In the past, precisely during the pre-industrial revolution era. Industrial accident occurred mostly in an unsafe environment where there subsists less than adequate risk reduction management strategies: lack of adequate machine guards and absence of administrative control (famous three (3) E concept) – Educate Employees, Establish Rules/Procedures and Enforce [applicable rules and regulations in the workplace]. But we are still hurting people every day in a presumed safe condition where there exist adequate safeguard assurance processes; robust interaction between management practices, organization factors and innovative technologies. Put in place by multinational organizations to empower human factors in helping them to fulfill their Health Safety Environment (HSE) line management responsibilities and business goals, in high risk environment like the oil and gas industry. In order to guarantee delivering of complex capital projects deliverables on schedule and within budget without compromising environmental stewardship, reliability and efficiency requirements. Unfortunately, existing control measures fail to meet their purpose of creating an incident free workplace. You might ask "Why is this possible?".

The reason is that safety hardware and protocols by themselves can’t stop incidents from happening in the workplace without proper integration with human factors, and this arrangement when properly harness will proactively influence workforce to take actions supporting operational discipline behaviour. Therefore, despite the enormous resources invested by multinationals to creates incident free workplace; an environment where personal injury, property damage and downtime are intolerable, innovative production and automation processes reduces human-machine interaction, and authority may be respectfully questioned without repercussion. Our industry is yet struggling to actualize zero incident tenets of operation, due to human behavior which often manifests as consequences of the choices we made while performing our daily tasks. Evidently, this is the dilemma confronting contemporary organizations that did not only believe that incident free operation is possible but have demonstrated their commitment to incident & injury doctrine, by investing so much human and material resources to developed cost-effective safeguard assurance plans designed to keep people safe - make sure everyone working for them go home safe to meet their loved ones every day. Nevertheless, from the 1911 New York Triangle Fire incident that recorded 146 deaths to the famous 2010 Macondo blowout incident which recorded 11 dead. Our industry is still celebrating 99+ years anniversary of workplace incident since not every worker that goes to work in the morning always return home safe in the evening to meet their loved ones.

Human factor will negatively or positively influence organizations’ Operational Excellence and Capital Stewardship performance. As a result of the decisions that we made consciously or unconsciously under demanding operating conditions. Explained below, are two distinctive models for explaining how our choices interacts with processes and equipment to product both desired and undesired results in the workplace.

 Perception-Action- Result Model

This model proposes that our perception will naturally stimulates our actions and our actions will affect our results which might be either positive or negative, depending on the exactness of our preliminary comprehension of the prevailing situation. It also affirms there are only two possible outcomes emanating from our actions. It might be positive when our observations and actions are in sync, or negative if our discernment and subsequent actions are divergence as a result of insufficient information or experience and training. For instance, while drilling the 17" intermediate hole-section of an offshore well. The rig’s mud pump #2 abruptly stopped working due to electrical fault emanating from its electric motor. OIM asked the Senior Electrician to repair the faulty motor. He isolated the equipment inside the SCR room but failed to lock and tag out the circuit breaker and hurried straightaway into the mud pump-room to rectify the malfunctioned electric motor to avoid downtime. Chief Electrician on routine tour entered the SCR room, noticed that the circuit breaker was switched off, thinking that it was erroneously turned off, he turned it on. Consequently, rig’s electrician performing corrective maintenance in the mud pump’s motor was electrocuted.

 Perception- Interpretation- Projection Model

According to the International Well Control Forum, an individual is continuously taking information through their various senses. The sensory information is processed, and the person then projected into the future to consider how it will develop and act so (IWCF, 2019). Akin to the previous model discussed earlier, this concept likewise suggests two distinctive results as well:

• Workforce perceptive different information in the workplace and interprets them as usual,

• Form a projection which will then inspire the workers to act.

Outcome of our actions might either be positive or negative as previously discussed. For example, while drilling the 9-5/8" production hole-section of an offshore well. The driller observed flow increase while making-up pipe connection, which he deciphered as positive kick indicator based on his previous experience. Then he projected the scenario into the future and concluded that formation fluid entering the wellbore downhole have potential to cause occupational and major hazard accidents. But based on his earlier training, experience and situational awareness of credible topside blowout incident, the driller promptly shut-in the well using the rig’s Blowout preventer (BOP) equipment without conducting any flow check. The behavior of the driller prevents occupational accident, process safety and/or environmental events from occurring.

Contemporary organizations are mindful of the inherent risk associated with decision-making process of people working in hazardous environment like upstream operations in the oil and gas industry. They adopted technologies in supporting the workforce to reduce human error tendency to acceptable level while at the same time helping them to make the right choices in getting the right results the right ways. Also, organizations have applied the following innovative concepts: straddling "Shaping Accident Free Environment (SAFE)", "Zero harm", "Incident Free Operation (IFO)", "Incident & Injury Free (IIF)", "Safeguard Assurance Programs" etc. as a human performance enhancement tool. To aid employees to apply operational discipline principle, as well as assisting them to meet their mandatory "duty of care" obligation, encompassing provision of safe machinery and access to their employees. But for the industry to assure sustainable development in its incident free workplace doctrine, as well as motivating workers to partnership with them in realizing their zero-incident vision; organizations ought to be creative in generating practical solutions as suggested below.

1. Become a learning organization

leadership should never perceive failing as a setback to prevent them for delivering their projects deliverables. Rather they should see it as a journey towards actualizing their organizations' attempts in building incident free culture; since safety is not the absence of incident but it is the presence of controls (Dave Payne, (n.d.)). For instance, if you are traveling from Warri to Lagos and you suddenly have a flat tire at Ore junction. Will you abandon your journey abruptly? Certainly not. Surely, you will jump out from your car, fix the flatten tire and resume the journey. Equally, leadership should see failings as a unique opportunity to help them learn about the inherent weakness prevailing within the organization’s management systems. Thus, incident investigations exercises must be applied as a problem-solving tool to identify improvement opportunities, application of lessons learned in generating functional solutions to strengthen existing safeguards to guarantee continuous improvement in the protection of People, Asset and the Environment. But not as blame game orchestrated to get rid of outspoken individuals that are only fulfilling their safety onus - speaking-up whenever they perceived any unsafe work practices or unsafe condition in the workplace.

2. Change the belief from I think there are safeguards to I know safeguards are in place and working

Leadership should deliberately alter the idea that safeguards are in place and become assertive that they are operative in mitigating emerging risks based on prevailing technology, financial resources and available timeframe. Assertiveness can only be realized when there exists protocol that leaders could applied to measure, monitor and improve efficiency of existing safeguards assurance processes to accomplish their organization’s incident free operation expectations. A classic example of such program is the application of verification and validation program as process improvement tool in sustaining zero incident culture, exactly in the same way pre-flight protocol adopted in the aviation industry ensure incident free flight operation daily. For such program to be effective, it must be capable of identifying high-risk activities which the organization’s employees or its third-party contractors’ staff would be performing in its operated facilities. Satisfactorily describe roles as well as assigning responsibilities to leaders vested the onus of ensuring safeguards under their operational control are reliable, efficiency and adequate to manage anticipated risks. Before commencing any identified high-risk tasks with innate potential for serious injury and fatalities, with low frequency of occurrence but have high consequences. Implementation of such program will not only end traditional tick the box exercise common in the workplace but will drive operations staff to take ownership of the established safeguard assurance process. By physically verifying adequacy, suitability and efficacy of critical safeguards under their operational control.

3. Use statistics for its intended purpose not contrary

Leadership might subtle manipulates organizations’ safety performance just to make them look good in the eyes of stakeholders; public, shareholders and regulators. Although such practice might be legal within the framework of some regulatory directives. However, it will never produce incident free workplace talk less of eliminating workplace hazards, rather it will reinforce negative behavior supporting incident-prone values. Hence, for organizations to lay a solid foundation needed for building sustainable incident and injury free culture, where everyone is guaranteed to go home safe each day. They must create an arrangement for encouraging leadership to build robust relationship with followers in order to produce incident free environment:

• Where task performers can stop any task (when he/she perceived it is no longer safe to carry out such task) without any repercussion from management.

• Leaders care for employees’ wellbeing and concerns with the same passion they care for their organization’s core business goals.

If the preceding incident free strategy is administered with unbiased intention and integrity. Leaders will be positioned in a vintage place to motivate the workforce to implement operational discipline. Not because the company want them safe but because they choose to work safe. So that they can put smiles on the faces of their loved ones and at the same time protecting the assets of the organizations to ensure their business continuity objectives.

Incident & Injury Free (IIF) Commitment

I will plan my work and walk the talks today. By following safe work practices and rules while performing my task. However, when condition change during execution of my assigned task, I perceive any unsafe condition, or my colleagues are exhibiting at-risk behavior. I will address the abnormal condition by calling timeout for safety promptly. Because being my brother keeper is the only gift that I can give to my teammates’ spouses and loved ones.