Introduction
Safety practitioners continue to strive for recognition as a profession—within society, by other professions, by their employers, government agencies, and from each other. They will attain recognition as a profession only when the practice of safety has progressed to meet the regimens of a profession, and only when the content and quality of their practice earn the respect of other professions and of society in general.
We who are engaged in the practice of safety use the word professional quite freely as a form of self-identification. For those who want the practice of safety to be recognized as a profession and want to be considered safety professionals, a serious introspection concerning the perception others have of what they do would serve their purposes well. This chapter will present:
- The requirements for the practice of safety to be recognized as a profession
- Comments on each of those requirements
- A listing of actions that, if undertaken, would move the practice of safety toward recognition as a profession
As this discussion commences, it is appropriate to recognize with gratitude the accomplishments over several decades by those who have been successful in promoting and achieving a higher level of preparation for, and accomplishment in, the practice of safety. Many have contributed to that progress. Nevertheless, a major challenge remains for continued gains.
A Limited Literature Review
Only a few authors have written about the practice of safety being recognized as a profession. Most safety texts do not address the subject at all. A brief review of relative literature follows. As the history shows, authors have questioned whether what safety practitioners do meets the requirements of a profession. Some authors have pleaded for the necessary actions to be taken to achieve professional status.
In MORT Safety Assurance Systems, William G. Johnson (1980) includes a chapter titled “The Safety Function.” It commences with these questions. “What is the nature of the safety function? What are the safety professional's responsibilities, qualifications, and methods.” This 1980 publication pleads for answers to those questions. Johnson quotes from Scope and Functions of the Professional Safety Position published by the American Society of Safety Engineers (1998) as a reference paper (463).
In Analyzing Safety Performance, written by Dan Petersen and published in 1980, Chapter 1 is titled “The Professional Safety Task.” It opens with a duplication of the previously cited Scope and Functions of the Professional Safety Position. On several occasions, Petersen questioned the appropriateness of safety practitioners referring to themselves as professionals, as will be seen later.
Richard J. Finegan's article “Is the Loss Control Effort a Profession?” was published in Professional Safety, the Journal of the American Society of Safety Engineers, in June 1981. Note the commonly used term “loss control” rather than safety profession. Finegan questioned whether the discipline applied in loss control met the requirements of a profession.
Dan Petersen's article “Professionalism—A Fourth Step” was published in Professional Safety in November 1982. Petersen began with this statement: “Safety is working very hard to become a profession.” Petersen suggested that safety practitioners examine their theoretical base by asking whether what they believe to be fact is really fact or just opinion. Many of the questions he posed in 1982 are still pertinent today.
Ted S. Ferry made this brief mention of the need to “determine the limits of the safety and health field” and gave the following description of a profession in Safety Program Administration for Engineers and Managers, a book published in 1984:
A profession is an occupation generally involving a relatively long and specialized preparation on the level of higher education and is usually governed by its own code of ethics. (14)
In their book Introduction to Safety Engineering, David S. Gloss and Miriam Gayle Wardle speak of the requirements of a profession. This is what they wrote in 1984.
Hallmarks of a Profession
If safety engineering is to be considered a profession, then it must meet the criteria for professionalization. Gloss and Wardle refer to Greenwood who proposed that professions have specific characteristics, such as:
1. A well-defined theoretical base
2. Recognition as a profession by the clientele
3. Community sanction for professionalization
4. A code of ethics, which regulates the professional's relationships with peers, clients, and the world at large
5. A professional organization (13)
Dan Petersen again suggested in 1998 that safety professionals should engage in serious introspection concerning their work in his book Techniques of Safety Management. Petersen wrote:
In the safety profession, we started with certain principles that were well explained in Heinrich's early works. We have built a profession around them, and we have succeeded in progressing tremendously with them. And yet in recent years we find that we have come almost to a standstill. Some believe that this is because the principles on which our profession is built no longer offer us a solid foundation. Others believe they remain solid but that some additions may be needed. Anyone in safety today at least ought to look at that foundation—and question it. Perhaps the principles discussed here can lead to further improvements in our approach and further reductions in our record. (27)
Darryl C. Hill, a past president of the ASSE (American Society of Safefy Engineers), also expressed his views on the need for the safety profession to define itself as a step toward recognition as a profession. His article “Time to Transform?—Assessing the Future of the SH&E Profession” was published in Professional Safety in November 2002. Hill wrote:
- How can the profession be transformed when high school students and the population at-large know little about the safety discipline?
- In essence, the safety, health and environmental profession has not established a common definition of safety practice nor a common terminology to explain what practitioners do. The safety profession must define who it is and what they do.
- Safety has operated under an outdated set of principles for too long. Now, the transformation must begin to ensure future prosperity,
- The foundation on which safety is built needs a different look. A rebuilt or “patchwork” foundation is not enough. Total reconstruction is required if the SH&E profession is to reach new heights and become a recognized, respected profession.
Lon H. Ferguson and James D. Ramsey joined those pleading for action by safety practitioners to be recognized as a profession in their article “Development of a Profession: The Role of Education and Certification in Occupational Safety Becoming a Profession.” It was published in Professional Safety in October 2010. They wrote:
- Adding to the [absence of a recognized] image is the failure to develop a universally or legally adopted definition of safety professional.
- To call oneself a professional, one must work in a recognized profession.
- If an incipit profession grows and matures, it is recognizable as a distinct profession by those in the field as well as by those who hire them.
Ferguson and Ramsey quote J. C. Dean who suggests the following characteristics are consistent with well-developed professions:
- A service orientation and a code of professional ethics
- A specialized body of knowledge
- A distinct education tract that derives from the specialized body of knowledge
- Associated educational credentials
- Continuous learning and professional development
- A social or collegial dimension
A. Establish a Well-Defined Theoretical and Practical Base, to Include
- A definition of the practice of safety
- The societal purpose of the practice of safety
- A recognized body of knowledge
- The methodology of the practice of safety
Discussion
Chapter 2, “Defining the Practice of Safety,” was written to move the discussion forward: concerning the societal purposes of the practice of safety; to establish that there is a recognized body of knowledge for the practice; to speak of the rigor of education that would prepare one to enter the practice of safety; and to outline its methodology.
Chapter 3, “Principles for the Practice of Safety: A Basis for Discussion,” sets forth a sound practical base for the practice of safety, which if applied, will lead to professional recognition. Also, a work in progress relates to those purposes. At the American Society of Safety Engineers, the Body of Knowledge Task Force is gathering data to outline the body of knowledge applicable in the practice of safety.
In Chapter 20, “Applied Ergonomics: Significance and Opportunity,” reference is made to an article by Alphonse Chapanis (1991) titled “To Communicate the Human Factors Message, You Have to Know What the Message Is and How to Communicate It.” One of his themes is that human factors engineering has to be defined and its practitioners must know what it is to be able to communicate about it successfully. Safety professionals have the same need.
The practice of safety, as defined, includes all fields of endeavor for which the generic base is hazards—occupational safety, occupational health, environmental control, product safety, transportation safety, safety of the public, health physics, system safety, fire protection engineering, and the like. If the practice of safety is to be recognized as a profession, it must:
- Serve a declared and understood societal purpose.
- Clearly establish what the outcome of applying the practice is to be.
The definition given in Chapter 2 of the practice of safety is also given here as a reference for the discussion that follows.
The Practice of Safety
- Is hazard and risk focused.
- Serves the societal need to prevent or mitigate harm or damage to people, property, and the environment.
- Is based on knowledge and skill in the following categories:
- Applied engineering
- Applied sciences
...
