‘World
Class’ Disposition
The world class organisation understands that the new frontier in organisational maturity is the
management of secondary and tertiary hazards and risks. An HRO knows that to be world class one
has to move beyond an engineering, technological, regulations and legislative-only approach. The Risk
and Safety Maturity Matrix (Figure 23) shows five new domains that require influence in order to
become an HRO. These five human-centred domains require a greater understanding and focus on
human complexity.
The following discussion defines these extra five domains (steps 6-10) and discusses the kinds of
activities and capabilities required to influence them over time.
The Five Domains of the Generative-HRO Organisation
Step 6. Behavioural and Cognitive Controls

HROs know that behavioural controls are limited. They understand that the foundations of
behaviourism do not explain the full spectrum of human psychology. For those that wish to mature
in leadership influence it is important not to get trapped into the behaviourist mindset that obsesses
with measurement. This is the problem with trying to apply the philosophy of ‘scientific management’
to humans.
It is also important to understand the extent to which humans are affected by cognitive bias and
associated heuristics. There are more than 200 cognitive biases (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_
cognitive_biases) that affect human judgement and decision making. These biases precede behaviour
and help explain behaviour that doesn’t make sense to the observer. Understanding these biases and
how to influence them is the beginning of developing leadership in risk.
The combination of cognitive and behaviourist controls are most evident in the work of cognitive
behavioural therapy (CBT). Whilst CBT has been demonstrated to be effective, HROs know that it
is not the panacea for everything.
Step 7. SocioPsychologcial Controls

This domain has its focus on social arrangements and how human psychology is affected by various
pressures associated with groups, organisation and related sociological dynamics. Humans do not
always make rational decisions based on inputs and outputs or by logical decision making. Humans
also sensemake according to such things as ‘herd mentality’, groupthink, propaganda, cognitive
dissonance and group dynamics.
Social psychology understands that humans have a fundamental desire for belonging, acceptance
and community and that these affect the way humans make decisions. The most profound example
of this is to observe what happens to humans under the pressure of a signifcant event. The following
diagrams illustrate the way humans are influenced by events.

Figure 26. Nature of Human Community
Human communities include groups, clubs and congregations of like minded people.
A significant event or disaster pushes and pressures the community together.

Pressure of the event stresses and pushes the community together.
Figure 29. The Event Pierces the Community

In time the disaster stressors pierce the togetherness and some people are injured by the process.

Figure 30. Healing the Injured Community
Some community members help to heal the injured community. Following the healing the
community reverts back to normal as in Figure 26.
Figure 31. The Nature of Community in TIme

The human community as it ‘circles’ forward in normal pathway.

Figure 32. The Nature of Community Healing Trajectory in TIme
The pressure of a significant event on community pressure points.
These diagrams help explain how stress and pressures affect people in communities and
organisations. This was certainly the case in my experiences during the Beaconsfield Crisis and the
Canberra Bushfires.
During the Beaconsfield Crisis of 2006 I witnessed some amazing behaviour of people, but at the
same time also some of the most pathetic behaviour. Some people at the moment of crisis, despite
the need for human self preservation and precaution, behaved in illogical heroics at risk of their
own lives, despite the fact that they had their own families to consider. Some took on a ‘messianic’
mentality that appeared to be the best of intentions but amounted to little more than ego without
consideration of others. Many decisions were made by people based on emotions and arational
biases and these have been discussed previously in Risk Makes Sense. Regardless, the behaviour and
decisions were determined by social arrangements and dynamics rather than procedures, policy
and previously agreed administrative and legislative processes. It was under the moment that
many instinctive impulses of implicit knowledge emerged, showing little regard for emergency
management plans and previously agreed processes. Implicit arational knowledge dictated the real
belief and quickly disposed of the slow rational systems that are often espoused when everything
is normal. It seems that the moment there is some turbulence in life, the arational and implicit
knowledge comes to the fore and the real belief is witnessed as determined by the social context.
At this stage of the discussion it is important to make a distinction between a psychosocial focus
and a sociopsychological focus. The psychosocial focus pays attention to the psychology of the
human in social context and the sociopsychological focus pays attention to the social influence on
human psychology. Whilst this may seem a subtle difference, the implications for becoming an

HRO are important. Unless we understand that social arrangements significantly affect human
judgement and decision making, we will maintain the delusion that human judgement is rational
and attribute sensemaking to ‘common sense’. When leaders understand that the attribution and
management of risk is greatly affected by social arrangements, then they will be able to influence
organisational culture.
The Sociopsychological Factors

1. Perception and motivation
2. Sensemaking and mindfulness
3. Myth making
4. Culture, discourse and cognitive dissonance
5. Heuristics
6. ‘Group think’
7. Attribution, micro-rules and the psychology of risk
8. Power relations e.g. bullying
9. Unconscious and conscious decision making
10. Pitching, framing and priming language
HROs also understand that the psychosocial domain is important and includes both the
organisational psychological health and the well being of individuals in groups. The health of
individuals and groups are directly related to organisational health. Research by Erickson (1994) and
Razi (2006) show that organisational health is directly related to maturity in managing risk and safety.
Therefore an HRO pays attention to organisational psychosocial factors, including the following:
Psychosocial Factors
1. Stress, time pressures and fatigue
2. Cognitive demands
3. Mental health and emotional demands
4. Work conditions and climate
5. Injury and illness triggers
6. Hours of work, conflict
7. Violence, bullying and abuse
8. Lack of job control, absenteeism
9. Poor management and supervision
10. Organisational injustice,
11. Inadequate recognition

Step 8. SocioPolitical Controls
The sociopolitical domain is focused on power relations and political climate and how these influence
the management of risk. HROs know that internal and external politics affect not only organisational
health but also human judgements about risk. The four competing sociopolitical types as explained by
Cameron and Quinn (1999), are:
1. Democratic
2. Adhocratic
3. Autocratic
4. Bureaucratic
These four sociopolitical dynamics are explained as follows:
Democratic
The idea of a democratic dynamic indicates a family-type organisation, usually characterised by
a strong emphasis on team work, employee development, partnership, participation, loyalty and
mutuality. It is believed that through these approaches maturity is best achieved. Some core values in
a democratic culture are: trust, loyalty, intimacy, friendliness, concern, respect, equality. These values
are secured by high centralisation where flexibility can operate within clear boundaries which are
accepted, owned and shared. An organisation which is driven by the dominance of such a cultural
dynamic maintains an internal and flexible approach to management with room for individual and
group discretion within accepted boundaries.
Adhocratic
The idea of a adhocratic dynamic should not be interpreted as “do as you like”. The idea of being “ad
hoc” has its focus on the temporary nature of things and prioritises individualism. It is more interested
in the immediate, the specialised and dynamic. An organisation dominated by this cultural dynamic
is more open to change and flexibility, and is able to move quickly with either the unexpected or
with new demands. The major values which are the drivers of this cultural dynamic are adaptability,
creativity, managing uncertainty, movement and discretion within accepted boundaries. The focus of
this cultural dynamic is less centralised and more conscious of external considerations, e.g. positioning
against competition. In this way, the creativity and flexibility are perceived as mechanisms to get the
edge on the opposition. The adhocratic driven organisation is conscious of is own distinctives, or what
makes it different from the rest.
Bureaucratic
The idea of a bureaucratic dynamic has its emphasis on high organisation and formalisation, this is
not vested in individuals or persons but in processes and policies. The core values of the bureaucratic
cultural dynamic are certainty, respect, containment, stability and control. The bureaucratic nature
of management is not seen as a negative but a positive where boundaries help enable individuals
and groups within the structures to relax, develop relationships, enjoy work and feel secure in the
knowledge that the processes, policies and directions are clear. A bureaucratic cultural dynamic views
relationships to competitors in the market and differentiation based on performance.

Autocratic
The idea of an autocratic dynamic has its emphasis on people, particularly leadership and hierarchical
management. In this cultural dynamic value is placed on authority, influence, order, organisation,
smooth running procedures, trust, competence, intelligence, efficiency and pace. Rigid structures
are not viewed by this cultural dynamic as critical. Rather, there is a trust in strong and competent
leadership which make effective and responsible decisions, often able to by-pass the slowness of
bureaucratic and democratic organisations. Leaders attracted to this dynamic are often charismatic
and engender confidence in the workforce. There is a perception of safety because the leader knows
where things are going.
The Competing Values Framework

These four socio-political types are known as the Competing Values Framework (CVF). The CVF has
two axes of organisational direction and tension which when intersected form a quadrant on which
strengths and weaknesses of political dynamics can be plotted. The first axis (X) looks at the tension
between Internal and External foci. That is, systems that tend to be inward looking most often focus
on Maintenance and Integration, whereas systems that tend to be outward looking are by definition
more conscious of Positioning and Differentiation from outsiders and competitors.
Internal Maintenance and Integration Positioning and Differentiation External

X Axis Focus Focus
The second axis (Y) looks at the organic or mechanistic approaches to systems as managed in an
organisation. Systems that are more Organic in nature tend to be more Flexible and Discretionary,
whereas safety systems which are more Mechanistic in nature have a stronger emphasis on Control
and Stability.
Y Axis Flexibility and Discretion
Organic Processes
Mechanistic Processes
Control and Stability

It is by intersecting these two lines of tension that one is able to map the Democratic, Adhocratic (ad
hoc and individual), Bureaucratic and Autocratic (hierarchical) cultural dynamics of an organisation.
The intersection of these two axes results in the creation of four quadrants, each representing the
socio-political tensions that exist in organisations, namely approaches to organisation which are
Democratic, Autocratic, Adhocratic and Bureaucratic in nature. This structure of analysis helps assess
socio-political arrangements in organisations. The CVF quadrant is illustrated in Figure 33.
Figure 33. The Competing Values Quadrant
Flexibility and Discretion
Organic Processes
Democracy Adhocracy

Focus Focus
Autocracy Bureaucracy
Please note: These four sociopolitical types can be mapped using the Human Dymensions MiProfile
Survey that was introduced in the first book Risk makes Sense.
The four quadrants are also labelled in each corner indicating high or low formalisation and high and
low centralisation. These serve as summary labels describing the tension point between each of the
interacting axes. This quadrant tool helps illustrate the trends and dynamic relationship between the
organising process and the socio-political dynamic. Figure 32 Socio-political CVF Summary includes
summary explanations of each socio-political type.

Figure 34. Socio-political CVF Summary - Example: Risk and Security
Competing Values Framework Flexibility and Discretion
Organic Processes
High Low
Centralisation Centralisation
Clan Open
Democracy Adhocracy
An organisation that focuses on An organisation that focuses on
security through friendliness, external positioning, with high
internal maintenance, trust, flexibility, creativity, dynamic and
people-centredness, flexibility immediate response, movement and
and sensitivity. The unexpected managing change. The unexpected is
is managed through dialogue, an invitation to rise to the challenge
communication and flexibility. and display excellence.

Focus Focus
An organisation that focuses on An organisation that focuses on

internal maintenance, leadership, structure, security by organisation and
stability, trust and certainty. The control. The unexpected is managed
unexpected is managed through through procedure and policy
leadership capacity and speed for effectiveness
decisions.
Hierarchy Rational
Autocracy Bureaucracy
Low High
Formalisation Formalisation

Figure 35. CVF Management and Leadership Characteristics
Flexibility and Discretion
Organic Processes
High Low
Centralisation Centralisation
Leadership Type - Facilitator Leadership Type - Innovator

Mentor Visionary
Entrepreneur
Effectiveness Measure - Cohesion
Morale Effectiveness Measure - Creativity
HR Development Growth
HR Development
Management Theory - Participation
Fosters Management Theory - Innovation
Commitment Fosters
New Resources

Focus Focus
Leadership Type - Coordinator Leadership Type - Competitor
Monitor Producer
Organiser Hard-Driver
Effectiveness Measure - Efficiency Effectiveness Measure - Market share

Timeliness Beating competitors
Smooth Functioning Goal Achievement
Management Theory - Control Management Theory - Control

Fosters Fosters
Efficiency Productivity
Low High
Formalisation Formalisation
Whilst there is no one desired or ‘ideal’ type in this method of analysis, there are ways of using the
quadrant to assess correspondence and congruence with the desired vision and espoused values of the
organisation. The following 16 Sociopolitical types can be measured using the Human Dymensions
MiProfile survey tool.

Figure 36. Competing Values Organisational Types
CVF PROPORTIONAL BALANCE LOW-RESILIENCE
Organic Processes Organic Processes
High Low High Low
Centralisation Centralisation Centralisation Centralisation
Q3 Q2
Q3 Q2
Clan Open Clan Open

Internal Democracy Adhocracy External Internal Democracy Adhocracy External
Focus Hierarchy Rational Focus Focus Hierarchy Rational Focus
Autocracy Bureaucracy Autocracy Bureaucracy
Q1 Q4
Q1 Q4
Low High Low High

Formalisation Formalisation Formalisation Formalisation
Mechanistic Processes Mechanistic Processes
FAIRNESS IN EVERYTHING I’M IN CHARGE FROM BELOW

High Low High Low
Q3 Q2
Q2 Q3
Clan Open Clan Open

Q1 Q4 Q1 Q4
Low High Low High

DOMINANT LEADERSHIP FROM ABOVE POLICY AND PROCEDURE RULE

High Low High Low
Q3 Q2 Q3 Q2
Clan Open Clan Open

Q4 Q1
Q1 Q4
Low High Low High


THE INDIVIDUAL IN GROUP THE INDIVIDUAL IN PROCESS
High Low High Low
Q3 Q2 Q2
Q3
Clan Open Clan Open

Q1 Q4 Q1
Q4
Low High Low High

BENEVOLENT DICTATORSHIP MANAGEMENT POLICY

High Low High Low
Q3
Q2 Q3 Q2
Clan Open Clan Open

Q4
Q1 Q1 Q4
Low High Low High

PUSH ME PULL YOU PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS

High Low High Low
Q2 Q3
Q3 Q2
Clan Open Clan Open

Q4 Q1
Q1 Q4
Low High Low High


WHERE IS THE COLLECTIVE? WHERE IS THE INDIVIDUAL?
High Low High Low
Q2 Q3
Q3 Q2
Clan Open Clan Open

Q1 Q4 Q1 Q4
Low High Low High

WHERE’ IS THE LEADER? WHERE IS THE POLICY AND PROCESS?

High Low High Low
Q3 Q2 Q3 Q2
Clan Open Clan Open

Q1 Q4
Q4 Q1
Low High Low High

Step 9. Cultural Controls

McLaren (1996, xiii) explains culture as:
... value-based interpretations; artifacts; shared experiences; interaction, adaptation, and survival;
social customs and social norms; the expressive forms of social and material life; a distinctive ‘way
of life’ of a group or class; historically transmitted ensembles of symbols; ‘maps of meanings’ that
make social life intelligible to its members; systems of knowledge shared by large groups of people;
the quotidian, self-interpreted conduct of particular groups and communities; historically shaped
forms of consciousness; contradictory forms of ‘common sense’ that shape public and popular life;
everyday activities and patterns of actions; an evolving totality of meanings; a living tradition;
socially transmitted patterns of behaviour; meanings alive in institutional life as well as in ordinary
behaviour; socially embodied differences and ‘performed’ at the level of everyday life; the symbolic
production of material structures; a conception of the world or worldview; ...

For the purpose of this discussion, a narrowing down to some sense of commonality could be:
1. Common and exclusive language/knowledge (cultural discourse);

2. Accepted terms of reference by a group;
3. Clear identifiers of membership;
4. Common values, attitudes and beliefs;
5. Explicit and implicit symbols;
6. Shared experiences;
7. Social customs and social norms;
8. Historically transmitted ensembles of symbols;
9. ‘Maps of meanings’ that make social life intelligible to its members.
The Culture and Trajectories map first introduced in Risk Makes Sense is helpful in understanding
the sociopsychological dimensions of risk. It gives a perspective on the various ‘trajectories’ that exist
within a cultural understanding of risk. Any so called ‘risk culture program’ which ignores aspects of
this map is not likely to succeed. Models of risk culture programs which offer little more than the
policing of systems are not risk culture programs. No amount of ‘spin’ about ‘generative’ risk culture
or ‘transformational’ risk culture changes much if the discourse, framing and priming maintain old
patterns, habits and subcultures of punitive and coercive rule.
An HRO is able to define culture in sophisticated terms and avoids the limitations of defining
culture-as-systems or culture-as-behaviour, but understands the complexities of culture. An HRO
consciously develops strategies to influence culture.
Step 10. Subcultural Controls

Subcultures operate underneath and within a mainstream culture. Most often they act as subversive
sub-groups of the mainstream culture, for example bikie clubs and youth gangs. Subcultures can
also operate as countercultural factions within an orthodox cultural setting. Subcultures often are
evidence in organisations of variation between espoused theory and theory-in-use. For example, an
organisation may espouse a mantra of ‘zero harm’, but subcultures may exist in that organisation that
not only deny the mantra but actively undermine it. The following are typical subcultural dynamics in
organisations that act subversively against espoused theories of risk and safety:
R5 \#%5(5ł#%]5B)%(#-'5(5\&#*5-,0#]5.)5*,)/,-C
R5 )/&-*%5B-35)(5."#(!5)5().",C
R5 *.##-'
R5 3(##-'5(5,#-%5,,)!(
R5 .&#-'
R5 (,7,*),.#(!
R5 $5)]

R5 $'')(5-(-]5B-#'*&#-.#7,1,C
R5 &'#(!
These dynamics are usually present in subcultures that have more intensive but less visible identifiers
of cultural compliance. HROs are aware of subcultures and are able to track down identifiers and
influence subcultural formation and sustainability.
Risk and Safety Maturity versus Risk and Safety Immaturity

The final part of this discussion of what constitutes ‘world class’ sets out the qualities required to
step up above the line in the Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix. As long as an organisation remains
in a calculative mindset it will never become an HRO or have the disposition required to be ‘world
class’. Unfortunately, some whilst advocating for a generative organisation still fall back to calculative
methodologies to explain it (Piers, Montijn & Balk, 2009). It seems so hard for some to let go of
mechanistic cultural frameworks and understand the ethic, values and maturity required to become
truly generative. This is because the idea of the generative organisation is understood within the
framework of ‘scientific management’. Unless one is able to suspend the calculative worldview and
make a leap of faith above the red line, there is no possibility of becoming an HRO. A world class
safety organisation is known by its virtues. Aristotle said:
Neither by nature, then, nor contrary to nature do the virtues arise in us; rather we are adapted by
nature to receive them, and are made perfect by habit. (Nicomachean Ethics Book 2 para 2)
It was Aristotle who first argued that virtue is right behaviour habituated. In other words there is no
virtue until there is a habit of right behaviour. One acquires virtue through the practice and formation
of habit, of right behaviour or, as some educationalists contend, we learn by doing. This means that
the beginning of moving from a calculative stage to a generative state is letting go of old paradigms
and worldviews.

Table 1. Comparison of HRO and Non-HRO
High Reliability Organisation Non-High Reliability Organisation

Generative Calculative
Trust Hiding
Faith Fear
Recognition focus Punitive focus
Human-centered Content-centred
Learning Indoctrination
Tolerance Intolerance
Humanising relationships Toxic relationships
Community Individualism
Managing Fallibility Perfectionism/absolutes
Excellence Compliance
Holistic Fragmented
Safety embedded Safety as an add-on
Risk makes sense Quest to eliminate and deny risk
For the purpose of this discussion, the following overlay of Human Dymensions programs are now
added to the Risk and Safety Matrix to address a person-centred approach above the line as illustrated
in Figure 39. It should be made clear that programs in themselves are not what each domain is about,
but rather reflect an attitude to drive for a more person-centred approach in the management of risk.
The programs added to the Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix are:
1. WALK-TALK (observations and conversations)

2. SEEK (event reporting that makes sense)
3. THINK (critical thinking about risk)
4. RISK (making sense of risk)
5. LEAD (the sociopsychology of leadership)
6. CARE (the overarching psychosocial worldview)
Each program is a human-centred method for maturing the organisation to an HRO disposition.

Figure 39. Stepping Up to Risk and Safety Maturity Programs
Programs that acknowledge person-centred sensemaking about risk need make no mention of
zero. The HRO has a focus on the positive, not the negative. An HRO steps up to people-centred
approaches to risk and understands that zero is a dehumanising ideology. An HRO has a focus on
positive proactive goals and understands leadership in terms of capability to influence all key domains
above the line.
Workshop Questions
1. Do a search on the Internet for 5 examples of humanising goals regarding risk, safety or security.
2. What are the main messages your organisation seeks to speak? Are these articulated consistently?
3. Are the messages in your workplace cluttered and excessive? Are there simply too many messages
on walls and signs?
4. Where is your organisation on the Risk and Safety Maturity Matrix? If you work in a calculative
organisation, what is your strategy for change?
5. Which of the 16 sociopolitical types do you think is most like yours? Why?

The Rotor
The day of excitement was here for the bold,
so young yet so excited, the stories I had been told.
The spooks and the thrills, the scary and the wild,
how could I not go, I wasn’t a child.
Just walking through the funny face teeth,
my jaw dropped down, in sheer disbelief.
Where were my thoughts, the thrill of the ride,
the Rotor it beckoned, in fear I walked inside.
The spin and the whirr, the rotating disk,
I’d stuck to the wall, the joy of the risk.
Defying gravity, defying Newton,
stomach churning, sliding turning.
Ah, the secret, the girls and their dresses,
no zero here, I’ll give you three guesses.

Conclusion
This book has addressed arguments for and against the concept, language and ideology of zero. It
has attempted to add substance to the debate with some new discussion based on research into the
psychology and culture of risk.
The book has endeavoured to show that the ‘zero harm’ ideology and ‘zero harm’ language undermine
culture in organisations. The book discussed issues to do with risk, culture, language, motivation, goal
setting, binary opposition, unconscious priming, cognitive dissonance, counter-intuitive dynamics,
scepticism and survey evidence on ‘zero harm’ believability and ownership.
In summary here are the main reasons why the language of zero harm is dangerous. It
R5 ,#0-5,*),.#(!5/(,!,)/(:
R5 "-5-*1(551")&5(15&(!/!5(5.5#-.),.#)(5 ),52*&#(#(!5135#($/,35)/(.#(!:
R5 #-5/(,&#-.#5(5(#0:
R5 !(,.-5-*.##-'5(53(##-'5)/.5- .3:
R5 #-5-5)(55(!.#05."#65(5*,)').-550#,./5) 5#(.)&,(5(5#.:
R5 .%-5."5 )/-5)Ŀ5#!5*#./,5,#-%-5.)5-'&&5*#./,5,#-%-651"#"5#(5)/&5#(,-5,#-%:
R5 -.#ł-5#(()0.#)(5(5,.#0#.3:
R5 *,#'-5,.#05,.",5."(5*,).#05)/(., ./&5."#(%#(!:
R5 ,#0-55*/(#.#05'#(-.:
R5 ,#0-55()(7&,(#(!5&#'.:
R5 !(,.-5 ,5(5(2#.3:
R5 #&#..-55#-)/,-5) 5 /('(.&#-'65&%5(51"#.-65)'*&#(65-)&/.-65(5
enforcement;
R5 "-55.,$.),35#(5)(5#,.#)(:5.",5#-5()5ł2##&#.365#-,.#)(652.(/.#(!5#,/'-.(-65
culpability or openness about the absolute;
R5 *,#'-55 )/-5)(5 #&/,:
R5 *,)').-5*,&3-#-535(&3-#-:
R5 -.-5/*5.&%5)/.5,#-%5-5(!.#05(5,#0-5."#(%#(!5135 ,)'5&,(#(!5.)5,#-%5&#'#(.#)(:
R5 ,#0-55/&./,5) 5#(.)&,(5.".5&%-5."50#,./5,+/#,5.)5-.5'(!5"/'(-8
The language of zero necessitates all these actions as it primes its audience. Its philosophical trajectory
is the elimination of risk, the microscopics of error and the intolerance of humanness.

Further Directions
This may be the end of this book but it need not be the end of the conversation in making sense of
risk. There is much more to think about and discuss on the Human Dymensions blog, the link for
which can be found on the Human Dymensions website - www.humandymensions.com.
Training
Programs Offered by Human Dymensions
PROACT Program - Psychology Risk Observations and Culture, Conversation and
Competency Training
A five-day program in perception, motivation, observation, coaching, unconscious priming, framing,
pitching and conversation skills development. This program targets the psychology of risk in security
and safety. PROACT includes:
WALK-TALK (observations and conversations)
SEEK (event reporting that makes sense)
THINK (critical thinking about risk)
RISK (making sense of risk)
LEAD (the sociopsychology of leadership and goals)
CARE (the overarching psychosocial worldview)
iKnow-How Program
A three-day workshop on health and wellbeing, suicide prevention, managing conflict, life skills,
leadership and stress management
SafetyWorks
A three-day program in safety leadership, safety awareness, advanced hazard identification, incident
investigation, safety communication skills and safety culture. Extension options to 12 module
postgraduate program.
Human Dymensions are able to design a survey experience for you, including gap analysis,
benchmarking, focus group and world cafe group learning.
Tailor a Program to Suit You

The Human Dymensions team are able to facilitate the development of a unique program to suit
your needs.

A READING LIST
Psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, London.

9
Abelson, R., Frey, K., and Gregg, A., (2004) Experiments with People: Revelations from Social
Adorno, T. W. et. al. The Authoritarian Personality. New York, Norton, 1969.
Ajzen, I., and Fishburn, M., (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour.
Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Altemeyer, B. Enemies of Freedom: Understanding Right-Wing Authoritarianism. San Francisco,

Jossey-Bass, 1988.
Argyris, C. and Schon, D. Theory in Practice. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1974.
Argyris, C. and Schon, D. Organisational Learning II: Theory Method and Practice. Reading Mass,
Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1996.
Ariely, D., (2008) Predictably Irrational: the hidden forces that shape our decisions. Harper Collins,
London.
Bargh, J. A., Chaiken, Shelly., Govender, Rajen., Pratto, Felicia. (1992) The Generality of the
Automatic Attitude Activation Effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. Vol 62, No., 6, pp.
893-912.
Bargh, J. A., (ed.) (2007) Social Psychology and the Unconscious: The Automaticity of Higher
Mental Processes. Psychology Press, New York.
Barr, J. Fundamentalism. London, SCM Press, 1977.
Barr, J. Escaping from Fundamentalism. London, SCM Press, 1984.
Beheshtifar, M., Mazrae-Sefidi, F., Moghadam, M., (2011) Role of Perfectionism at Workplace.
European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative. Issue 38
Boone, K. C. The Bible Tells Them So:The Discourse of Protestant Fundamentalism. London, SCM
Press, 1989.
Chapter 9: A Reading List 141

Brafman, O., and Brafman, R., (2008) Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behaviour. Doubleday,
New York.
Breakwell, G., (2007) The Psychology of Risk. Cambridge University Press, London.
Burton, R., (2008) On Being Certain. St Martin’s Griffin, New York.
Butterworth, J., and Thwaites, G., (2005) Thinking Skills. Cambridge, London.
Caldini, R., (2009) Influence: Science and Practice. Pearson. Boston.
Cameron, K., and Quinn, R., (1999) Diagnosing and Changing Organisational Culture: Based on the
Competing Values Framework. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
Chabris, C., and Simons, D., (2010) The Invisible Gorilla: and other ways our intuition deceives us.
Harper Collins, New York.
Chui, C., and Hong, Y., (2006) Social Psychology of Culture. Psychology Press, New York.
Claxton, G., (1999) Wise Up, The Challenge of Lifelong Learning. Bloomsbury, London.
Claxton, G., (2005) The Wayward Mind. Abacus Press, London.
Cohen, N. J. (ed.) The Fundamentalist Phenomenon. Michigan, Eerdmans, 1990.
Conklin, J., (2006) Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. Wiley,
London.
Conway, R., (1992) The Rage for Utopia. Allen and Unwin, St Leonards.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., (1990) Flow, The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Collins, New
York.
Dobbs, (2012) How Do You Choke Away the British Open? The Science of the Tight Collar. (http://
www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/07/how-do-you-choke-away-the-british-open-the-science-of-
the-tight-collar/ Accessed 26 July 2012).
Dollar, G. W. A History of Fundamentalism in America Greenville. Bob Jones University Press,

1973.
Edelman, S., (2006) Change Your Thinking. ABC Books, Melbourne.
Erickson, P., (1994) The effect of corporate culture on injury and illness rates within the organisation.
PhD Dissertation. University of Southern California.
Festinger, L. Riecken, H. W. and Schachter, S. (1956) When Prophecy Fails: A Social and
Psychological Study of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World. Harper
Torchbooks, New York.
Festinger, L. (1957. ) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford,

California.
Fine, C., (2006) A Mind of Its Own: How your Brain Distorts and Deceives. W. W. Norton, New
York.

Frith, C., (2007) Making up the Mind, How the Brain Creates our Mental World. Blackwell
Publishing, Carlton, Australia.
Gardner, D., (2008) Risk: The Science and Politics of Fear. Virgin Books, London.
Gigerenzer, G., (2007) Gut Feelings: The intelligence of the unconscious. Viking, New York.
Gill, R. Competing Convictions. London, SCM Press, 1990.
Gowers, A. and Scott, R. Fundamentals and Fundamentalists. Bedford Park, APSA, 1979.
Hallinan, J., (2009) Why We Make Mistakes. Broadway Books, New York.
Hassin, R., Uleman, J., and Bargh, J., (2005) The New Unconscious. Oxford University Press,
London.
Hoffer, E. The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. New York, Harper an
Row, 1951.
Hofstede, G., and Hofstede, G. J., (2005) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.
McGraw Hill, New York.
Hudson, P., (1999) The Human Factor in System Reliability – Is Human Performance Predictable?
RTO HFM Workshop, Siena Italy.
Kahneman, D., (2011) Thinking Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
Kaplan, P., (1999) The Nothing that is: A Natural History of Zero. Oxford University Press, London.
Kleespies, D. C., (1932) A Study in the Psychology of Conversion. Masters Thesis. Loyola University,
Illinois.
Lamb, W., (1989) The Concept of the Imagination and its Place in Education. PhD Thesis.
University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong.
Lupton, D., (1999) Risk. Routledge, London.
Macknik, S., and Martinez-Conde, S., (2010) Sleights of Mind. Henry Holt and Co. New York.
McLaren, P., (1999) Schooling as a Ritual Performance. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanham.
Marty, M. E. and Appleby, R. S. Fundamentalisms Observed. Chicago, University of Chicago Press,

1991.
Marx, D., (2009) Whack a Mole: The Price We Pay For Expecting Perfection. By Your Side Studios,
New York.
Meissner, W. W. (1971) The Assault on Authority. Maryknoll, Orbis Books.
Milgram, S. (1969) Obedience to Authority. Harper and Row, New York.
Mol, J. J. Identity and the Scared: A Sketch for a New Socio-Scientific Theory of Religion. Oxford,
Blackwell, 1976.

Morris, R. (2012) Scoping Study: Impact of Fly-in Fly-out/Drive-in Drive-out Work Practices
on Local Government. Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government, University of
Technology, Sydney.
Moskowitz, G., and Grant, H., (eds.) (2009) The Psychology of Goals .The Guilford Press, New York.
Neville, B., (2010) Educating Psyche. Harper Collins, Melbourne.
Paul, R., (1993) Critical Thinking. Jane Willsen and AJA Binker, Santa Rosa, CA.
Phillips, J., (2010) Let Aboriginal communities have a say over intervention, Sydney Morning Herald.
(http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/let-aboriginal-communities-have-a-say-over-intervention-
20100622-yuuf.html) Accessed 23 July 2012.
Piers. M., Montijn, C., & Balk, A., (2009). Safety culture framework for the ecast sms-wg. Safety
Management System and Safety Culture Working Group. Ecast Component of ESSI, European
Strategic Safety Initiative. Dutch National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR)
Pike, D., (1967) Paradise of Dissent; South Australia 1829-1857. Melbourne University Press,
Melbourne.
Plous, S., (1993) The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making. McGraw Hill, New York.
Razi, S., (2006) The organization cultural impact on accidents: a secondary analysis of the relationship
between culture and safety. PhD Dissertation. Capella University. Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Reason, J. T., (1997) Managing the Risks of Organsiational Accidents. Ashgate, Aldershot.
Reber, A., (1993) Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge. Oxford University Press, London.
Rice, J. R. I am a Fundamentalist. Murfreesboro, Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1975.
Robinson, K., (2009) The Element. Penguin, New York.
Robinson, K., (2011) Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Wiley, London.
Rock, D., and Page, L., (2009) Coaching with the Brain in Mind. Wiley, New York.
Seife, C., (2000) Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea. Penguin, New York.
Shaef, A. W. and Fassel, D. The Addictive Organisation San Francisco. Harper and Row, 1990.
Sloan, J., (2006) Learning to Think Strategically. Elsevier, New York.
Soja, E., (1994) Post Modern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. Verso,
London.
Sunstein, C., (2002) Risk and Reason. Cambridge University Press, London.
Sunstein, C., (2005) Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle. Cambridge Uni Press,
London.
Reber, A., (1993) Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge. Oxford University Press, London.
Sack, D., (2012) The Dance Of Perfectionism And Addiction: Why ‘Good Enough’ Is The Gold

Standard in Recovery (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/addiction-recovery/2012/04/perfectionism-
addiction/) Accessed 23. July 2012.
Slovic, P., (2000) The Perception of Risk. Earthscan, London.
Slovic, P., (2010) The Feeling of Risk: New Perspectives on Risk Perception. Earthscan, London.
Snook, I. Indoctrination and Education London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972.
Spielberger, C., (ed.) (2004) Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology. Elsevier Academic Press, Tampa
Florida.
Tannen, D., (1998) The Argument Culture, Moving from Debate to Dialogue. Random House,
New York.
Tannen, D., (2005) Conversational Style, Analysing Talk Among Friends. Oxford University Press,
New York.
Van Hecke, M., (2007) Blind Spots: Why smart people do dumb things. Prometheus Books, New
York.
Vohs, K., and Baumeister, R., (2011) Handbook of Self-Regulation. The Guilford Press, New York.
Wagner, P., (2010) Safety – A Wicked Problem, Leading CEOs discuss their views on OHS
transformation. SIA, Melbourne.
Wegner, D., (2002) The Illusion of the Conscious Will. The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Weick, K., (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing. McGraw Hill, New York.
Weick, K., (1995) Sensemaking in Organisations. Sage Publications, London.
Weick, K., and Sutcliffe, K., (2001) Managing the Unexpected. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Weick, K., (2001) Making Sense of the Organisation Vol. 1. Blackwell, London.
Weick, K., (2001b) Making Sense of the Organisation Vol. 2. Blackwell, Oxford.

About the Author
Dr Robert Long
PhD., (UWS) BEd., (USA) BTh., (SCD) MEd., (Syd) MOH (La Trobe), Dip T., Dip Min., MACE,
CFSIA.
Executive Director - Human Dymensions Pty Ltd (www.humandymensions.com)
Rob has a creative career in teaching, education, community services, government and management.
He is currently Honorary Fellow at The Australian Catholic University in the School of Social Work.
Rob has lectured at various universities since 1990 including University of Canberra, Charles
Sturt University and ACU National. He also has a distinguished career outside of academic life
including Manager Erindale Evacuation Centre during the Canberra Bushfires 2003, Emergency
Coordination Operations Group Beaconsfield 2006, Community Recovery Beaconsfield 2006 and
Risk Management Coordinator World Youth Day (Canberra Goulburn) 2008.
Rob is the founding Principal of the Galilee School which he established in 1996 to educate the
most high risk young people in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). He was Director of Youth,
Community and Family Support services in the ACT Government and has served on numerous
Australian inter-governmental task forces, committees, ministerial councils and working groups in
areas such as gambling, crime, homelessness, indigenous disadvantage, social infrastructure, child
protection, youth-at-risk, drug addiction, prisons and social justice.
Rob is engaged by organisations because of his expertise in culture, learning, risk and social
psychology. He is a skilled presenter and designer of learning events, training and curriculum.

Real Risk: Human Discernment and Risk
Real Risk is the next book in the series and is
Human Discernment and Risk available to order from
www.humandymensions.com.au
Dr Robert Long

I
n a perfect world things don’t go bump and wheels don’t fall off, humans don’t make mistakes and
people don’t suffer - but we don’t live in a perfect world. No amount of denial of human fallibility
makes it so. We have hospitals, morgues and cemeteries that remind us that human life is not
only finite but that suffering and risk test your attitude to learning. In the midst of human reality
there are proponents claiming that ‘all accidents are preventable’ and advocating ‘zero harm’. Some
organisations even reward employees for meeting ‘zero’ goals and thereby ‘prime’ workers to hide, deny
and under-report harm.
This book is an extension of the previous book Risk Makes Sense: Human Judgement and Risk. There is
no sense in total risk aversion or risk elimination. There is no learning without risk.
The absolute of ‘zero’ is actually not possible. There is no nothing. This is despite the fact that the word
‘zero’ dominates our culture, giving its name to everything from drinks, motorbikes and shops. There
is no void and any effort to try and measure zero is affected by the efforts to measure it. Scientists
can’t get to absolute zero (Zero Kelvin −273.15°). Yet there are many organisations and CEOs who set
‘zero’ goals for their organisations in the management of risk .
What do perfectionist goals do to humans? Do perfectionist goals motivate humans to learn? Do

perfectionist goals set people up to fail? Why are absolute goals for perfection absent from all walks of
life except mining and construction companies? Why do academics, teachers and sport coaches know
that absolutes and perfection are de-motivating yet these organisations don’t? Why do psychologists
associate perfectionism with mental health disorders yet some CEOs see perfectionism as healthy?
Are such perfectionist goals applicable for themselves or only for others?
Much of the quest for zero is based on binary opposition thinking. This is black and white
fundamentalist thinking. Binary opposition thinking can only imagine two options: if it’s not
white, it must be black. You are either a good citizen or a terrorist. There are no ‘50 shades of grey’
in the ‘zero’ mind-set. One either sets a goal for harm or one must only have goals for ‘zero’. Such
simplistic thinking is endorsed by language of entrapment to prove its own assumption. There are
more sophisticated ways of thinking and speaking that make better sense of the real world and enable
motivation and learning.
This is a book for the fallible, the human and those committed to learning.

For The Love of Zero Compressed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

For The Love of Zero Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

For the Love of Zero

Human Fallibility and Risk

Dr Robert Long and Joshua Long

National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry

Dewey Number 302.12

© Copyright 2012 by Robert Long.

Graphic design and layout by Justin Huehn and Craig Ashhurst

ii For the Love of Zero

SECTION ONE - For the Love of Zero ........................................................................... 1

Chapter 1 - The Attraction of Zero .............................................................................................. 3

Chapter 2 - The Logic of Zero .....................................................................................................13

Chapter 3 - The Discourse of Zero.............................................................................................25

SECTION TWO - Zero Dissent ................................................................................... 35

Chapter 4 - Zero Dissent .............................................................................................................37

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero v

Chapter 5 - Making Sense of Zero ............................................................................................51

Chapter 6 - The Nature of Fundamentalism ............................................................................63

SECTION THREE - Strategies Without Zero ............................................................... 85

Chapter 7 - Strategies without Zero ..........................................................................................87

Chapter 8 - The Humanising Organisation ............................................................................ 103

vi For the Love of Zero

Chapter 9 - A Reading List .......................................................................................................141

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero vii

viii For the Love of Zero

Rev Graham Long

With Memory and Thanks

x For the Love of Zero

xii For the Love of Zero

Discourse: developed by Michael Foucault. The transmission of power in systems of thoughts

Heuristics: refer to experience-based techniques for problem-solving, learning, and discovery.

Ideology: meaning a worldview and disposition in faith/belief. An ideology is to be understood as

xiv For the Love of Zero

R5 Does the language of zero make any difference?

R5 Is zero a harmless neutral concept that doesn’t really matter?

R5 Does zero language inspire and motivate people?

xvi For the Love of Zero

These questions will be addressed through the discussion of this book.

Structure and Use of the Book

When absolutes in history are rejected, the absolutism of relativity is also

The Fascination with Zero

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero 3

This was my first encounter with zero projected as a positive concept.

For the Love of Zero

4 For the Love of Zero

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero 5

6 For the Love of Zero

Figure 3. The Triple Zero Kid’s Challenge

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero 7

8 For the Love of Zero

The Meaning of Zero

Three Year Olds and Pooh Pooh

The word ‘zero’ comes from Arabic meaning ‘nothing’ or ‘empty’.

The SISK Group (http://www.siskgroup.com/about-us/zero-philosophy) badge their website stating

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero 9

10 For the Love of Zero

Conforming to Cultural Language

Chapter 1: The Attraction of Zero 11

12 For the Love of Zero

Chapter 2: The Logic of Zero 13

14 For the Love of Zero

Chapter 2: The Logic of Zero 15

16 For the Love of Zero

Trends in ‘Zero harm’ Culture and Marketing