Blog | Falcony

Cognitive Dissonance - How management may not accept the truth of Safety Incidents

Written by Arttu Vesterinen | Mar 14, 2024 1:45:00 PM

In the realm of workplace safety, acknowledging the occurrence of safety incidents is a crucial step towards prevention and improvement.

However, human psychology can sometimes lead individuals, including management, to experience cognitive dissonance—a state of mental discomfort that arises when we hold conflicting beliefs or attitudes. In this blog, we will explore how cognitive dissonance may prevent management from accepting the truth of safety incidents and its potential consequences.

Understanding Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance occurs when individuals confront information or experiences that challenge their existing beliefs, values, or self-concept. To resolve this discomfort, people often take one of the following approaches:

  • Change Beliefs: Adjust their beliefs or attitudes to align with the new information.
  • Minimize Importance: Downplay the significance of the conflicting information.
  • Seek Confirmation: Seek out information that supports their existing beliefs to reduce dissonance.
  • Ignore or Deny: Simply ignore or deny the conflicting information, maintaining their current beliefs.

Cognitive Dissonance in Safety Incidents

In the context of safety incidents, cognitive dissonance may manifest in several ways among management:

  • Minimizing Incident Severity: When faced with a safety incident report, management may downplay the seriousness of the incident to avoid acknowledging systemic flaws or inadequate safety measures.

  • Attributing Blame: There may be a tendency to blame individual workers involved in the incident rather than examining broader organizational factors that contributed to the event.

  • Selective Attention: Management may focus on data or reports that support the idea that the workplace is safer than it actually is while ignoring or discounting contrary evidence.

  • Avoiding Accountability: Cognitive dissonance can lead to a reluctance to accept responsibility for safety incidents, which can hinder the implementation of corrective actions.

Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance in Safety

Failing to address cognitive dissonance in safety incidents can have significant consequences:

  • Repetition of Incidents: Ignoring or downplaying safety incidents can lead to their recurrence, as root causes remain unaddressed.

  • Lost Learning Opportunities: By not accepting the truth of safety incidents, organizations miss valuable learning opportunities to enhance safety measures and prevent future incidents.

  • Damaged Trust: Employees may lose trust in management if they perceive a lack of transparency and accountability in addressing safety incidents.

  • Legal and Regulatory Consequences: Denial of safety incidents can result in legal and regulatory issues, potentially leading to fines and reputational damage.

Mitigating Cognitive Dissonance in Safety Reporting

To mitigate cognitive dissonance and encourage management to accept the truth of safety incidents, organizations can take the following steps:

  • Promote a Just Culture: Foster a culture where reporting safety incidents is encouraged and individuals are not punished for reporting.

  • Objective Investigations: Conduct thorough and objective investigations into safety incidents, involving individuals with diverse expertise, including human factors specialists.

  • Data Transparency: Ensure transparency in sharing safety incident data, including near misses, to provide a comprehensive view of safety performance.

  • Continuous Improvement: Use incident findings to drive continuous improvement in safety measures, procedures, and training programs.

  • Training and Awareness: Provide training on cognitive biases and their impact on decision-making, including cognitive dissonance, to help management recognize and address these biases.

Conclusion

Cognitive dissonance can be a barrier to addressing safety incidents effectively. By promoting a culture of transparency, conducting objective investigations, and fostering a commitment to continuous improvement, organizations can encourage management to confront cognitive dissonance and accept the truth of safety incidents. Ultimately, this approach leads to safer workplaces, improved morale, and enhanced trust between employees and management.

Are you looking for a tool to report incidents or any other issues in your organisation? Falcony | Observe ticks all the boxes for incident management, is easy to customise, enables real dialogue and is a lot more. 

We are building the world's first operational involvement platform. Our mission is to make the process of finding, sharing, fixing and learning from issues and observations as easy as thinking about them and as rewarding as being remembered for them.‍

By doing this, we are making work more meaningful for all parties involved.

More information at falcony.io.