It is well known that the control of hazards is substantially dependent on the attitude and knowledge of individuals. In physical systems, the objective can be enhanced by engineering causative agents out of the system, thereby eliminating or moderating the effects of human factors. Toward that end, safety engineering education can furnish engineers the reason for and methods of accomplishing safe systems – as indeed general safety education can improve safety attitudes and augment knowledge about accident prevention.
Information alone cannot be expected to sway one’s judgement, however. When it does, it is usually because the decision maker is ready to agree with what is suggested and he or she has no reason not to follow the prescriptive immediately. Given the opportunity, one’s priorities usually are determined by quite personal and occasionally ephemeral inclinations. Since safety is not always uppermost in individuals’ minds, a method of external governance is required to provide some regularity in the deportment necessary for safety achievement.
Organized societies enact laws established rules and policies and use other broad-scale means to regularize the conduct of groups of individuals. Nevertheless the limitations of these methods can be noted daily in the nation’s news reports. Clearly these methods alone are unreliable where specific mission requires the cooperative effort of a number of individuals. The principal solution for this enigma includes engaging competent managers and distributing their skills across a hierarchy of increasingly responsible positions. The hierarchical arrangement of authority enables the managers to selectively apply managerial persuasion and permits the determination of accountability for the group’s performance as a reflection of its manager’s ability to deliver what is wanted. Managing thus becomes the focal point for fulfilling group objectives. Although the manger may be subject to the human failing of inconstant and...