Skip to main content


Safety meetings are a cardinal feature of all safety programmes.

It doesn't matter much whether they're scheduled, impromptu or otherwise, you can't escape them anyway. Visit any worksite and you're sure to hear something about a safety meeting. It may be about the agenda for the next one due or how boring and ineffectual the last one was. Meetings can be exciting, appropriate and to the point. So also can they be a major turn off, dull, uninspiring, uninteresting and sleep-inducing.

There's probably nothing with a greater potential to harm workplace team safety interest than a poorly organized, poorly conducted safety meeting. If it isn't 'productive' in terms of the 'takeaways' then there'll be little or no incentive for the participants to give it any memory space. Safety meetings are supposed to be like refueling stations. They provide opportunities to recharge your knowledge bank of batteries via real time experience-sharing, discovering hitherto hidden 'whys' and 'hows', etc. If in the end no such 'productivity' is realized or perceived, then time spent is  more or less a wasted. 

Unproductive meetings are often poorly planned, poorly led, unstructured, and finally cast adrift by a domineering supervisor or leader. If he/she is dispensing wisdom and knowledge in a 'know all', do-not-question-me-I-know-what-am-talking-about fashion, then you can safely kiss it goodbye. In which case, it would have been much better for all concerned if the leader sent a memo of 'instructions' round in the first place. Simply herding hapless employees into an enclosure to let loose with a torrent of 'this is how we do it here' is a team safety spirit killer of epic proportions. It is most unadvisable. If it is a meeting with a singular objective for workplace safety, then everyone must be allowed to participate or contribute for the common good of all.

Unfortunately, the reverse is often found in practice. Some workplace leaders simply do not know when to let go. They prefer to preach when they ought to be exchanging ideas or speaking when they should be listening. By so doing they lose or isolate the very same people whom they're working ever so hard to 'safeguard', which is quite pointless really. If team members do not feel part of the overall picture, very little will be achieved no matter the effort expended by way of meetings. Especially if they are not clear, focused, practical, relevant and direct to the point of application. Supplications and prayerful workplace safety meetings will do very little for set targets, objectives and overall programme performance. Make that next safety meeting count by doing the right thing.

It can help your cause a great deal.


Popular posts from this blog


There are pep talks and there are pep talks.

Over the years, I've had the privilege of observing pep talks all day long on seismic crews, construction sites, production platforms, processing plants, wire line, drilling operations, rig moves and so on. But not once have I left not feeling maybe the crew could have done better with the shape and content of the core messages thereof. This is because I am of the view that safety messages are only helpful if they are clear and to the point, with little or no ambiguity, if any at all. Unfortunately, this is not always the case.

Now 5-minutes is not a great deal of time for even the most gifted and skillful of speakers to nail  home  the key safety dos and don'ts of the job soon to commence. So most of these talks frequently average out to be sing songs and prayerful affairs in the end, with generalized 'messages' like be 'your brother's keeper', 'safety is everybody's business', 'you all know what…


In 'ACCIDENT IS MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN', we tried illustrating  how a NOTHING HAPPENED near miss incident of a hammer accidentally slipping off a technician's grasp, falling through a considerable height and landing safely between two busy foremen, with no damage to property or injury to anyone on site resulted in so much useful production time loss. A conservative computation of the time-cost estimate showed what seemed to be a 'harmless' incident costing the site company management a hefty 3.4 Man-Days lost time in direct costs! The exercise ended without considering the 'POTENTIAL' of the occurrence.

'POTENTIAL' simply refers to the probability of a much more consequential outcome by chance or slightly altered circumstances given the number of people exposed to the threat at the time. This is usually what constitutes the difference between a 'NOTHING HAPPENED' incident, a disabling/ serious property damage one or a fatality. That the people…

How Much of Your Opex Do You Save Cutting Corners?

What % of your operating budget do you save when you look the other way while unauthorized changes and deviations are a norm in the workplace under your supervision? Would you 5, 10, 15 or maybe 30%? You are not too sure how much, if anything at all?

Well, it is highly unlikely that you will ever save on your Opex if employees are free to make up their own rules as they go along or can decide which step on the job comes next instead of what the approved procedures say. In fact working with scant regards for the Right Way of doing things condemns you to an ever spiraling  operating budget spend. Because you'll find that you are constantly grappling with 'digging a hole to fill a hole' throughout the life of  the project.

In the end, there are no prizes for guessing that your project will come in grossly over budget and way outside the delivery schedule because of all the issues of rework, unplanned stoppages, delayed logistics, repairs and replacements, backtracking, clea…