Pessimism, Optimism and Realism in Safety Management

Introduction

Working in safety management, we see both manifestations of pessimism and optimism. We can optimistically expect positive outcomes, proactively approach challenges, innovate, cooperate, and bounce back after crises. Conversely, we can pessimistically focus on incidents and the impossibility of reaching ‘zero harm,’ feeling helpless about making practical changes. How do pessimism and optimism influence our practices, and what role can realism play?

Optimism in Safety Management

A general tendency to expect good outcomes and to approach challenges with positivity rather than negativity can contribute positively to safety management. When we’re optimistic, we may be more likely to innovate, explore new possibilities, or engage in cooperative behaviors that can lead to organizational or technological progress. We also may recover from setbacks or illnesses more effectively.

The impact of pessimism on our effectiveness and motivation

The distribution of what goes right and what goes wrong influences pessimistic outlooks. The pessimist counts what goes wrong and sees this as the negation of what goes right. But pleasure (what goes right) and pain (what goes wrong) can’t be compared quantitatively because they are qualitatively different. When pessimism prevails in an organization, our practical abilities can be paralyzed. Pessimism often denies the natural limits on human power and freedom, leading to unrealistic expectations. The media mostly report negative things. Yes, negative developments such as climate change, species extinction, and growing inequality require solutions. But we should be motivated to act through education and information instead of holding ourselves back with pessimism and scaremongering.

Pessimism as a transitional phase towards a balanced and systemic understanding

While pessimism about the number of adverse events can appear as a backlash against destroyed optimism about the possibility of zero harm, pessimism is a necessary transitional phase towards a systemic understanding of the world that denies a single inherent purpose (safety first) or value alignment with human desires. The result is a non-negative approach instead of either a negative (all is lost; learned helplessness) or positive (all is good; if you can dream it, you can do it) approach. We need a form of hope that acknowledges life's limits and retains its value even in adversity.

A rational optimism

Since the Copernican revolution, humans have come to realize that they don’t hold a privileged position in the universe. This shifted perspectives from inherent optimism to acknowledging the randomness and indifference of natural laws towards human desires and values. Progressive optimism often denies the natural limits on human power and freedom, leading to unrealistic expectations. As we become more self-aware of what our systems produce—both the good and the bad—the justification for optimistic life directives must transform into a rational worldview.

Optimism and realism in safety management - Adapting to unexpected situations

We do need optimism about our people being able to adapt to unexpected situations. For the support of our people, we need realism. For this, we can study the system and find out what small steps are feasible. Effective safety measurement involves understanding everyday work and identifying factors that ensure consistent positive outcomes. Safety, quality, and other performance measures are interconnected and should be addressed together. Effective responses to crises often involve small, incremental changes rather than grand, disruptive transformations of zero harm. By identifying what we can control, such as our designs and responses to unexpected events, we can mitigate adverse effects and enhance positive outcomes. If we question our assumptions and seek diverse perspectives, we can make balanced and informed decisions, weigh potential rewards against potential downsides, and make informed decisions based on this analysis.

Conclusion

While an optimistic approach encourages innovation, cooperation, and effective recovery from setbacks, unchecked pessimism can paralyze practical abilities and trap us in unrealistic expectations. The qualitative differences between pleasure and pain, between everyday work and accidents, are easy to overlook if we don’t come together and share our perspectives. The influence of media on our outlook is substantial. As we deal with complex systems, we try to balance optimism with realism. We take incremental, knowledge-based steps to change our systems. By recognizing the interconnectedness of safety, quality, and performance measures, we enhance our resilience and adaptability in the face of uncertainties.

Suggested reading:

Hollnagel, E. (1994), Safety-I and Safety-II – The Past and Future of Safety Management, Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Lash, C. (1991), The True and Only Heaven – Progress and Its Critics, New York/London: W.W. Norton & Company.

Schröder, M. (2019), Warum es uns noch nie so gut ging und wir trotzdem ständig von Krisen reden, Elsbethen: Benevento publishing.

Simmel, G. (1900), Zu einer Theorie des Pessimismus, Die Zeit – Wiener Wochenschrift für Politik, Volkswirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Kunst, Vol. 22, Nr. 277, January 20t, 1900, pp. 38-40.

Thekdi, S., Aven, T. (2023), Think RISK – A Practical Guide to Actively Managing Risk, Abingdon/New York: Routledge.