79 METHODOLOGY OR APPROACH From 2010–2025, the authors held corporate HSE leadership roles and advised senior operational and functional leaders on HSE strategy and performance improvement. They designed and supported delivery of safety improvement and fatality prevention programs across approximately 45–50 surface and underground mines and metals processing operations (concentrators, smelters, and refineries), in five international corporations, across six continents and ten commodities. This work placed the authors at the centre of a period characterised by competing priorities and constrained leadership attention. Asset-level interventions provided direct insight into the real conditions faced by operators, maintainers, and contractors as they attempted to execute work within prescribed systems and controls—often under production pressure, with increasing workforce variability, and within expanding administrative and procedural requirements. RESULTS, OUTCOMES When consolidating insights across this diverse sample, a consistent pattern of systemic issues emerged: 1. System complexity inflation Safety systems and tools have multiplied and become more complex. To address perceived gaps, companies have repeatedly introduced new elements—additional procedures, tools, standards, and rituals, often under the guise of continuous improvement. However, earlier-generation tools and systems are rarely retired. They typically remain available, sometimes still expected, but with limited guidance on when and how they should be used relative to newer requirements. At the same time, new and modified controls have often pursued greater specificity. While well-intended, this frequently increases complexity beyond what frontline teams can reliably apply in dynamic operating conditions. The result is “system volume inflation”: more tools, more steps, more documentation, and more overlap—paired with ambiguity about what is mandatory versus optional, what is “best practice” versus situational, and which tool is most appropriate for the task at hand. In that environment, teams often default to visible compliance—completing forms, meetings, and checks—while the authenticity and practical utility of risk control can degrade. Work still proceeds, but the system increasingly functions as a compliance layer rather than a high-fidelity control mechanism.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2