Westrum (1991, 2004) proposed a description of three (3) levels of safety culture advancement. Hudson (1999), and later Parker, Lawrie & Hudson (2006), built on these and developed five (5) levels of safety culture advancement. Depending on its level of maturity, safety culture is either characterized as
- Pathological
- Reactive
- Calculative
- Proactive, or
- Generative
This classification into five levels was included in the OGP’s Hearts and Minds program (2010). It is presented in the table below:
|
Pathological |
Reactive |
Calculative |
Proactive |
Generative |
|
|
Communication |
No communication |
Communication is focused on accidents, otherwise, it is top-down only. |
Lots of statistics, |
Management is Safety is discussed |
Safety has priority. Lots of feedback loops. Sharp-end workers actively seek out information. |
|
Organizational |
No trust. Sanctions and micro- |
Responsibility is focused on individuals, who must be trained and follow procedures. |
Sharp-end workers have little influence over procedures. Management is perceived as being obsessed with safety but is not taken seriously. |
Participation is encouraged, under supervision from Obsession with statistics. |
Workers see management as partners and respect Workers identify problems and management works with them to address them. |
|
HSE Organization |
No HSE structure; |
Legal and statistical Procedures are changed after an accident. |
HSE specialists are well accepted. Rewards and sanctions for HSE. Lots of procedures with no concern as to their applicability. |
HSE specialists endeavor to take into account the Safety is taken into account in design. |
Small HSE department supporting management. Procedures are drafted by the teams. Continuous improvement. Small number of procedures, included in training. |
|
Organizational |
Denial of problems. Focus is on profits. |
Management overreacts after an accident. Workers have little faith in actions from management. |
Monitoring of numbers. Conviction that the situation is under control. Difficulty reassessing solutions. |
Priority is given to safety over productivity (with competing goals). Management is interested. Analysis of near-misses. |
Workers are given lots of free rein and there is trust between workers and management. |
|
Behavior with regard to working conditions |
Working conditions are Management is not interested. |
Legal obligations. Improvements after an |
Clean environment. Management does not always have sound knowledge of the sharp end. |
Priorities and resources are discussed without waiting for an accident to occur. |
Management has sound knowledge of the sharp end. Workers influence the working environment. Management disseminates best practices to the other sites. |

