How risk assessment has evolved: Fostering trust through coaching

Business
Webp ddg1glgdib1w16szy7cdi1rx13e7
Pat O'Loughlin President & CEO at Ohio's Electric Cooperatives | Ohio's Electric Cooperatives

This article is the second in a series of three written in response to input provided for the Co-op Forum in the April 2024 edition of RE Magazine.

The question: How has risk assessment evolved in the last decade?

Last quarter, we focused on the danger of separating operations and safety and emphasized evolving towards operating safely. We also discussed transitioning from a compliance approach to a standard of care where leadership fosters a culture of safety.

In part two, we reflect on setting clearer expectations and "coaching" crews in a positive environment. The traditional mindset of "what happens on the crew stays on the crew" has evolved into an open communication space where workers can share their shortcomings without fear. This shift moves from a culture of blame to one where people are part of the solution.

Steve Savon, Safety and Regulatory Consultant at OEC, emphasizes coaching over catching violations. He recalls introducing this approach during a meeting with GM/CEOs before launching the COLD (COLT Onsite Lineworker Development) program. "I expected some pushback and received none," he said, highlighting Ohio's progress in safety programs.

Historically, safety violations were met with strict documentation and discipline, even if organizational failures contributed to them. Now, there is recognition that some violations may require moving beyond coaching but only after establishing clear expectations. Savon suggests asking whether it was "will or skill" that led to the violation—whether it was intentional or due to lack of knowledge or human error.

Previously, individuals were often blamed for incidents resulting from safety violations. Now, there is an understanding that while some employees may need correction or termination due to character flaws, effective screening processes can prevent such issues. Savon notes that ability is often why people are hired but character flaws are why they get fired.

Coaching has proven more effective than punitive measures for fostering safe practices among good employees. This transition is partly driven by a multi-generational workforce and evolving training methods. However, past experiences with punitive crew observations have left long-lasting negative impressions among linemen.

Psychological safety plays a crucial role in successful safety programs built on trust between management and workers. Open communication without fear leads to better culture and more effective crew observations focusing on positive reinforcement rather than punishment.

Savon introduces an "after action review" process involving those who made mistakes as key contributors to improving processes. This approach shifts away from blame towards collective problem-solving applicable across various departments beyond just safety.

The new incident review method assumes most employees have good intentions but acknowledges formal investigations are necessary for serious incidents or when bad actors are involved.

Open communication following human error incidents can either improve or worsen safety culture based on organizational response. Proper responses focus on improvement through trust-based relationships leading to stronger cultures overall.

In summary

The cooperative model thrives on its people; thus approaches towards employees significantly impact organizational success. Trust-based environments foster open communication akin to family dynamics distinguishing cooperatives from other organizations.

As risk assessment evolves further strengthening trust through relationship-building processes ensures workers become solutions rather than problems while protecting both personnel and cultural integrity against detrimental influences.