School of Reliability and Systems Engineering, Beihang University, 100191, Beijing, China.
School of Reliability and Systems Engineering, Beihang University, 100191, Beijing, China.
Appl Ergon. 2020 Jan;82:102952. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102952. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
In contrast to the conventional safety philosophy (Safety-I) which focuses on 'what goes wrong', a newborn one (Safety-II) focusing on 'what goes right' endows people with more opportunities to realize productive safety in complex socio-technical systems. Yet, it is challenging to make the best of both the philosophies in a period of knowledge transition when they may have to coexist. This work investigates how Safety-II may resemble, differ from, and correlate to Safety-I. From individual, environmental and organizational aspects, 9 impacting factors are identified and expounded comparatively in the two philosophies. To examine impact of the factors on accidents and resilience respectively, an empirical approach is presented in the context of Beijing taxi service system (BTSS). Multiple means such as questionnaire surveys, semi-structured interviews, and statistical analysis with bi-method (Correlation Analysis, and Data Envelopment Analysis) cross-checking are utilized comprehensively to support the empirical study. The results show that: a) individual factors play a dominant role in system risk/performance management, in respect to views of both Safety-I and II; and b) organizational factors are more influential in creating and maintaining system resilience. Based on the findings, possible patterns of integrating the two philosophies are instantiated through mutually complementary application to BTSS. Despite the context of BTSS, this work provides a feasible way of comparing between Safety-I and Safety-II, for beneficial reference of other socio-technical systems.
与传统的安全理念（安全 I）侧重于“出错的原因”不同，关注“正确的做法”的新兴理念（安全 II）赋予人们更多机会在复杂的社会技术系统中实现生产安全。然而，在知识转型时期，当两种理念必须共存时，如何充分利用这两种理念具有一定的挑战性。本研究旨在探讨安全 II 如何类似于、不同于和相关于安全 I。从个体、环境和组织三个方面，识别出 9 个影响因素，并在两种理念中进行了比较阐述。为了分别检验这些因素对事故和韧性的影响，在北京市出租车服务系统（BTSS）的背景下提出了一种实证方法。本研究采用了问卷调查、半结构化访谈和统计分析等多种方法（相关分析和数据包络分析）进行交叉验证，为实证研究提供了支持。结果表明：a）个体因素在系统风险/绩效管理中起着主导作用，这与安全 I 和安全 II 的观点一致；b）组织因素在创造和维持系统韧性方面更具影响力。基于这些发现，通过在 BTSS 中相互补充的应用，体现了整合两种理念的可能模式。尽管本研究以 BTSS 为背景，但为比较安全 I 和安全 II 提供了一种可行的方法，为其他社会技术系统提供了有益的参考。
