Jean-Christophe Le Coze – Rebranding Safety

Overview

You hear a lot about the New View of safety. Some people love it. Others question it. However, what if it isn’t new at all?

In this article, you will explore where the New View really comes from. Why is there so much debate around it, and what does it mean for you as a safety professional? Also, how can you apply the ideas in a simple and practical way? Let’s break it down.

A Conversation from Berlin

At the EHS Congress in Berlin, I spoke with Jean-Christophe Le Coze, who prefers to be called JC. He works in France as a research director and focuses on safety in high-risk industries.

JC has spent more than 20 years researching safety, especially in safety-critical sectors like aviation and nuclear energy. During his workshop in Berlin, he explored one big question: Is the “New View” of safety new?

What Is the “New View”?

The New View challenges the old way of thinking about human error.

In the old view, accidents happen because people make mistakes. If mistakes cause harm, then the answer seems simple: control people more tightly, write better rules, and enforce compliance.

The New View takes a different path. It says that people are part of a wider system. Their actions usually make sense to them at the time. If you want to improve safety, you must understand the pressures, trade-offs and conditions around them.

Many people connect these ideas with thinkers like Sidney Dekker and the idea of Safety II. 

Nevertheless, there is something important to understand.  These ideas have been developing for 40 to 50 years in fields such as human factors and system safety.

The New View is not brand new. It is more like a translation of older research into a language that more safety professionals can access and use.

Why Do People Argue About It?

Much of the debate happens online. Some professionals support Behaviour-Based Safety. Others prefer the New View. It can feel like two sides fighting for control of the same space.

The reason for this tension is more about methods. It is also about where the ideas come from. Behaviour-Based Safety grew from a tradition that values measuring behaviour, observing actions and using feedback to change what people do. 

The New View comes from human factors, cognitive psychology and systems thinking, where the focus is on understanding how people think and how systems shape behaviour.

In many ways, the disagreement reflects deeper beliefs about what science should look like and how proof should be shown.

The Measurement Problem

You have probably faced this question yourself: how do you measure safety?

For years, safety has been measured by counting injuries, deaths and accident rates. If those numbers go down, we assume safety has improved.

However, if you introduce a new way of thinking, how do you prove it works? If accidents decrease, was it your approach, better supervision, luck, or changes in workload? Safety is complex. It is difficult to isolate a single cause.

This makes it hard to “prove” that the New View works, even if it leads to better conversations, smarter decisions and stronger systems.

Safety Is Not a Menu You Must Finish

As a practitioner, you may feel overwhelmed by the choices in front of you. There is Behaviour Based Safety, HOP, Safety I, Safety II and resilience engineering. Each claims to offer something valuable.

Instead of trying to choose one camp, think of safety as a buffet. You do not need to consume everything at once. You can try one idea, test it in your workplace, and see how it fits. If it improves understanding and performance, keep it. If it does not, adjust or move on.

The key is not loyalty to a label. The key is learning what works in your context.

The Safety Market

It is also important to recognise that safety is a market. There are consultants, books, training programmes and conferences, all offering guidance. Different ideas compete for attention. Sometimes this competition is about genuine differences in theory. At other times, it is about positioning and branding.

This does not mean the ideas are wrong. It simply means you should think critically. Ask yourself whether an approach fits your workplace and solves a real problem, or whether it is simply presented in an attractive way.

Practice Comes Before Theory

One of the strongest messages from JC is that practice often comes before theory.

Researchers frequently study organisations that are already successful. They observe what these organisations do, then develop explanations and models based on what they see. In other words, theory often grows from practice.

This means the people doing the work deserve recognition. As a practitioner, your role is vital. You test ideas in real environments. You adapt them to your industry. You see what actually works under pressure. You also provide feedback that shapes future thinking.

Without practitioners, theory would have little meaning.

Context Changes Everything

Many safety ideas come from the aviation and nuclear industries. These sectors are large, complex and highly regulated. However, your workplace may be very different.

In the UK, most businesses are small or micro-businesses. Their resources, structures and pressures are not the same as those of airlines or nuclear plants. You cannot simply copy and paste ideas from one industry into another.

You must adapt them. Context always matters.

The Loop Between Theory and Practice

There is a constant loop between theory and practice. When researchers study what works in real life and build explanations from it, they are theorising practice. 

When they develop ideas designed to help organisations improve, they are creating practical theories.

These two processes feed each other. Practice shapes theory, and theory influences practice. When you understand this loop, you stop seeing safety ideas as opposing teams. Instead, you see an ongoing conversation that evolves over time.

What You Can Do Tomorrow

Start by paying closer attention to real work. Look at what people do, not what procedures say they should do. Try to understand why their actions make sense to them and what pressures shape their decisions.

When something goes wrong, replace blame with curiosity. Instead of asking who failed, ask what made the decision seem reasonable at the time.

Make space to learn the foundations of human factors, psychology and systems thinking, even at a basic level. This knowledge will help you stay steady when new trends appear.

Finally, respect experience. When someone says they have been doing something successfully for 20 years, listen carefully. Sometimes what looks new is simply a new label for long-standing good practice.

Final Thought

The New View is not new. It is part of a longer history of research into how people and systems interact.

Your job is not to choose sides. Your job is to improve safety where you are. You do that by understanding real work, learning where ideas come from, adapting them to your context and valuing both theory and practice.

At Risk Fluent, we believe safety improves when strong thinking meets real-world action.

You do not need to follow every new trend. You simply need to understand enough to choose wisely. That is where real progress begins.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)