The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Safety II professionals: How resilience engineering can transform safety practice
Open accessAbstract
The safety management literature describes two distinct modes through which safety is achieved. These can be described as safety management through centralized control, or safety management through guided adaptability. Safety management through centralized control, labelled by Hollnagel as ‘Safety-I’, aims to align and control the organization and its people through the central determination of what is safe. Safety management through guided adaptability, or ‘Safety-II’, aims to enable the organization and its people to safely adapt to emergent situations and conditions. Safety-II has been presented as a paradigm shift in safety theory, but it has created practical difficulties for safety professional practice. In this paper, we define the two modes of safety management and explain the challenges in changing the role of a safety professional to support Safety-II. When should safety professionals re-enforce alignment, and when should they support frontline adaptations? We outline specific activities for safety professionals to adopt in their role to move towards a guided adaptability mode of safety management. This will move the safety professional further towards their fundamental responsibility – ‘to create foresight about the changing shape of risk, and facilitate action, before people are harmed.’
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Organizational culture and leadership
(1993) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/0024-6301(93)90120-5 · Cited by 16,462
Principles of Scientific Management, The
(2015) · The SAGE Encyclopedia of Economics and Society · doi:10.4135/9781452206905.n541 · Cited by 5,038
Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies
Grimes, A. J., & Perrow, C. (1985) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257982 · Cited by 4,960
Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts
Wears, R. L. (2006) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2006.018390 · Cited by 2,900
Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies
Cummings, L. L., & Perrow, C. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392945 · Cited by 2,861
Schein, E. H. (1990) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.45.2.109 · Cited by 2,581
The motivational basis of organizational behavior
Katz, D. (1964) · Behavioral Science · doi:10.1002/bs.3830090206 · Cited by 1,632
Principles of Scientific Management
(1993) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fasebj.7.9.8330677 · Cited by 1,590
The dark side of organizations: mistake, misconduct, and disaster.
Vaughan, D. (1999) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.271 · Cited by 1,072
Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering
Woods, D. D. (2015) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.018 · Cited by 880
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Provan, D. J., Woods, D. D., Dekker, S. W. A., & Rae, A. J.
- Venue
- Reliability Engineering & System Safety
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-03
- Volume
- 195
- Pages
- 106740
- ISSN
- 0951-8320 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2986206633
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 49
- FWCI
- 32.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Safety II professionals: How resilience engineering can transform safety practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ress.2019.106740
- The paper
- Provan, D. J., Woods, D. D., Dekker, S. W. A., & Rae, A. J. (2020). Safety II professionals: How resilience engineering can transform safety practice. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.106740
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.