PAPod 515 - Engaging Insights from the Santa Fe Workshop Q&A Session

1 00:00:00,017 --> 00:00:03,797 Hey everybody, Todd from the future. How do I sound, future-y? 2 00:00:04,217 --> 00:00:11,097 So this is a part two. If you haven't heard part one, it was last week's, but it hardly matters.

3 00:00:11,557 --> 00:00:15,597 Although if you get a chance, it might be good because I do give kind of a brief 4 00:00:15,597 --> 00:00:20,297 description of what this is about that I probably will not give this time. 5 00:00:20,437 --> 00:00:34,457 Either way, enjoy the pod! We'll be right back. 6 00:00:23,440 --> 00:00:35,440 Music.

7 00:00:34,717 --> 00:00:37,277 Hey everybody, welcome to the Pre-Accident Investigation Podcast. 8 00:00:37,717 --> 00:00:41,057 I'm Todd, your host, Todd Conklin, just in case you don't know who I am. 9 00:00:41,117 --> 00:00:50,517 And this is part two of the outbrief of the 2024 Santa Fe Workshop open question 10 00:00:50,517 --> 00:00:52,037 and answers that we use for the ending. 11 00:00:52,577 --> 00:00:58,657 So the first one went great.

You loved it. Lots of feedback telling me so. 12 00:00:58,657 --> 00:01:02,097 So this is kind of the rest of it. And I think you'll enjoy this.

13 00:01:02,437 --> 00:01:08,757 Well, I'm figuring just about as much, if not more. So it's a big weekend for me. 14 00:01:09,897 --> 00:01:16,897 So I am currently at the Winfield Bluegrass Festival listening to, 15 00:01:16,917 --> 00:01:23,037 I probably am, even as we speak, discovering new music that I didn't know before, 16 00:01:23,177 --> 00:01:26,397 which is always kind of a, I don't know, when you find a new band, 17 00:01:26,397 --> 00:01:29,837 even at my ripe old age it's kind 18 00:01:29,837 --> 00:01:32,737 of exciting because two things happen one 19 00:01:32,737 --> 00:01:35,737 is you've discovered a new band which is always super cool 20 00:01:35,737 --> 00:01:39,177 but two you're like i wonder where were they were why didn't 21 00:01:39,177 --> 00:01:43,817 i know about these people where were they what's going on that's kind of the 22 00:01:43,817 --> 00:01:47,717 excitement so that'll be fun and then i'm zooming off to you know do some stuff 23 00:01:47,717 --> 00:01:53,917 and then i'll be nestled in my house enjoying fall as it appears around me in 24 00:01:53,917 --> 00:01:56,057 new mexico hope you're doing good how are things going, 25 00:01:56,257 --> 00:02:01,557 getting back into the swing of things and doing great work, good work done well 26 00:02:01,557 --> 00:02:03,557 for the right reasons, if you know what I mean. 27 00:02:03,977 --> 00:02:07,377 I'm hoping so.

So what else about the conference in Santa Fe? 28 00:02:07,437 --> 00:02:12,517 Well, the other thing I would share with you, because it's worth sharing, is we've over, because. 29 00:02:13,524 --> 00:02:20,164 Because I'm connected with a t-shirt artisan, Steve Thomas, the t-shirt artisan, 30 00:02:20,364 --> 00:02:25,444 we have created some t-shirts that we give out at the workshops. 31 00:02:25,684 --> 00:02:31,304 And I was especially pleased with what t-shirt artisan Steve Thomas did on this 32 00:02:31,304 --> 00:02:33,504 one because it's a sugar skull.

33 00:02:33,644 --> 00:02:36,484 And if you don't know what that is, that would be something to look up. 34 00:02:36,484 --> 00:02:43,564 It's a thing from Dia de los Muertos in Mexico, and it's a skull. 35 00:02:44,164 --> 00:02:47,724 So it's kind of creepy because skulls are kind of fundamentally creepy, 36 00:02:47,904 --> 00:02:53,124 but they're normally made out of sugar, and they're a treat, a dulce, a little candy. 37 00:02:53,384 --> 00:03:01,124 But we took that same design, and on a t-shirt, we put Dia Sin Muertos en Los 38 00:03:01,124 --> 00:03:04,684 Trabajos, so Day Without Death at Work.

39 00:03:05,284 --> 00:03:08,444 And it came out great. People loved it. That was exciting too. 40 00:03:08,524 --> 00:03:11,544 So that was kind of a hit and fun to wear.

41 00:03:11,664 --> 00:03:15,884 So if you wear t-shirts, that would be the one to wear. I don't know if they're available. 42 00:03:16,964 --> 00:03:19,664 That's a really good question that I don't know. 43 00:03:19,764 --> 00:03:24,124 We'll have to see if we can find that out.

If so, and you want one, 44 00:03:24,204 --> 00:03:25,724 maybe we can hook you up with one. 45 00:03:25,844 --> 00:03:29,004 We can probably do that. That's probably doable. 46 00:03:29,324 --> 00:03:31,824 I hadn't thought about it, but they're kind of cool looking.

47 00:03:31,944 --> 00:03:33,104 You'll think they're fun. 48 00:03:33,304 --> 00:03:38,684 That was a fun part of it as well. So let's pick up right kind of where we left 49 00:03:38,684 --> 00:03:48,604 off with Mike Peters and Martha Acosta and Jennifer Long and Bob and Andrea, oh, Bob Edwards, 50 00:03:48,824 --> 00:03:53,724 I should say that, and Andrea Baker and myself listening to some questions, 51 00:03:53,864 --> 00:03:58,824 some interesting questions that were we're sort of tossed out to the crowd. 52 00:03:59,004 --> 00:04:02,664 So without any further ado, let's jump into the pod.

53 00:04:07,644 --> 00:04:11,304 Sound familiar? This will save you time. They said it used to take me 30 minutes. 54 00:04:11,324 --> 00:04:12,944 Now it takes me three hours a day.

55 00:04:13,144 --> 00:04:18,284 So we actually didn't listen to them. We didn't ask them. We did this to them, not with them. 56 00:04:18,444 --> 00:04:21,084 And because of that, now we put more time pressure on them.

57 00:04:21,104 --> 00:04:25,964 If you ask people who get work done, what is in your way that doesn't help your 58 00:04:25,964 --> 00:04:27,644 operations? I've done learning teams on this. 59 00:04:28,284 --> 00:04:30,784 Supervisors, what gets in your way? They thought they'd get one or two things.

60 00:04:30,884 --> 00:04:34,524 They got a flip chart page of things that is absolute waste of their time. 61 00:04:34,824 --> 00:04:38,704 So in over a couple of months with a leadership sponsor, those supervisors were 62 00:04:38,704 --> 00:04:41,864 able to say, this doesn't help, that doesn't help. Let's automate this. Let's get rid of this.

63 00:04:42,024 --> 00:04:46,684 And in about a two to three month time, they gained back six to eight hours 64 00:04:46,684 --> 00:04:48,944 each per week. Would you like that? 65 00:04:49,484 --> 00:04:52,724 Yeah. So I came Came back to that site.

I said, how'd it go? 66 00:04:52,864 --> 00:04:54,844 And the sponsor said, really well, 67 00:04:54,924 --> 00:04:57,764 I couldn't believe all the crap we have them do that brings no value. 68 00:04:58,224 --> 00:05:01,604 And he said, we have really freed up a lot of their time. And he looked at me 69 00:05:01,604 --> 00:05:04,404 with all seriousness and said, Bob, what should we fill the gap with?

70 00:05:05,161 --> 00:05:09,381 I said, you don't have a gap. Leave them alone. Let them go supervise. 71 00:05:09,761 --> 00:05:13,061 The problem was is we were doing things to them, not with them.

72 00:05:13,321 --> 00:05:16,481 People resist change. Why? Because we do it to them, not with them. 73 00:05:16,641 --> 00:05:21,041 When we did this change with them, they showed us where the wasted time was.

74 00:05:21,341 --> 00:05:24,341 And if you can get a supervisor closer to work on a regular basis, 75 00:05:24,561 --> 00:05:26,401 that's actually what supervising is supposed to be. 76 00:05:26,641 --> 00:05:31,021 So where did that all come from though? A leader willing to listen to the people 77 00:05:31,021 --> 00:05:31,661 actually get the work done. 78 00:05:31,721 --> 00:05:34,241 So yeah, I think we can alleviate some of this time pressure because I think 79 00:05:34,241 --> 00:05:35,521 we're doing a lot of stuff that there's a waste of time.

80 00:05:36,181 --> 00:05:39,261 Yeah. Yeah. So Bob makes me want to add. 81 00:05:39,481 --> 00:05:44,521 So actually, Bob and I worked the same company and they came out and we did 82 00:05:44,521 --> 00:05:48,601 pretty deep dive learning in the supervisors and they were spending two full 83 00:05:48,601 --> 00:05:51,061 days, 16 hours a week in timekeeping.

84 00:05:51,701 --> 00:05:55,961 So I had to do the board of directors, senior leaders meeting. 85 00:05:56,221 --> 00:06:01,461 And I said, I can buy you two additional days of supervision in the field. 86 00:06:01,601 --> 00:06:03,721 And of course, everybody's ears perk up. 87 00:06:03,881 --> 00:06:07,581 And I said, hire somebody to track your time, right?

88 00:06:07,681 --> 00:06:11,881 Because there's whole companies that are willing to come and do timekeeping, right? 89 00:06:12,121 --> 00:06:15,661 And it was the most interesting meeting because, and you know this guy too, 90 00:06:15,801 --> 00:06:20,341 the CFO of the company said, I've heard that shit for years. 91 00:06:21,261 --> 00:06:27,061 That's what he said. And the big boss, the big, big boss, like the board of 92 00:06:27,061 --> 00:06:34,821 directors boss said, and today we'll listen.

Yikes-o automatic. 93 00:06:34,941 --> 00:06:37,201 I'm going to say one last comment on this. 94 00:06:37,501 --> 00:06:41,381 I think too, because I work with a lot of the senior teams, when it's a growth 95 00:06:41,381 --> 00:06:42,901 issue and you've got the time pressures, 96 00:06:43,141 --> 00:06:47,461 some of them aren't doing good strategy where they're really looking at what 97 00:06:47,461 --> 00:06:50,561 are the aligned actions and what are we doing over the next 12 to 18 months 98 00:06:50,561 --> 00:06:56,241 to actually solve whatever it is, especially if we're not really prioritizing well. 99 00:06:56,381 --> 00:06:59,221 Because I think if they're not there aligned or 100 00:06:59,381 --> 00:07:03,141 something that's that's going to help prioritize you're 101 00:07:03,141 --> 00:07:09,021 left with the pressure of try to get it all done it sounded 102 00:07:09,021 --> 00:07:16,781 like i don't know it sounded like you use small pockets of success to influence 103 00:07:16,781 --> 00:07:23,861 and spend your time at that level and and it just started to perpetuate and expand to probably a 104 00:07:23,941 --> 00:07:26,381 point where it caught the executive's attention to go, 105 00:07:26,501 --> 00:07:31,961 I want to understand more of this rather than expel all that energy at the front, 106 00:07:31,981 --> 00:07:34,901 trying to convince a bunch of executives.

107 00:07:35,101 --> 00:07:40,401 And plus you got engagement from the floor up behind you, right? Yeah. 108 00:07:41,001 --> 00:07:47,301 Yeah. As far as I can tell, anyone chime in, just from all of the organizations 109 00:07:47,301 --> 00:07:50,281 and the different examples that we've been able to see, there seem to be.

110 00:07:51,082 --> 00:07:56,442 Two more prevalent ways that this tends to happen in an organization. 111 00:07:56,742 --> 00:08:02,102 The first is what you just explained, meaning that there's folks that are somewhere 112 00:08:02,102 --> 00:08:04,422 within the organization, usually somewhere in middle management. 113 00:08:04,542 --> 00:08:08,302 They hear something about this topic. They really think it's a good idea.

114 00:08:08,502 --> 00:08:12,642 They don't have a lot of influence in the organization, and so they spend time building influence. 115 00:08:12,902 --> 00:08:16,742 They do pilots. They influence the people around them. They make small change 116 00:08:16,742 --> 00:08:21,682 until something catches someone else's eye, and they have a meeting with someone, 117 00:08:21,802 --> 00:08:25,682 and then they're able to actually bring that to someone else in the organization 118 00:08:25,682 --> 00:08:26,642 that has more influence.

119 00:08:27,222 --> 00:08:31,482 That's one model. And then the other model, which I'm sure Todd can talk more 120 00:08:31,482 --> 00:08:35,922 to, is something bad happens that has caught somebody's attention, 121 00:08:36,142 --> 00:08:41,262 and they're looking for an answer, and the answer comes in the form of Todd 122 00:08:41,262 --> 00:08:42,842 Conklin, usually, right? I said the answer. 123 00:08:43,042 --> 00:08:48,182 And that's usually in those organizations, change starts from the top of the organization.

124 00:08:48,482 --> 00:08:51,522 Is that a fair summary of what seems to be true? 125 00:08:51,722 --> 00:08:57,062 Yeah. But I actually think that Andy's first example is more sustainable and 126 00:08:57,062 --> 00:09:00,642 between us chickens, a million billion times healthier. 127 00:09:01,082 --> 00:09:06,442 Because after something bad happens, like a fatality, multiple fatalities, 128 00:09:06,662 --> 00:09:11,922 I just did a decapitation that really took this company, just surprised them.

129 00:09:12,162 --> 00:09:16,082 Well, so first of all, of course it surprised you. If you have a leadership 130 00:09:16,082 --> 00:09:20,902 team that says, well, we're expecting a decapitation soon, that's a pretty scary leadership team. 131 00:09:21,222 --> 00:09:25,682 The challenge is, and I think this is really the big part of what we deal with, 132 00:09:25,802 --> 00:09:33,142 is the realization at some level that leaders need to be curious. 133 00:09:33,862 --> 00:09:37,262 And so the only thing I can say, because I don't know how to fix leaders that 134 00:09:37,262 --> 00:09:40,222 aren't curious, that are already leaders, they're kind of a problem.

135 00:09:40,682 --> 00:09:44,542 But I will tell you, when you're hiring people that work for you, 136 00:09:44,662 --> 00:09:48,162 when you're building the next generation of leaders that are going to come and 137 00:09:48,162 --> 00:09:50,902 take your job, and if they're really good, maybe they're going to take the job 138 00:09:50,902 --> 00:09:53,902 above you, hire people that are genuinely curious. 139 00:09:54,642 --> 00:09:57,042 Because curiosity is really important. 140 00:09:58,282 --> 00:10:05,302 And always reinforce the message that it's way sexier to not know than it is to know. 141 00:10:05,802 --> 00:10:09,122 If you already think you know the answer, right, which we deal with all the 142 00:10:09,122 --> 00:10:11,622 time, you can name the boss that fits that category.

143 00:10:12,182 --> 00:10:15,962 Then when they go to the field, what they're going to do is look for ways to 144 00:10:15,962 --> 00:10:18,062 reinforce what they know, right? 145 00:10:18,122 --> 00:10:20,502 So there's even a name for that in psychology. 146 00:10:21,222 --> 00:10:26,482 So, and that bias is really strong. What you want is a boss that is genuinely 147 00:10:26,482 --> 00:10:30,142 comfortable with not knowing, which we've talked a lot about him.

148 00:10:30,422 --> 00:10:34,842 But one of the things about your boss, Scott, is he was completely comfortable 149 00:10:34,842 --> 00:10:39,822 at every level with the opportunity to learn. In fact, I think it's fair. 150 00:10:40,102 --> 00:10:43,342 I think he found that the best part of his job. 151 00:10:43,662 --> 00:10:47,962 That's what he liked to do was to learn.

So that's key. I hope that helps because 152 00:10:47,962 --> 00:10:49,122 that's a really good question. 153 00:10:50,281 --> 00:10:54,521 So one thing that really kind of sticks out with me is the phrase, 154 00:10:54,601 --> 00:10:57,321 what's happening when nothing is happening? Not a great question.

155 00:10:57,621 --> 00:10:59,661 It's a very proactive phase. 156 00:11:00,201 --> 00:11:06,861 So I see such huge value in going out and doing the field engagements and things like that. 157 00:11:07,381 --> 00:11:11,521 What would be, I guess, your, as a panel, what would be your, 158 00:11:11,641 --> 00:11:19,961 I guess, thoughts on how do we sell that proactive stage when we're actually very reactive? 159 00:11:19,961 --> 00:11:23,541 We generally wait for something to happen to get ahead of something.

160 00:11:23,641 --> 00:11:25,661 There are so many soft signals that are out there. 161 00:11:26,301 --> 00:11:30,881 So I guess that would be my question is how do we get that proactive or reactive 162 00:11:30,881 --> 00:11:34,081 or from a reactive to that proactive phase? 163 00:11:34,281 --> 00:11:38,781 One thing is that weak signals are by definition weak, right? 164 00:11:39,181 --> 00:11:42,581 So weak signals are hard to hear because they're weak.

Loud signals, 165 00:11:42,841 --> 00:11:46,341 super easy to hear because they're big fat accidents, right? Right. 166 00:11:46,361 --> 00:11:50,801 And so part of what we want to do is kind of change the attenuation of our organization 167 00:11:50,801 --> 00:11:58,181 so that we're actually identifying problems before they become catastrophic or consequential. 168 00:11:58,461 --> 00:12:01,921 And really what we're talking about is resilience and recoverability.

169 00:12:02,121 --> 00:12:04,781 So you'll always have to prevent. 170 00:12:05,421 --> 00:12:10,241 In fact, let me just take this moment to say, don't stop any prevention strategies. 171 00:12:10,621 --> 00:12:15,421 They're really good. keeping people from getting hurt and managing hazards aggressively.

172 00:12:15,781 --> 00:12:20,861 That's a really important thing. In the tree world, fall protection seems pretty 173 00:12:20,861 --> 00:12:22,801 vital to me. Don't stop that, right? 174 00:12:23,561 --> 00:12:28,721 The problem is, is it's not enough.

And so it's the idea of building a case 175 00:12:28,721 --> 00:12:33,501 for resilience, which then causes the conversation to change. 176 00:12:33,641 --> 00:12:37,981 But let me give you just a quick hint. Instead of having your leadership go 177 00:12:37,981 --> 00:12:43,881 out and identify where risk is high, have them go out and identify where control is low. 178 00:12:44,661 --> 00:12:48,881 Now, you may say, actually, you guys won't say it because we've been hanging 179 00:12:48,881 --> 00:12:53,461 out a long time, but other people in your organization may say, what's the difference?

180 00:12:54,021 --> 00:13:01,821 That seems like the same question. And yet, your very question is encapsulated in that shift. 181 00:13:02,481 --> 00:13:06,321 When we ask people to look for where risk is high, which is a pretty good exercise, 182 00:13:06,581 --> 00:13:08,921 they're going to go out and tell you what the most dangerous crap we do. 183 00:13:09,521 --> 00:13:13,781 Except in your industry, where near as I can tell, everything's kind of dangerous.

184 00:13:14,181 --> 00:13:17,041 I mean, it's a dangerous work, right? 185 00:13:17,601 --> 00:13:23,541 If you go out and ask them where control is low, you're really tuning your ear, 186 00:13:23,661 --> 00:13:28,901 or better yet, tuning the organization's ear to listen to smaller signals early 187 00:13:28,901 --> 00:13:34,641 because they're going to tell you which part of the system is most brittle before it fails, 188 00:13:34,841 --> 00:13:37,441 not waiting till it fails. 189 00:13:38,786 --> 00:13:42,006 So I would guess that the answer to that question is highly dependent upon where 190 00:13:42,006 --> 00:13:43,726 somebody sits in an organization, right? 191 00:13:43,766 --> 00:13:47,866 If you have the ear of senior leaders and you can have that discussion up front, 192 00:13:47,946 --> 00:13:51,346 you could have an intellectual discussion where they're willing to try something new.

That's one thing. 193 00:13:52,426 --> 00:13:55,166 There's many in this room that are lucky enough to have that position in an 194 00:13:55,166 --> 00:13:59,006 organization, and there's many that we don't have that much influence in an organization. 195 00:13:59,206 --> 00:14:03,466 So if you're in a space where you don't have the ear, right, 196 00:14:03,506 --> 00:14:08,926 you can't use you can't use a very cohesive and logical explanation to help 197 00:14:08,926 --> 00:14:10,006 somebody see something differently. 198 00:14:10,686 --> 00:14:16,706 What you end up having to do is sort of is prove it and prove it in small ways that add up.

199 00:14:16,806 --> 00:14:20,406 So the ways that I can picture where we tried to bring attention to looking 200 00:14:20,406 --> 00:14:23,846 at things proactively, I actually started reactively because that is the only 201 00:14:23,846 --> 00:14:25,206 thing that we paid attention to. 202 00:14:25,306 --> 00:14:28,846 But what I mean by that is I would take an event that we had already done some 203 00:14:28,846 --> 00:14:29,986 sort of investigation for. 204 00:14:30,366 --> 00:14:34,966 And I would do some type of operational learning to understand what people were still facing. 205 00:14:35,486 --> 00:14:40,646 And then I would take those conditions and label which of them haven't existed for a really long time.

206 00:14:41,126 --> 00:14:46,626 And I would do that after events, even after we had done sort of our traditional 207 00:14:46,626 --> 00:14:50,946 investigation to show that, hey, these elements, they've existed for a long time. 208 00:14:51,086 --> 00:14:54,246 And so we probably had an opportunity to look at them ahead of time. 209 00:14:54,546 --> 00:14:57,706 And then I would do the same thing with our audit. So we actually already have 210 00:14:57,706 --> 00:14:59,826 fairly proactive engagements.

211 00:15:00,126 --> 00:15:03,546 We just don't necessarily use the face-to-face interaction well. 212 00:15:03,726 --> 00:15:07,926 We could do something more with the time. So anything that was proactive that 213 00:15:07,926 --> 00:15:10,326 already existed, I did my very best to hijack. 214 00:15:10,566 --> 00:15:14,266 And I hijacked it at a site level because that's what I had control over at first, right?

215 00:15:14,486 --> 00:15:18,246 So we had requirements for observations, we had requirements for audits, 216 00:15:18,246 --> 00:15:21,206 and I would turn those into mini operational learning discussions. 217 00:15:21,626 --> 00:15:25,206 And then I tried to find a metric that I could show that there was value in 218 00:15:25,206 --> 00:15:27,886 doing that. And in my world, we had something called concern reports. 219 00:15:28,286 --> 00:15:31,626 And concern reports were considered good things, right?

Meaning an employee 220 00:15:31,626 --> 00:15:35,126 was bringing up an issue, a difficulty, and it was being reported. 221 00:15:35,546 --> 00:15:40,046 And the more concern reports in my world, the better you looked as a plant. 222 00:15:40,246 --> 00:15:43,306 Well, I took all that information and shoved it into our concern reporting system. 223 00:15:43,506 --> 00:15:49,426 So suddenly we had hundreds more concerns than anyone else had because we were proactively learning.

224 00:15:49,646 --> 00:15:53,046 And then people started to ask questions. And when they started to ask questions, 225 00:15:53,046 --> 00:15:54,326 then there was a door for a conversation. 226 00:15:55,827 --> 00:15:59,447 Yeah, my question is almost identical to Pat. Him and I are on the fire department 227 00:15:59,447 --> 00:16:00,627 together, so we think alike.

228 00:16:01,207 --> 00:16:05,027 So in and around that, I want to know more about how to expose the dark corners, 229 00:16:05,227 --> 00:16:09,367 you know, the weak signals, specifically for the supervisors that we can take 230 00:16:09,367 --> 00:16:10,907 back and have conversations. 231 00:16:11,287 --> 00:16:16,907 We're both operations folks, spend a lot of time in the field, not as much as we'd like. 232 00:16:17,067 --> 00:16:20,727 And we have those conversations with crews, but they're so, I think, 233 00:16:20,747 --> 00:16:24,747 normalized by slight deviations, right? And we're performing at a pretty high 234 00:16:24,747 --> 00:16:30,287 level, but there's the things that creep up that you'd say, man, I never saw that coming.

235 00:16:30,627 --> 00:16:34,767 And that's why I was looking for, like, if you were to ask three questions of 236 00:16:34,767 --> 00:16:38,727 a crew or whatever it might be from a supervisor level, what would that be? 237 00:16:39,007 --> 00:16:41,547 What would that really look like? 238 00:16:42,207 --> 00:16:46,827 Because we always talk, you can really hone in. And I like what Todd said about the low control.

239 00:16:47,207 --> 00:16:52,547 I do like that. So anyways, I just didn't know if you could expound on what Pat was asking earlier. 240 00:16:52,887 --> 00:16:58,247 So if you have to have three questions, I'll give them to you because they're 241 00:16:58,247 --> 00:17:00,807 out there and there's really cool work being done around this. 242 00:17:00,927 --> 00:17:04,947 So there's tons of data and it's kind of exciting and it's all part of this 243 00:17:04,947 --> 00:17:07,407 story.

I mean, it's a part of people that you hung out with. 244 00:17:07,727 --> 00:17:11,507 But before we go there, one of the things that's really important about these 245 00:17:11,507 --> 00:17:14,847 weak signals is that they're not indicative of failure. 246 00:17:15,647 --> 00:17:24,107 So mostly systems rattle and creak and buzz and fart and burp and don't fail. 247 00:17:24,607 --> 00:17:29,187 And so what we're really talking about when we talk about weak signals is trying to predict the future.

248 00:17:29,667 --> 00:17:33,827 And we really have a high need as human beings to sort of understand and predict 249 00:17:33,827 --> 00:17:36,547 the future. I'll just break it to you as gently as possible. 250 00:17:37,087 --> 00:17:41,207 Generally, we suck at it because you're you're in this room, 251 00:17:41,327 --> 00:17:45,987 we're not on your yacht, you didn't buy Apple when it was 50 cents a share. 252 00:17:46,167 --> 00:17:47,967 I mean, we're not good at it.

253 00:17:48,287 --> 00:17:53,187 But there are ways to sort of predictively think about uncertainty, 254 00:17:53,727 --> 00:18:00,567 and it means that you have to move from if-thinking to when-thinking, which is expensive. 255 00:18:01,387 --> 00:18:05,047 It's resource-intensive, and it's a much different conversation. 256 00:18:05,247 --> 00:18:09,427 Instead of saying, there's a probability of 70% this will fail. 257 00:18:09,607 --> 00:18:13,647 So we're going to manage this with 70% protection, which we've done for years.

258 00:18:14,027 --> 00:18:17,227 We have to say when this system fails, right? 259 00:18:17,307 --> 00:18:22,747 Not if, when the system fails, do we have robust controls in place to manage the recoverability? 260 00:18:23,307 --> 00:18:28,927 So two things have to happen. One is your organization has to be really comfortable 261 00:18:28,927 --> 00:18:31,707 understanding that failure Failure is normal.

262 00:18:32,207 --> 00:18:35,167 So we could talk about zero, but we already have. 263 00:18:35,407 --> 00:18:40,727 The one that actually bugs me more than zero is all accidents are preventable. 264 00:18:41,047 --> 00:18:45,927 So the problem with all accidents are preventable is that it really sets up 265 00:18:45,927 --> 00:18:51,027 this sort of false dichotomy that the accident happened because we failed to prevent it. 266 00:18:51,840 --> 00:18:55,780 So I guess that's true in retrospect.

All accidents are preventable. 267 00:18:56,080 --> 00:19:02,180 But I'll also suggest that all winning lottery numbers are knowable after they've been selected. 268 00:19:02,740 --> 00:19:06,040 Like we're really good at playing the lottery after they pick the numbers. 269 00:19:06,760 --> 00:19:11,200 The three questions are kind of what is now being known as the sticky suite.

270 00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:15,220 Are you guys familiar with sticky? We talked about it a little earlier on the 271 00:19:15,220 --> 00:19:17,120 first day. Stuff that kills you. 272 00:19:17,420 --> 00:19:20,300 Although nobody I know in the whole industry calls it stuff.

273 00:19:20,300 --> 00:19:21,920 You can sort of fill in what they call it. 274 00:19:21,980 --> 00:19:27,660 So what'll kill you, when it happens, what keeps you safe, and is that sufficient? 275 00:19:28,380 --> 00:19:34,700 That suite of questions will do more for your organization on a continuous basis 276 00:19:34,700 --> 00:19:38,720 around catastrophic and significant failure, like fatalities, 277 00:19:38,840 --> 00:19:40,540 than probably anything else you do. 278 00:19:40,680 --> 00:19:43,980 So it's a really powerful set of questions.

Want to add to it, anybody? 279 00:19:48,400 --> 00:19:53,440 I think if Mark Yaston was able to be here today, I think probably what he would 280 00:19:53,440 --> 00:19:58,280 echo is that for sure we're not great at predicting, but we are really good 281 00:19:58,280 --> 00:20:00,520 at learning what is happening and what has happened. 282 00:20:01,140 --> 00:20:04,840 And so he talks to post-job brief, right? 283 00:20:04,900 --> 00:20:09,220 So if you're going out into the field, rather than trying to get people to predict 284 00:20:09,220 --> 00:20:12,440 what's going to happen, it is a lot lot easier for them to teach you what did 285 00:20:12,440 --> 00:20:13,780 happen that surprised them.

286 00:20:14,120 --> 00:20:19,900 And oftentimes that gives you an insight into places where things were surprising. 287 00:20:20,380 --> 00:20:23,060 Usually it worked out, right? Because it was creaking. What did you say, Todd?

288 00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:26,960 It was creaking, groaning, squeaking, and burping and farting. 289 00:20:27,040 --> 00:20:30,360 So it was doing all of those things. 290 00:20:32,960 --> 00:20:37,340 It was doing all of those things. People could hear it because it's already 291 00:20:37,340 --> 00:20:40,700 happened and then and learning from what has happened, but faster, 292 00:20:40,800 --> 00:20:42,480 right?

So we're not waiting for the bad thing. 293 00:20:42,660 --> 00:20:45,760 We're waiting for just what happened today. Like what happened today that surprised 294 00:20:45,760 --> 00:20:49,060 you? Anyone remember some of the questions he suggests on his post-job brief?

295 00:20:49,180 --> 00:20:50,120 You remember it off the top of your head? 296 00:20:50,440 --> 00:20:53,220 What happened today that surprised you? Anyone else? 297 00:20:54,540 --> 00:21:00,140 Well, multiple brains are smarter than one brain.

Multiple brains are smarter than one brain. 298 00:21:00,460 --> 00:21:03,620 What are we missing? What worked well and what didn't work well? 299 00:21:04,060 --> 00:21:05,940 I think there's one more that I can't remember.

300 00:21:07,567 --> 00:21:11,427 What would you recommend? I think we have it on hophub.org. We've got his list 301 00:21:11,427 --> 00:21:14,967 of questions as well, and he has all the slides up there. So that might be helpful.

302 00:21:15,547 --> 00:21:18,267 And in honor of Mark Yesen, who's not here with us this week, 303 00:21:18,287 --> 00:21:21,027 unfortunately, but he is amazing and normally is with us. 304 00:21:21,187 --> 00:21:25,707 He also tells a story of where they put cameras on rescue helicopters to analyze 305 00:21:25,707 --> 00:21:27,147 the rescue. Did I tell you this? 306 00:21:27,567 --> 00:21:30,007 Did I tell you this one already?

No? I did? 307 00:21:30,567 --> 00:21:33,227 Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. So, so I'm old. 308 00:21:33,827 --> 00:21:38,327 So yeah. So that, that whole notion of, of watching stuff to learn, 309 00:21:38,407 --> 00:21:40,907 right.

That's the, that's right. We didn't talk about like football games, right? 310 00:21:41,107 --> 00:21:44,007 So people that are listening to this podcast may not have heard this, 311 00:21:44,087 --> 00:21:48,507 but the, the landing the helicopter and then that, that video going to the boss 312 00:21:48,507 --> 00:21:51,687 and the boss critiquing it was not helpful. It was scary.

313 00:21:51,827 --> 00:21:56,167 And they became more concerned about the video camera capturing what they were doing. 314 00:21:56,227 --> 00:21:59,327 But when they, when they told them about their leader was good enough to realize 315 00:21:59,327 --> 00:22:01,027 he was doing something they didn't mean to do. 316 00:22:01,127 --> 00:22:05,107 So now when they land, it gets sent to them and they can analyze their own rescue, 317 00:22:05,307 --> 00:22:07,527 right? So this is going to be on a podcast, right?

318 00:22:07,767 --> 00:22:11,147 So anybody on the podcast, if you haven't listened to or talked to Mark Yesen, 319 00:22:11,187 --> 00:22:12,267 man, reach out to that guy. 320 00:22:12,407 --> 00:22:16,967 He's