【EHS英文】四大简单方法，让安全止步不前
少儿英语 外教/03
英语四级评分标准05
Leaders who oversimplify issues quickly can be identified by asking them for their definition of safety. When they start with the trite platitudes like “thinking before you act” or “paying attention,” then you suspect they have an overly-simplistic view.
我们可以通过询问安全的定义，来将问题过于简单化的领导者给快速地识别出来。一旦以老生常谈的话开始，比如“三思而后行”，或者“注意一下”，那么，你就可以怀疑他们有着过于简单化的观点。
Likewi, when they throw up their hands and admit they don’t know how to improve safety, it is an indicator that they either misunderstand or overly simplify the problem. Such leaders tend to practice and promote four approaches that almost guarantee limited safety improvement.country music
同样，如果这些领导者放弃努力，并承认自己不知道如何改善安全时，这就表明他们误解了问题，或者将问题过于简单化了。这样的领导者，倾向于实践和推广以下四种方法，这四种方法只能保证有限的安全改善。
1. Over-simplified definition
william hurtOver-simplified definition – The thinking of organizational leaders often is reflected in their communication to associates. Good followers listen carefully to their leaders to discern priorities and preferred practices. Leaders who oversimplify safety tend to influence others to do likewi. When a whole organization thinks they already are doing what is required in safety, progress becomes problematic. There is no clear path forward and workers tend to feel safety improvement is beyond their control.绀野朝美
在安全定义方面过于简单化-组织领导者的思想，通常会在他们与同事的交流中体现出来。良好的追随者，会仔细聆听领导者的话，以理解优先事项和做法。将安全简单化的领导者，往往会影响其他人也去这么做。一旦整个组织认为他们已经在做安全上所需要做的事情时，进步就会有问题。没有明确的“前进之路”，工人们往往就会觉得安全方面的改善，
已经超出了他们所能控制的范围。
友谊英文This mindt often is reinforced by safety metrics that don’t reflect any improvement. Frustration often follows becau trying harder doesn’t produce better results. At this point, many organizations develop a “more is better” mentality. If this level of effort is not producing improvement, we must not be doing enough. This can lead to adopting the latest program of the month or following industry trends rather than accurately defining the site-specific problems and solutions. This leads to and is complicated by the next issue, a lack of an overarching safety strategy.
这种心态，常常被不能反映出任何改进的安全指标所强化。挫折往往紧随其后，因为尝试努力不会产生更好的结果。在这一点上，许多组织产生了一种“多多益善”的心态。如果这种程度的努力并没有产生改善，那么，肯定是因为做的不够多。这可能会导致采用最新的月度计划，或者紧跟行业趋势，而不是去准确地定义现场的特定问题及相应的解决方案。这会引起下一个问题，而下一个问题会让问题更加复杂，并缺乏整体安全战略。
2. Lack of strategy
Lack of strategy – If safety is viewed as simply thinking and paying attention, there is no need to develop a strategy for doing so. Leaders can command workers to do so and it will happen. The problem is, it either does not happen or it fails to improve safety. The lack of strategy most often manifests itlf in the tendency mentioned earlier: to adopt the program of the month.
缺乏安全战略-假如将安全视为简单的想法，并需要关注的话，就没有必要在安全方面制定战略。领导者只需要指挥员工，而员工只需要执行就好了。问题是，这在安全上既不会出现，也不会有改善。安全方面战略的缺乏，最常体现在前面提到的趋势上：采用月度计划。
Programmatic thinking is the diametric opposite of strategic thinking. Throwing a group of often unrelated programs at a problem is not a strategy. Almost all organizations have strategies for some aspects of their mission. For-profit organizations often include elaborate marketing strategies to compete in the marketplace. The strategies often include market analysis to determine who their customers are and what tho customers want or need.
纲领性思维与战略性思维完全相反。在一个问题上，抛出一组通常不相关的项目，并不是策略，而几乎所有的组织在某些使命上都有自己的战略。对于营利性的组织而言，通常会包括精心策划的营销策略，以期在市场上进行竞争。这些策略通常包括市场分析，以确定谁是客户，以及客户想要，或者需要什么。
Unfortunately, few organizations apply this strategic thinking to safety. They fail to recognize their workers are the customers of safety, not the problem to be controlled. Once workers are recognized as internal customers, excellent safety becomes an application of the same strategic thinking: find out what the customers want and need, and develop a strategy to provide it to them.
不幸的是，很少有组织将这一战略思维应用在安全方面。他们没有意识到工人是安全的顾客，而不是需要被控制的问题。一旦工人被确定为组织的内部客户，卓越安全，便成为战略性思维的应用：找出顾客想要什么及需要什么，并制定策略来将顾客想要及需要的提供给客户。
Strategy is how to win. In safety, strategy is winning the war against accidental injuries. A
n overly simplistic view of how accidents happen can make such victory difficult or impossible.
赤尾屿
战略是关于怎么样赢的。在安全方面，战略是赢得意外伤害战争胜利的。将事故发生过于简单化的观点，会使得这场安全方面“战争”的胜利变得相当困难，而且不太可能胜利。
中秋节快乐的英语3. Managing with lagging indicators
yes or no下载Managing with lagging indicators – In his book, Transforming Performance Measurement, Dean Spitzer boldly states that most organizations don’t get what they want precily becau they don’t measure “what they want.” What almost all organizations measure in safety is what they don’t want. They measure accidents, quantity and verity. They calculate the ratio of accidents to hours worked. They measure lost time and both direct and indirect costs of accidents.
安全上，管理滞后性指标-迪恩·斯皮泽在其《绩效考评革命》一书中曾大胆地指出，绝大多数组织并没有得到确实想要的，因为他们并不考评“想要的”。其实，几乎所有组织在安
全上所考评的，并不是他们所想要的。他们对事故、数量与严重性进行考评，根据工作时间对事故率进行计算，并对损失工时与直接及间接事故成本进行考评。
They do not measure the factors that prevent accidents. Even if you think safety is as simple as thinking before you act, why not measure how many times workers think first and how many times they don’t? Lagging indicators are measures of failure. That is why most organizations are not trying to succeed in safety; they simply are trying to fail less than they did previously.
