“Old” and “new” safety thinking: Perspectives of aviation safety investigators

Karanikas, Nektarios; Chionis, Dimitrios; Plioutsias, Anastasios

doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104632

Cited by 18 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, even the simple question “Why didn’t you speak up?” prompts the individual to focus on the idea that they did something wrong and were to blame. Thus, “old” models of safety thinking are adopted that focus on what the health care professional could have done differently, rather than new safety thinking (Karanikas et al, 2020) where the focus is on understanding individual actions in the context of the connected wider system. In Table 1, we present typical questions that are asked after an adverse event in health care and alternative phrasing of each question.…”

Section: Theoretical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Employee silence in health care: Charting new avenues for leadership and management

Montgomery

Lainidi

Johnson

et al. 2022

Health Care Manage Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IssueHealth care management is faced with a basic conundrum about organizational behavior; why do professionals who are highly dedicated to their work choose to remain silent on critical issues that they recognize as being professionally and organizationally significant? Speaking-up interventions in health care achieve disappointing outcomes because of a professional and organizational culture that is not supportive.Critical Theoretical AnalysisOur understanding of the different types of employee silence is in its infancy, and more ethnographic and qualitative work is needed to reveal the complex nature of silence in health care. We use the sensemaking theory to elucidate how the difficulties to overcoming silence in health care are interwoven in health care culture.Insight/AdvanceThe relationship between withholding information and patient safety is complex, highlighting the need for differentiated conceptualizations of silence in health care. We present three Critical Challenge points to advance our understanding of silence and its roots by (1) challenging the predominance of psychological safety, (2) explaining how we operationalize sensemaking, and (3) transforming the role of clinical leaders as sensemakers who can recognize and reshape employee silence. These challenges also point to how employee silence can also result in a form of dysfunctional professionalism that supports maladaptive health care structures in practice.Practice ImplicationsDelineating the contextual factors that prompt employee silence and encourage speaking up among health care workers is crucial to addressing this issue in health care organizations. For clinical leaders, the challenge is to valorize behaviors that enhance adaptive and deep psychological safety among teams and within professions while modeling the sharing of information that leads to improvements in patient safety and quality of care.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Employee silence in health care: Charting new avenues for leadership and management

Montgomery

Lainidi

Johnson

et al. 2022

Health Care Manage Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the findings revealed that no categories of risk perception or risk communication factors were reported in 14% and 20% of the sample, respectively. Thus, the general attributions of events to risk perception and communication without further explanations about their underlying factors might reflect using constructs as legitimate direct causes of events without having examined the constituents of such constructs ( 61 ). On the positive side, the distribution of the frequencies with which one or more categories of factors were reported to have contributed to events (Table 2) indicates an awareness of risk perception and communication constructs within most of the investigation teams.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of Risk Perception and Communication in Aviation Safety Events

Chionis

Karanikas

Iordan

et al. 2021

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although effective risk management during operations relies on risk perception and risk communication, the aviation industry has not systematically considered the contribution of these two constructs to safety events. This study analyzed a representative sample of safety investigation reports (1) to identify the degree to which risk perception and communication and their factors have been influential overall and across various flight operation stages of investigated events, and (2) to examine whether their contribution has changed with time. The analysis of 140 reports showed environmental factors affected risk communication and perception most frequently, whereas emotional and physiological factors were found in the sample with very low frequencies. Also, risk communication and perception and their factors did not appear with the same frequency across the various flight stages, and a few variations were observed over time. The aviation industry could consider the results of this study to steer its efforts toward mitigating the adverse effects of factors related to ineffective risk perception and communication. This could include the inclusion of respective factors in safety reporting schemes, investigation methods and analyses and, possibly, a tailored approach to the various flight stages and targeted risk literacy interventions.

show abstract

“…When calculating the entropy weight, the traditional entropy weight method uses a standardized processing method, as shown in equation [ 7 ].

…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, in this paper, equation [ 8 ] is used to calculate the entropy weight to replace equation [ 7 ].

Analysis of the rationality of improving the entropy method …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are many factors affecting flight safety, carrying out causative factors analysis and experience sharing is of great practical significance for national and regional civil aviation flight safety. In previous studies, many civil aviation safety research methods have been formed, and different scholars have carried out research on factors affecting flight safety from different perspectives [ 7 ]. established “old” and “new” safety thinking from perspectives of aviation safety investigators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation