Safety clutter: the accumulation and persistence of ‘safety’ work that does not contribute to operational safety

References

• Almklov, P.G., Rosness, R., & Størkersen, K. (2014). When safety science meets the practitioners: Does safety science contribute to marginalization of practical knowledge? Safety Science, 67(Suppl.C), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amalberti, R. (2013). Navigating safety: Necessary compromises and trade-Offs – Theory and practice (2013 edition). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bourrier, M., & Bieder, C. (2013). Trapping safety into rules: An introduction. Trapping safety into rules. How desirable or avoidable is proceduralization (pp. 1–9). Farnham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, H.T.O., & Mannion, R. (1999). Striking a balance between checking and trusting (The York Series on the NHS White Paper No. Discussion Paper 165). York: Centre for Health Economics.
   Google Scholar
• Dekker. (2017). The safety anarchist: Relying on human expertise and innovation, reducing bureaucracy and compliance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dekker, S. (2014a). Safety differently: Human factors for a new era (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dekker, S. (2014b). The bureaucratization of safety. Safety Science, 70, 348–357. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2014.07.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey, B.S. (1997). Not just for the money: An economic theory of personal motivation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, G. C. (2009). The responsibilization strategy of health and safety: Neo-liberalism and the reconfiguration of individual responsibility for risk. The British Journal of Criminology, 49(3), 326–342. doi:10.1093/bjc/azp004
   Google Scholar
• Hale, A., & Borys, D. (2013). Working to rule, or working safely? Part 1: A state of the art review. Safety Science, 55, 207–221. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2012.05.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollnagel, E. (2014). Safety-I and safety-II (New edition edition). Farnham, Surrey, England, UK; Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Hollnagel, E., Woods, D.D., & Leveson, N. (Eds.). (2006). Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts (New edition). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Howard-Payne, L. (2016). Glaser or Strauss? Considerations for selecting a grounded theory study: South African Journal of Psychology, 46(1), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246315593071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnstone, R.E. (2017). Glut of Anesthesia Guidelines a Disservice, except for lawyers. Anesthesiology News, 42(3), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral science, 9(2), 131–146. doi:10.1002/bs.3830090206
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leape, L.L. (2014). The checklist conundrum. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(11), 1063–1064. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe1315851 doi:10.1056/NEJMe1315851
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerner, J.S., & Tetlock, P.E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255–275 doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, R., Smith, G., & Ashhurst, C. (2016). Risky conversations: The law, social psychology and risk. Scotoma Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manuele, F.A. (2009). Leading & lagging indicators. Professional Safety, 54(12), 28–33.
   Google Scholar
• McAllister, D. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, N., Corrigan, S., & Ward, M. (2002). Well-intentioned people in dysfunctional systems. In Keynote presented at fifth workshop on human error, safety and systems development. Newcastle, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• McGhee, G., Marland, G.R., & Atkinson, J. (2007). Grounded theory research: Literature reviewing and reflexivity. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60(3), 334–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04436.x doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04436.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nemeth, C., Nunnally, M., O’Connor, M., Klock, P.A., & Cook, R. (2005). Getting to the point: Developing IT for the sharp end of healthcare. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 38(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.002 doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pink, D. (2011). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York: Riverhead Books.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. (2003). Evaluating the audit explosion. Law & Policy, 25(3), 185–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2003.00147.x doi:10.1111/j.1467-9930.2003.00147.x
   Google Scholar
• Provan, D.J., Dekker, S.W.A., & Rae, A.J. (2017). Bureaucracy, influence and beliefs: A literature review of the factors shaping the role of a safety professional. Safety Science, 98(Suppl.C), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Provan, D.J., Dekker, S.W., & Rae, A.J. (2018). Benefactor or burden: Exploring the professional identity of safety professionals. Journal of Safety Research, 66, 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2018.05.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rae, A.J., & Alexander, R.D. (2017). Probative blindness and false assurance about safety. Safety Science, 92, 190–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rae, A.J., Nicholson, M., & Alexander, R.D. (2010). The state of practice in system safety research evaluation. In IET system safety conference. Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Shojania, K.G., Duncan, B.W., McDonald, K.M., & Wachter, R.M. (2002). Safe but sound: Patient safety meets evidence-based medicine. JAMA, 288(4), 508–513. doi:10.1001/jama.288.4.508
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stock, C.T., & Sundt, T. (2015). Timeout for checklists? Annals of Surgery, 261(5), 841–842. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Townsend, A.S. (2013). Safety can’t be measured: An evidence-based approach to improving risk reduction). Britain: Gower Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Vaughan, D. (1997). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA (1 edition). Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wears, R.L., & Hunte, G.S. (2014). Seeing patient safety “like a state.” Safety Science, 67, 50–57. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, D., Macgregor, S., Provan, D.J., & Rae, A.J. (2018). “We can stop work, but then nothing gets done.” Factors that support and hinder a workforce to discontinue work for safety. Safety Science, 108C, 149–160.
   Google Scholar