• No results found

Behavioural risk at outdoor music festivals


Academic year: 2019

Share "Behavioural risk at outdoor music festivals"


Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text


University of Southern Queensland

Behavioural risk at outdoor music festivals

Aldo Salvatore Raineri

Doctoral Thesis

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Professional Studies

at the University of Southern Queensland

Volume II



Volume 2

List of Appendices

Appendix A Learning Portfolio

Appendix B Learning Plan

Appendix C Risk Management Overview

Appendix D Results of Survey to Determine Current Practice

Appendix E Crowd Safety Checklists

Appendix F RM Consultants Crowd Risk Assessment Method

Appendix G Conference Papers

Appendix H DIM-ICE Model incorporating the Crowd Behaviour Index (CBI)


Appendix A



University of Southern Queensland Doctor of Professional Studies

Learning Portfolio WBL8000

Name : Aldo Salvatore Raineri Student Number: 0050104989

Address: 27 Palm St. Postal: PO Box 136

Kenmore Kenmore Qld 4069

Brisbane, Q'ld 4069

Tel: (07) 3878 8494 (H)

(07) 3234 1809 (W) 0417. 728 701

Fax: (07) 3404 3550

Email : w0104989@mail.connect.usq.edu.au (USQ) aldo.raineri@qld.gov.au (work)

aldoraineri@bigpond.com (home)

Date of Birth: 19th August, 1955 Place of Birth: Brisbane, Australia

Marital Status: Married Children: Three

Employment: Director – Strategic Policy

Workplace Health and Safety Queensland Department of Justice and Attorney-General

Award being sought: DProfSt




Section 1 Introduction

Section 2 Formal learning – educational qualifications 2.1 Legal

2.2 Education & Training 2.3 Criminology

2.4 Business

2.5 Occupational health and safety

2.6 Miscellaneous unfinished qualifications

Section 3 Reflecting on my professional work-based experience and learning 3.1 General approach to reflection

3.2 The commercial years 3.3 The teaching years

3.4 The government service years 3.5 The eventsafe years

3.6 Reflecting on my reflection

Section 4 My future learning - project proposal

Section 5 How my learning supports my project proposal

Section 6 RPL Claim



1. Introduction

This portfolio outlines the formal and experiential learning which underpins my current roles of:

 government policy adviser and legislator;  safety practitioner and specialist; and  tertiary educator.

Appendix 1 – current curriculum vitae.

Section 2 outlines my formal learning, as evidenced by my educational qualifications, which range across a number of disciplines. Apart from the technical mastery of specific

knowledge, I have been able to adopt a cross-disciplinary perspective to my current practice as a safety adviser, legislator and practitioner. For example, compliance practice is firmly grounded in legal compulsion; however, developing interventions that effectively motivate people to comply with the law draws on varying principles, theories and approaches from the behavioural sciences and education.

Section 3 outlines my professional work-based experience and learning and outlines my reflections on this professional journey. The section commences with a general articulation of my understanding of reflection and its purpose (3.1), followed by a description and specific reflections of my learning during the various professional phases of my life (sections 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5). It also discusses a number of major achievements in my professional life,

involvement in which generated significant and powerful learning experiences, resulting in tangible outcomes.

Although all this experience and learning may seem disparate and unconnected, I believe that all learning is iterative and concatenated and that, therefore, what I am today has been shaped by exposure to all these different events and occurrences. For example, my current

approaches as a tertiary educator have been moulded by my early teaching experiences in the TAFE system, my practice as a policy adviser and legislator are supported by my legal training and experience and my post-graduate work in criminology and criminal justice, and my practice as a safety professional is underpinned by the intersection of these various domains of knowledge and experience.

I also believe that these experiences have transformed and shaped me into a critical thinking individual. Norris and Ennis (1989: 176) define critical thinking as “reasonable and reflective thinking that is focused upon deciding what to believe or do”. Keefe (1993: 123) notes that “[r]eflective reasoning moves beyond simple rules, relationships and principles to higher frameworks of meaning – analogy, extrapolation, evaluation, elaboration, invention.”

For example, the work of Gramsci (Mayo 1999) and Freire (1970, 1972) on the



development and refinement of practices and interventions, based essentially on an action research methodology.

Section 4 outlines my short-term professional aspirations, which are achievable through the completion of my negotiated learning project(s), and define and shape those aspirations in terms of where I am coming from and where I am now. The proposed project is essentially the next logical step to work that I commenced in 2001 in the context of my safety

consultancy business. The project will seek to develop a more contextualised, evidence-based and strategic tool to overcome what I see as the inadequacy of traditional risk assessment approaches for crowd safety management treatments and interventions at major outdoor music festivals.

My view of the inadequacy of current approaches in this context is based on observation, participation and research which have been informed by previous learning and the reflective application of principles to new contexts. Because a key factor in this context is human emotion, understanding and accounting for the variables that can influence the psychology of a crowd, and the extremes of behaviour that can result, become equally as important as understanding the laws of dynamics. My own experience of working with large crowds at outdoor music festivals has led me to agree entirely with Sime (1993; 1995), who argues that a comprehensive approach to crowd safety design, management and risk assessment needs to integrate psychological and engineering frames of reference.

Section 5 attempts to draw together my relevant past learning to support my project proposal. In effect, this section argues that the concatenation of my experiences and learning across such a diverse range of settings provides a strong foundation for a stable inter-disciplinary platform on which to shift from an operationally based compliance system to a more strategic compliance management framework.

Section 6 outlines my claim for recognition of prior learning (RPL). I will be claiming exemption for a total of 10 units, being 7 units for post-graduate study, its continual application and subsequent research, and 3 units based on work experience, learning and achievement at a senior level.



2. Formal learning – educational qualifications

In this section I outline my formal educational qualifications and provide evidence of formal learning.

Appendix 2 - Copy of degrees and diplomas and copy of QUT academic statements showing acceptance into and withdrawal from SJD course and completion of doctoral level research methodology subject.

2.1 Legal:

(i) BA (University of Queensland, 1977)

(ii) LLB (Hons) (University of Queensland, 1979)

(iii) G. Dip. Leg Prac (Queensland University of Technology, 1980)

2.2 Ed/Training:

(i) B Ed (University of South Australia, 1996) (ii) G. Dip. Tr & Dev (Griffith University, 2000)

(previously G Dip Ad & Voc Ed, Griffith University, 1992) (iii) Cert IV Assessment & Workplace Training

2.3 Crim/Socio-legal:

LLM (Queensland University of Technology, 1994)

2.4 Business:

Dip. Bus (South Queensland Institute of TAFE, 1996)

2.5 OHS:

(i) Dip. OHS (National Safety Council of Australia, 1991)

(ii) Cert IV OHS (South East Metropolitan College of TAFE, 1999) (iii) Workplace Health and Safety Officer (1997-current)

(iv) Workplace Health and Safety Inspector

2.6 Uncompleted qualifications:

(i) B Bus (University of South Australia) (ii) M Admin (Griffith University)



Subsequent to the completion of my Masters degree in criminology, I was able to published the results of research that I had undertaken into the impact of crimes on victims, their sense of helplessness and isolation in the criminal justice system and the potential benefit of using Victim Impact Statements as a tool for integrating victims into the process, thereby re-invigorating their satisfaction with the machinery of justice. Research into the social and psychological processes associated with offender disposition and their effects on victims of crime revealed dissatisfaction at their not being more involved in the criminal justice process. Victims feel disenfranchised and disempowered as they come to play only a secondary role in the trial process.

I saw the victim impact statement as a mechanism for victims’ input into sentencing decisions as an important reform in the direction of making the criminal justice system more victim-oriented. It is a benign way of providing victims with the right for input and satisfying their need to be part of the process, without jeopardising the basic principles of the adversary system or compromising the rights of an accused. It is an important contribution to procedural and substantive justice.

I believe that this article was a catalyst for the Queensland Government’s inclusion of the first tentative steps at introducing victim impact statements in the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995.



3. Reflecting on my professional work-based experience and learning (my professional journey)

In section 3.1 I set out my understanding of the benefits of reflective practice, particularly critical reflection, in professional development. The importance of reflection and reflective practice (Schon 1983, 1987) are frequently noted in the literature; indeed reflective capacity is regarded by many as an essential characteristic for professional competence and learning.

In sections 3.2 through to 3.5 I set out my employment history and reflect on the various phases into which it seems neatly to divide. I have set out my employment history chronologically from the time I first graduated from the University of Queensland. Even though it is only my experience during the last 15 years or so in the occupational health and safety field that is relevant to my proposed project and future learning (especially the last 8 or so in relation to my work in the outdoor music industry), nonetheless the earlier experiences were formative and provide a significant springboard for the space in which I currently find myself.

For example, my legal training and early professional years in legal practice exposed me to the human response to legal compulsion, while my studies and research in criminology and justice theory scratched below the surface of that response in an effort to answers questions such as “What is it that makes people comply with legal rules?” and “What is the moral bind of the law?” My years in education have given me a broad exposure to different learning styles and motivations and, apart from the intrinsic satisfaction that I have obtained and continue to obtain from teaching, they have given me a good insight, for example, into how to pitch an education/awareness program from a policy intervention perspective.

My years in government service have been an extremely fruitful learning period. While I “fell into” occupational health and safety almost by accident, I soon came to believe that it was in this area that I could “make a difference” Not only have I learned much of the technical matters that go to make up the discipline, I have also been able to adapt my previous training and experience to develop policy and legislation that serves the better good. In doing so, I have often had to wrestle with the tensions between developing good policy and legislation and stakeholder accommodation – a learning experience quite unique in itself. I am

particularly pleased, however, that a considerable number of innovations which I introduced into Queensland safety legislation have been endorsed and recommended for adoption nationally by the recent National Review into Model Occupational Health and Safety Laws (Stewart-Crompton, Sherrif and Mayman 2009).

The eventsafe phase is in many ways a specifically contextualised extension of my experience and learning in occupational health and safety from both an operational and strategic perspective. While my initial involvement with promoters of outdoor music festivals and venue owners/operators was to ensure compliance with safety laws, I quickly came to realise that the greatest risk exposure for them lies in the very factors that motivate patrons to attend these events and that the existing tools for assessing the extent of that exposure need to take account of a number of non-traditional qualitative factors. My proposed project,

therefore, stems from my assessment of the inadequacy of traditional risk assessment approaches for crowd safety management treatments and interventions.



Commentators generally distinguish 2 types of learning – academic and experiential.

Experiential learning is considered by many (seee Rogers 1969, for example) as equivalent to personal change and growth. However, learning that is derived from experience doesn’t just happen. For it to take place one needs to engage in reflection (see, for example, Kolb 1984; Boud, Keough and Walker 1985; Johns and Freshwater 1998).

Interest in reflection is based on an implicit belief that “…knowledge is personally

constructed, socially mediated and inherently situated.” (Clarke 1995: 43). Though Panda (2004) notes that not much work has been done on linking learning to reflection, reflection has a significant place in Kolb’s experiential learning, Dewey’s reflective thinking and Schon’s reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action. According to Kolb (1984), reflecting is an essential element of learning. Moon (1999) attempts to link reflection to learning and professional development through relating it to a map of learning involving cognitive structures, stages of learning, approaches to learning and representation of learning.

Reflective practice is a process of thinking in action, usually in “muddy waters”. It involves wondering what it would be best to do and eventually finding a better way forward.


“…reveal(s) to us aspects of our experience that might have remained hidden had we not taken time to consider…Past experiences are considered in the light of new information. Reflection allows us to draw conclusions about our past experience and develop new insights that we can apply to our future activities.” (Wade & Yarborough 1996: 64)

At a micro-level “reflection is a process of reviewing an experience of practice in order to describe, analyse, evaluate and so inform learning about practice.” (Reid, 1993 p.305). At the broader level, however, reflection is an active process whereby the professional can gain an understanding of how historical, social, cultural and personal experiences have contributed to professional knowledge and practice (Wilkinson, 1996). According to Jarvis (1992 p.180), “it is that form of practice that seeks to problematise many situations of professional

performance so that they can become potential learning situations and so the practitioner can continue to learn, grow and develop in and through practice.”

Schon (1983, 1987) suggests that we can engage in reflection in one of two ways - either by ‘reflecting on action’, after the experience, or by ‘reflecting in action’, during the experience. Reflecting on action enables us to spend time exploring why we acted as we did, what was happening in a group and so on. In so doing we develop sets of questions and ideas about our activities and practice. Reflecting in action is sometimes described as ‘thinking on our feet’. It involves looking to our experiences, connecting with our feelings, and attending to our theories in use. It entails building new understandings to inform our actions in any situation that is unfolding.

Killion and Todnem (1991) expanded Schon's reflection model to include the concept of reflection for action. This type of reflection guides future action based on past thoughts and actions. This type of reflection combines reflection on action and reflection in action.



another strategy that will address and work within the governing variables. In other words, given our chosen goals, values, plans and rules are operationalised rather than questioned. According to Argyris and Schön (1974), this is single-loop learning. An alternative response is to question the governing variables themselves, to subject them to critical scrutiny. This they describe as double-loop learning. Such learning may then lead to an alteration in the governing variables and, thus, a shift in the way in which strategies and consequences are framed.

Reflective practice is something more than just thoughtful practice. Dewey (1933) explains the act of reflection as a process directed at seeking a conclusion through inquiry. This definition of reflection extends beyond the more simplified notion that reflection is thinking about the problem. Instead, thinking about a problem is a first step of reflection.

However, in order to move from “learning by experience” to “learning from experience”, one needs to go that step further and engage in critical reflection, as suggested by Mezirow (1990) in the following diagram:

By itself, reflection is not necessarily critical (Brookfield 1995: Ecclestone 1996). To engage in critical reflection requires moving beyond the acquisition of new knowledge and

understanding into questioning existing assumptions, values and perspectives (Cranton 1996: 76). Four elements are central to critical reflection – assumptions analysis, contextual

awareness, imaginative speculation and reflective scepticism (Brookfield 1988: 325).



ways. Thus Boyd & Fales (1983 p.100) claim that critical reflection “is the core difference between whether a person repeats the same experience several times becoming highly proficient at one behaviour, or learns from experience in such a way that he or she is cognitively or affectively changed”.

Duffy (2007) believes that reflective practice is an active deliberate process of critically examining practice where an individual is challenged and enabled to undertake the process of self-enquiry to empower the practitioner to realize desirable and effective practice within a reflexive spiral of personal transformation. Critical reflection is thus viewed as

transformational learning, which according to Baumgartner (2001) can happen either gradually or from a sudden or critical incident and alter the way people see themselves and their world.

Mezirow (1990: 5) also sees critical reflection as an essential component of learning:

“Perhaps even more central to … learning than elaborating established meaning schemes is the process of reflecting back on prior learning to determine whether what we have learned is justified under present circumstances. This is a crucial learning process egregiously ignored by learning theorists.”

Mezirow maintains that such reflection on assumptions and presuppositions (particularly about oneself) leads to transformative learning:

"Perspective transformation is the process of becoming critically aware of how and why our presuppositions have come to constrain the way we perceive, understand, and feel about our world; of reformulating these assumptions to permit a more inclusive, discriminating, permeable and integrative perspective; and of making decisions or otherwise acting on these new understandings. More inclusive, discriminating

permeable and integrative perspectives are superior perspectives that adults choose if they can because they are motivated to better understand the meaning of their

experience." (Mezirow 1990:14)

In other words, the real significance of adult learning appears when learners begin to re-evaluate their lives and to re-make them. This, for Mezirow, takes precedence over whatever it was they set out to "learn" in the first place. Freire (1970) calls this the process of

conscientization. Clark (1991) identifies the following three dimensions to a perspective transformation:

 psychological (changes in understanding of the self),  convictional (revision of belief systems), and

 behavioral (changes in lifestyle).



As Elias (1997: 3) puts it:

"Transformative learning is the expansion of consciousness through the



3.2 The commercial years – legal practice, business and consulting (1981-1988)

After completing my secondary schooling in 1972 at St James’ Christian Brothers College in Brisbane I enrolled in a combined arts/law degree at the University of Queensland, which I completed in 1979.

I then undertook a “professional practice” year at the Queensland University of Technology (1980) – this was a new course which was an alternative for the centuries-old articles of clerkship system whereby aspiring lawyers would be articled (ie; apprenticed) to practising lawyers for several years before being eligible for admission to practice in their own right. The course attracted me, in that I had commenced articles of clerkship several years before but found that I was not getting exposure to the full range of legal activities that I would have liked.

The QUT course was built around simulated practice exercises in mock professional arrangements. A debrief following each exercise was my first exposure to reflection in learning and practice. I now recognise this “practicum” approach as an example of a community of learning engaged in a problem-based approach, a pedagogical strategy in which students are presented with open ended, contextualised, real world situations. Rather than developing content knowledge, the focus was on application of knowledge and problem solving skills by defining the problem, sourcing resources (including prior knowledge and experience of team members) and identifying gaps in our own knowledge. In addition to the standard problem solving process, the course added the important steps of abstraction and reflection. For me, ‘reflection on action’ unconsciously became ‘reflection in action’ and subconscious moved on to become ‘reflection for action”, a process which has unconsciously remained with me throughout my life.

After graduating, I worked in legal practice for approximately 5 years (1981-1985), firstly in North Queensland for a year in general practice, and then in a Brisbane commercial firm, dealing mainly with commercial and tax matters. This was in the heyday of tax minimisation and avoidance and the government soon legislated to rein in this type of behaviour. While the government tightened legislation in relation to avoidance, all types of schemes, including legitimate minimisation arrangements were pretty much tarred with the same brush and this type of work virtually dried up.

I decided then that routine legal work, such as matrimonial matters and neighbourhood fencing disputes were not for me, so I drifted out of mainstream legal practice to undertake business and management consulting (Trans Global Strategies, 1985-91).

During this time I also commenced a body corporate management business (probably the first one in Queensland, following the introduction of new legislation dealing with residential strata title management) which I subsequently sold (Central Management Services, 1983-85).



3.3 The teaching years - TAFE (1988-1992)

Probably as the result of an intellectual vacuum and some sort of deep-seated need to engage with people in a non-transactional way, I seized on the opportunity which presented itself to undertake the teaching of commercial law subjects in the Diploma of Business programs at a number of different TAFE colleges in Brisbane (Southbank Institute, Moreton Institute, Metropolitan South Institute).

One of the colleges I worked at was the Alexandra Hills Senior College (later to become the Bayside Community College, prior to its’ mainstreaming as part of the Mt Gravatt College of TAFE, and now part of the Metropolitan South Institute of TAFE). The senior college

concept was an experimental one at the time, based on the US college concept, offering years 11 and 12 of senior schooling and TAFE vocational courses. The college encouraged

integration of these 2 streams and innovation and flexibility in teaching and learning. It was a ‘second chance’ college, actively welcoming students who found the mainstream education system challenging and those people seeking training/re-training in order to enter the workforce, particularly after long absences. I was impressed with the ethos, values and culture of this place (which reflected a humanistic approach to human development) and applied for a full-time position in 1990.

In 1992 I became part of the College management team, firstly as Associate Director - Organisational Operations and then Associate Director - Educational Development. During this time, I led the following organisational innovations:

 the "self managed team" concept. This task required pro-active leadership to ensure an understanding and acceptance by staff across different areas of the changes in work practices involved, whilst at the same time maintaining effort and quality of service delivery;

 integrated secondary/vocational program (precursor to Carmichael Report recommendations);

 a trimester system for Associate Diploma of Business programs; and

 the creation of a single College timetable from three disparate arrangements (secondary, pre-vocational and tertiary) which had until that time proved difficult to amalgamate. Strategically and operationally, this proved to be a milestone in allowing greater

flexibility of course structure, arrangement and offering, as well as providing a more cost-effective allocation of teaching time, thereby contributing to a properly integrated Senior College program.

A significant achievement during this time was my selection to lead and manage the National Open Learning TAFE Staff Development Project in Queensland. This involved the national development and local trialling of training modules for use by TAFE staff across Australia, reflecting “best practice” relating to the implementation of open learning methodologies in traditional and industry-based educational delivery.

Another significant achievement during this time was my selection to upgrade the curriculum for the legal component of Diploma of Business courses in the move by the vocational education and training system to competency-based training.



bringing together, leading and managing multi-disciplinary teams in response to tender applications for commercial training and organisational development opportunities. Development of project proposals was always done in consultation with proposed members of the project team and my role, apart from any necessary process and content input, was very clearly a motivational one. Clients included government departments, both State and Commonwealth, government instrumentalities and private sector organisations and industry/professional groups.

Appendix 4 - Copies of my appointment letters ands relevant positions descriptions for the various positions that I held during this period.

Appendix 5 – matrix outlining skills, attributes and competencies that I have been assessed as possessing in order to be appointed to the various positions in TAFE Qld.

These teaching years were a period of personal (transformational) change and development for me, involving deep and critical reflection on my values, attitudes and approach to life generally. I found that teaching and curriculum development gave me greater satisfaction than any of the other work that I had previously done. In addition, I was exposed to a number of views and perspectives which continue to influence my world view and approach. For example, the principles of humanistic education and andragogy as the most appropriate and effective process frameworks to facilitate adult learning inform my current University teaching practice and facilitation as well as my public presentations. Action research

continues to be a major methodological framework for developing and testing interventions and solutions.

Humanism is a school of thought that believes human beings are different from other species and possess capacities not found in animals (Edwords 1989). Humanists, therefore, give primacy to the study of human needs and interest. A central assumption is that human beings behave out of intentionality and values (Kurtz 2000). This is in contrast to the beliefs of operant conditioning theorists (see, for example, the work of Skinner), who believe that all behaviour is the result of the application of consequences or to the beliefs of cognitive psychologists (see, for example, the work of Piaget), who hold that the discovery or the making of meaning is a primary factor in human learning. I was attracted to the work of Carl Rogers (Rogers 1969; Rogers and Freiberg 1994), who clearly saw the purpose of humanistic education as providing a foundation for personal growth and development (particularly anchored around self-concept and locus of control) so that learning will continue throughout life in a self-directed manner (DeCarvalho 1991).



In relation to andragogy, I was especially impressed by the work of Malcolm Knowles, who popularised the concept as a process by which adults can learn best. Andragogy consists of learning strategies focused on adults. It is often interpreted as the process of engaging adult learners in the structure of the learning experience. The term was originally used by

Alexander Knapp, a German educator, in 1833, and was developed into a theory of adult education by Knowles (see Knowles, Holton and Swanson 2005, for a comprehensive discourse of the principles and theory of andragogy).

Knowles held that andragogy should be distinguished from pedagogy and is premised on the following four simple postulates (Knowles 1980):

1. adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction (Self-concept and Motivation to learn);

2. experience (including mistakes) provides the basis for learning activities (Experience); 3. adults are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance to their job

or personal life (Readiness to learn); and

4. adult learning is problem-centred rather than content-oriented (Orientation to learning).

One of the principal premises of andragogy is that the successful facilitator creates a learning environment for adults that is highly interactive. Therefore, andragogy tends to be process-driven more than content-process-driven.

Initially, I struggled to reconcile these approaches with the traditional didactic transmission of knowledge process that I had been subjected to during my undergraduate legal training. However, I was convinced by the arguments favouring humanism and andragogy and after many attempts at reorganising my material and trying a number of different delivery styles, I believe I arrived at an approach which found a neat balance between outlining an appropriate framework for students’ learning while leaving them sufficient latitude to explore and

discover relevant meaning for themselves. And at the same time, I attempted to demystify the intricacies of the law and make learning fun.

I have continued this basic approach in my current teaching practice. However, it does prove to be somewhat problematic at times for my current cohort of international students, whose cultural differences and experiences and sometimes less than adequate command of English require a more direct approach to the presentation of factual material.

During this time I was also introduced to action learning and action research. Action learning is a specific process for workplace-based professional development that has grown out of the work Reg Revans (see, for example, Revans 1980; 1982 and 1983). It has been widely used in British industry since about 1945 (Keys 1994), and has spread to other parts of the world. The term is sometimes used broadly to include a range of ways action learning principles have been adapted to more or less different processes (see Pine 1989), but for the purpose of this discussion the use of the term is confined to refer to the work of Revans and his


Action learning is different from mainstream training, education and professional



problems. It is about people learning to solve problems at work, from experience through reflection and action.

While action learning is individually focused, it uses a small group, known as a 'learning set', which provides a forum where set member's ideas can be challenged in a supportive


Action learning is an iterative, experiential process, involving a cyclical notion of learning. The elements of the cycle are:

 an action;

 reflection - considering of the effects, successful and unsuccessful, of that action;

 generalizing - identifying new learning from this experience, that can be applied; and

 planning - on the basis of generalizations, deciding how to act in the future (Preston and Biddle 1994: 2).

While all elements of the cycle are necessary for the action learning process to take place, the notion of reflection is particularly crucial to an understanding of action learning: Action learning is based on the relationship between reflection and action

 reflection is the essential link between past action and more effective future action;

 reflection is a necessary precursor to effective action; and

 learning from experience can be enhanced through deliberate attention to this relationship (McGill and Beaty 1996: 21).

Action research is a technique designed to actively bring about change in a situation while researching the change as it occurs. It is a deliberately interventionist strategy which stands in contrast to observational and experimental studies, neither of which may have any direct impact on the situation in practical application. The integration of action and research within a process of continuous planning, action, and review provides a mechanism by which

participants can contribute ideas and strategies, implement such strategies and critically reflect on the results.

This approach uses a range of research methods, and is as its name suggests - tied in to action or change in programs. It is a dynamic, flexible process that is able to look at a program and learn and inform the program while it is being carried out, rather than at the end when the program is finished.

This approach involves stakeholders as participants in the process, and is flexible enough to take account of the differences that may exist both between and within communities. It helps tailor projects to local situations. Put simply, it asks what works, how, when, where, for whom and with what outcomes. It starts with where projects are at and builds on them, asking what is important about what is happening and why, and what do we want to learn.

Rather than using surveys or statistics or comparing one group with another, the practitioners of action research are more likely to value and interpret people's experiences and stories (although action research may still include surveys and statistics or other scientific research methods if they suit the project). It is generally agreed that more traditional approaches cannot achieve the insights that come from people's experiences. Stories add colour, character and a new culture to the evaluation process (Crane and Richardson 2000).

Action research has a varied history - it has roots both in management theory around



a way that empowered local people to act to change their lives (Freire 1970, 1972). It has been particularly important for people working in a range of fields throughout the world who see research as essentially linked to social change (Alston and Bowles 1998).

Action research, used as an evaluation method, is sensitive to local, environmental and social contexts. It finds ways to involve and value the contributions of everybody who has a stake in the program - for example, participants and their families, workers, local agency

managements, community members, local services, and government and non-governmental organisations. It is an approach that helps build partnerships between stakeholders, and bring in others, such as local businesses, which can make a contribution. This kind of involvement is integral to the evaluation.

I have embraced action research as viable methodology for developing strategies and

interventions across a range of situations that will be acceptable to those having to implement them, thereby ensuring a far greater chance of success. For example, I used this methodology in:

 the development and trialling of the national teacher training modules for the TAFE system;

 the production of the 1996 Report on the Integration of Workplace Health and Safety Competency Standards for Users and Operators of Industrial Equipment (NOHSC:1006) into Vocational Education and Training in Australia – referred to later; and

 the refinement of the original compliance manual that I developed for the Big Day Out – referred to later.



3.4 The government service years (1993-present)

In 1993 I moved into mainstream government service. My first job in this context was a Cabinet Legislation and Liaison Officer in the (then) Department of Employment, Vocational Education, Training and Industrial Relations. Because of my legal and industrial relations training I was seconded to the industrial relations part of the department for 6 months in 1994 to work on 2 specific projects. After having completed these I moved to the occupational health and safety of the department, where I have remained since approximately 1995.

Appendix 6 contains letters of appointment and position descriptions for the various positions that I have held so far in government service.

3.4.1 Cabinet Legislation and Liaison Officer

Department of Employment, Vocational Education, Training and Industrial Relations (1993 - 94)

Role purpose, key duties and assessment criteria

See Appendix 6.

Key activities

I was responsible for the strategic and operational management of the Department's Cabinet, Executive Council and Parliamentary programs.

I was also responsible for the management and facilitation of a number of Departmental reviews, particularly of a legislative nature, including the following:

 Business regulation reform review of legislation;  Anti-discrimination review of legislation;

 Mabo review of legislation; and

 Trade Practices Compliance Audit of Departmental Procedures and Legislation

In addition, I managed the following administrative law matters:  Freedom of Information (as Departmental internal review officer);  Evidence Act applications; and

 Judicial Review applications.

For approximately 6 months in 1994, I was assigned, and gave the Department advice in relation to the following 2 projects of legislative, legal and constitutional significance and complexity, the outcomes of which were strategically important, preserved the integrity and independence of the State’s industrial relations system and reflected government policy imperatives and close consultation with the social partners:

 the formulation and drafting of model rules for industrial organisations of employees (arising out of the Cooke Inquiry); and



3.4.2 Senior Executive Officer, Workplace Health and Safety Qld (1995 - 96) See appendix 6 for role purpose, key duties and job selection criteria.

3.4.3 Manager - Strategic Policy, Workplace Health and Safety Qld.

I acted in this position since January 1997 and was appointed permanently to the position on 16 December 2002. See Appendix 6 for role purpose, key duties and job selection criteria.

3.4.4 Director – Strategic Policy, Workplace Health and Safety Qld

I acted in this position since June 2005 and was appointed permanently to the position on 17 October 2007. See Appendix 6 for role purpose, key duties and job selection criteria.


Key activities and achievements


 development of occupational health and safety and workers’ compensation standards and initiatives in Queensland;

 Liaison with and preparation of Ministerial, CEO and senior officer briefing material for national forums such as the Council for Australian Governments

(COAG), the Workplace Relations Ministers Council (WRMC), the Australian Safety and Compensation Council (ASCC), the Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities (HWSA) and the Heads of Workers’ Compensation Authorities (HWCA);

 Consideration of and co-ordination of responses to interstate, national and international policy and operational developments: ILO, Productivity Commission reports, local, interstate and international OHS and WC reviews;

 Development of innovative responses to address industry and sector-specific problems within prevailing government policy frameworks (eg: Cash-in-Transit Industry Code of Practice instead of recommended industry licensing regime);

 Preparation and consideration of material for Cabinet, Executive Council and Parliament;  Provision of corporate legal advice on administrative, commercial, legislative and

enforcement matters;

 Preparation of and advice on tenders and contracts; and  Management of joint government-industry programs


 Strategic, business and operational planning for the WHS Program and the WHS Board and WHS Industry Sector Standing Committees;

 Specification of Program outcome and outputs (managing for outcomes and accrual budgeting/management);

 Performance monitoring of Program outputs, outcomes and performance;

 Input into national comparative jurisdictional performance measurement modelling;  Oversight of preparation of annual divisional budget and special initiatives;

 Preparation of annual Ministerial Program Statement, Annual Program Review and program material for Departmental Annual Report;

 Preparation of material for annual Parliamentary Budget Estimates debates. Industry liaison



profiles to the development of policy, operational and legislative initiatives for Ministerial and government consideration.

 Communication, liaison and interaction with the Premier, Minister, Director-General, senior officers of Government departments and senior industry and union personnel.  Representation on numerous inter-departmental, intergovernmental, state and national

bodies to represent the Queensland government.

Significant achievements which I have initiated, undertaken, directed and managed during my time with the Strategic Policy Branch include:

Development of policies and strategies

 Development of the Queensland Workplace Health and Safety Strategy 2004-2012 and priority industry and mechanism of injury action plans;

 Development of Safer Workplaces, a whole of government strategy for the reduction of workers’ compensation costs;

 Integration of national OHS competency standards for industrial equipment operators into vocational education and training (ANTA funded project);

 Development of the pre-qualified contractor (PQC) system for Queensland government tendering (subsequently adopted by Federal Safety Commissioner);

Queensland government reviews and legislative development

 National Competition Policy Review of the Workplace Health and Safety Act;

 Implementation of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission report, Industrial Matters Relating to the Cash-in-Transit Industry in Queensland (1996) and the development of the Cash in Transit Code of Practice;

Electrical Safety Taskforce (Dempsey Review), which led to the following Australia-first initiatives being introduced in Queensland:

(i) shifting of the electrical safety function from the energy industry department (then the Department of Mines and Energy) and its placement in the same department as the general industry safety regulator, thereby avoiding future claims of industry capture of the regulator as well as capitalising on the synergies between regulatory agencies (eg: industry audits, inspections, investigations and prosecutions), and (ii) development of contemporary stand-alone electrical safety legislation, modelled

on the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995; (iii) mandatory fitting of safety switches in all premises,

Building and Construction Industry (WHS) Taskforce (Crittal review), which led to the development of a suite of industry-specific regulations which are regarded by

construction industry contractors, unions and a number of other jurisdictions as the best in Australia;

Workplace Health and Safety Act Review (Crittal review), which examined potential gaps in coverage by the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 as a result of new and



 Inclusion of the requirement for risk management in the Workplace Health and Safety Act and development of the WHS Risk Management Code of Practice;

 Queensland Asbestos Regulatory Reform Package, including the adoption into

Queensland legislation of the national Code of Practice for the Management and Control of Asbestos in Workplaces and the national Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos;

 Implementation into Queensland legislation of the National Standard for Construction Work;

 Introduction of union right of entry to workplaces;  Tower crane and mobile crane reforms;

 Development of the Traffic Management Code of Practice;

Review of the Workplace Health and Safety Queensland Enforcement Framework, (Stewart-Crompton Review) which recommended the inclusion of new and innovative provisions allowing prosecution of government departments and the introduction of a new power for workplace health and safety representatives (WHSRs) to issue provisions improvement notices (PINs) at workplaces;

 Department of Employment and Industrial Relations (DIR) submission to the Service Delivery Performance Review Commission (SDPC) inquiry into safety administration in Queensland.

Queensland Government submissions to national reviews

 Development of the Queensland government submission to the Industry Commission (now the Productivity Commission) review into Work, Health and Safety in Australia (1995);

 Development of the Queensland government submission to the Cole Royal Commission – Report into the Building and Construction Industry in Australia (2003);

 Development of the Queensland government submission to the Senate Inquiry - proposed Building and Construction Industry Improvement Bill (2003);

 Development of the Queensland government submission to the Productivity Commission - Inquiry into Occupational Health and Safety and Workers’ Compensation Frameworks in Australia (2003);

 Development of the Queensland government submission to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into the Regulation of Chemicals and Plastics in Australia (2008);



Appendix 10 contains a matrix outlining skills, attributes and competencies that I have been assessed as possessing in order to be appointed to the various positions in Workplace Health and Safety Queensland. These relate to:

(i) leadership and management;

(ii) communication and interpersonal skills; (iii) analytical, conceptual and research skills;

(iv) development and implementation of policy initiatives; (v) managing research;

(vi) knowledge of workplace health and safety and workers’ compensation matters; and

(vii) knowledge of government operations.

I was assessed as possessing these skills, at increasingly complex levels, by an independent panel on each appointment. These are skills that I have learnt, developed and refined essentially “on the job” and I submit that my selection for these positions, along with the list of my key activities and achievements constitute evidence of my work-based learning over the last 15 years or so.

In addition to possessing a thorough knowledge of occupational health and safety, workers’ compensation and the operation of government (fairly instrumental skills at the end of the day), I have been assessed as possessing a high level of leadership and management expertise, strong communication and interpersonal skills and highly developed analytical and conceptual skills, all of which are evidenced by a significant record of achievement in directing, managing and reviewing research and a demonstrated record of achievement in providing high level policy advice to the Queensland government.

These generic skills have provided the scaffolding to supporta more effective practice and enhance my sense of professional identity. However, being a Myers-Briggs INFJ, and a particularly strong introvert, some of these have not come easily. For example, I have had to work consciously and deliberately (reflection-on-action) at developing my people

management and interpersonal skills in order to be a good manager and an effective leader. I still struggle, though, with some aspects, such as staff conflict resolution issues, preferring to shy away from these rather than get involved. This is something that I continue consciously to chip away at with the expectation that eventually I will become more at ease in these situations.

The project to integrate national OHS competency standards for industrial equipment operators into the vocational education and training system was quite significant and I

include evidence of the outcomes of this project in Appendix 11 as it demonstrates in a single piece of work evidence of the competencies outlined in Appendix 10.

The purpose of this ANTA funded national project was to develop a framework for the integration of the National Occupational Health and Safety Competency Standard for Users and Operators of Industrial Equipment [NOHSC1006] into vocational education and training in Australia. The process involved considerable consultation with all interested stakeholders Australia-wide and achieved “in principle” agreement for a strategic framework within which to effect integration. I was the manager and principle researcher for the project.



appropriate model for transition. The recommendations of these reports were subsequently operationalised by the Queensland government by implementing them through amendments to the Workplace Health and Safety Act in 2005.

Appendix 11

Raineri, Aldo S; Salmon, C; Carew-Reid, M: 1996: Report on the Integration of Workplace Health and Safety Competency Standards for Users and Operators of Industrial Equipment (NOHSC: 1006) into Vocational Education and Training in Australia, Division of Workplace Health and Safety Queensland, Brisbane.

Road to Transition: Improved Pathways for Operator Certification, Final Report, Department of Employment and Training, Queensland Government, 2004.

Regulatory Impact Statement for the development of amendments to the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 implementing the recommendations.

In addition, I have been able to influence the outcome of a number of State and Commonwealth reviews. For example,

Electrical Safety Taskforce (Dempsey Review) - led to a number of significant Australia-first initiatives which have improved safety in the electrical industry considerably;  Building and Construction Industry (WHS) Taskforce (Crittal Review) (2003) - led to the

development of a suite of industry-specific regulations which are regarded by

construction industry contractors, unions and a number of other jurisdictions as the best in Australia;

Workplace Health and Safety Act Review (Crittal Review) (2005) - led to the inclusion of a broader and more innovative range of duty holders and enforcement options;

 Queensland submission to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into the Regulation of Chemicals and Plastics in Australia (2008) – the Productivity Commission

recommendation governance and consultation arrangements suggested in the Queensland submission; and

 Queensland submission to the National Review into Model Occupational Health and Safety Laws (2008) – the national review reports recommend the adoption of a considerable number of Queensland regulatory arrangements, such as:

(i) adopting the broad concept of placing a statutory duty of care on a person who conducts a business or undertaking rather than on an employer, or

self-employed person;

(ii) enforceable undertakings;

(iii) governance arrangements for union right of entry to workplaces;

(iv) governance arrangements for the issuing of Provisional Improvement Notices (PINs); and



3.5 The eventsafe years

In 2001 I commenced a part-time safety consultancy in response to requests to develop safety material and interventions for the live music industry. The requests stemmed primarily from the promoters of the Big Day Out, the largest outdoor music festival in Australia, following the death of a patron from a crowd crush in the ‘mosh pit’ at the Sydney event in 2001. I have been retained by the Big Day Out each year since then and have also undertaken similar assignments for the Brisbane Livid Festival (2001-04), Valley Fiesta (2002-04) and Queensland Schoolies Week (2004).

Specifically, I have prepared OHS compliance documentation for all aspects of the event, including pre and post event activities as well as show day itself. This documentation comprises:

 Occupational Health and Safety Compliance Manual;  Health and Safety Risk Management Plan

 Construction Safety Plan  Event Safety Plan

In addition, I have provided annual input into the Security Management Plan, the Emergency and Evacuation Plan and the Traffic Management Plan.

I have also prepared Safe Work Method Statements for the event site manager and undertake comprehensive contractor compliance audits and education/awareness raising sessions for contractors and volunteers involved in the event.

Appendix 12 – Occupational Health and Safety Compliance Manual

Appendix 13 – Health and Safety Risk Management Plan

– Construction Safety Plan and Safe Work Method Statements – Event Safety Plan

In order to identify the major underlying causes of incidents in this context and develop appropriate safety interventions I undertook comprehensive research on this type of event specifically and, more generally, on the behaviour of crowds and their management. This led me to develop a paper which I presented at the Safety Institute of Australia’s annual Visions Conference in 2004 and to co-author an article in the Australian Journal of Occupational Health and Safety in 2005.

Appendix 14 - Raineri, A (2004): “The Causes and Prevention of Serious Crowd Injury and Fatalities at Outdoor Music Festivals” SIA Visions Conference 2004, October, Gold Coast.



Promoters and venue owners/operators have in the past give little if any thought to crowd safety, considering it not to be their responsibility but rather the personal responsibility of patrons, who are perceived to put themselves at risk by virtue of their attendance and zeal. In legal parlance, promoters, owners and operators look to legal defences involving implied or voluntary assumptions of risk by attendees and, in any event consider that they can

effectively transfer their liability through insurance. Therefore, any considerations that have been given to the safety of concert-goers have largely been ‘experience-based.’

However, the legal reality is quite different, with occupational health and safety legislation imposing a statutory ‘duty of care’ on concert promoters and venue owners/operators extending to members of the public. Awareness of this liability has grown in the Australian entertainment industry, having been made more acute by the death of a concert goer at an outdoor music festival in 2001.

My involvement from that time has largely been to implement operational compliance measures, based primarily on risk assessments. However, as my involvement in the outdoor music festival industry matures, and as my observations become more discerning, I am realising more and more the inadequacy of traditional risk assessment approaches for crowd safety management treatments and interventions.

In 1993 the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) highlighted the issue of crowd safety at public entertainment venues (Graham 1993) by publishing a report that provided a formula for risk assessment in these situations (Au et al 1993). The report suggested that a numerical figure (as determined by traditional risk assessment methodologies) could be applied to the likelihood of an accident occurring and the consequences, in terms of severity of injury, if it did. A risk factor is then established by multiplying the likelihood figure by the consequence figure and the result transposed into high, medium or low risk. Risk treatments/interventions are then prioritised and developed accordingly.

Upton (2004; 2008) indicates that the likelihood x consequences model appears to be perfectly logical and that while it is possible to measure some risk in this fashion (eg: the integrity of structures or temporary structures), he suggest that a purely quantitative approach is insufficient to predict human behaviour. Upton (2008) notes that a numerical risk

assessment model was initially adapted from a commonly used industrial quantitative method intended to predict the possible failure rate of mechanical objects. The model was, therefore, developed by engineers to satisfy a political need to introduce a system that would fit health and safety legislation.

When dealing with crowd activity, awarding a numerical figure becomes the person opinion of the assessor rather than a scientific system of measurement. Another assessor might have a different opinion and, therefore, award a different number to the same activity. An added complication is the fact that an assessor may introduce any form of numbering they chose as there is no mandatory requirement to use the recommended system. Predictably, this can result in enormous confusion and a compete misunderstanding by different persons of the risk assessment results.



high risk, once again appears to be a logical system, until you consider that the lettering is interchangeable and that some promoters or venue owners/operators, in particular, categorise their events in reverse order. It follows, therefore, that the assessor needs to explain the methodology used to construct the assessment if confusion is to be avoided.

One year before Au published his second report recommending an alphabetical system, Toft (1996) had published a critique of the limits of mathematical modelling of disasters. Toft made a very important point when he argued that individuals create their own sets of criteria against which risk is interpreted. What he was emphasising was the fact that risk perceived by a given society or individual is not objective but rather quite subjective. In other words, individuals perceive risk differently. Consequently, some people enjoy so called dangerous sports while others regard them as high risk actions bound to lead to serious injury or even death. This is not to imply that the participant in a high-risk sport is unaware of any associated risk; rather that they feel they are in control and, therefore, able to manage this risk. However, the fatal accident record for outdoor music festivals and other concert and entertainment events around the world illustrates that crowd members are rarely in control of the factors that lead to serious injury or death.

However, this is not to say that a quantitative risk assessment process should be discarded. A quantitative approach considers systems that can be measured, such as space, pedestrian speed and flow, tolerance levels (temporary structures) venue design, staff training and communications. What needs to be added is a quantitative element which considers cultural risks.

Cultural risks in this context arise out of rock culture, which originated in the United States during the mid nineteen fifties and which, from the outset, was promoted as an

anti-establishment youth culture that deliberately encouraged a demonstrative response from a crowd. At contemporary concert events crowd excitement levels can be maintained and even increased by the clever use of lighting, sound, special effects, and even the actions of the artist(s), to a point where a crowd mass can often appear to act irrationally. Support for this argument can be found in the actions of a youth culture that now accepts irrationality in the form of moshing, skanking, crowd surfing and stage diving as normal cultural behaviour. The crowd at an outdoor music festival accepts such activities as normal in spite of the fact that each ahs the potential to cause a lateral or dynamic surge, a crowd swirl, crowd collapse or localised high density, all of which might possibly subject crowd members to a dangerously high-pressure load.

A key factor here is human emotion. Therefore, understanding, and accounting for, the variables that can influence the psychology of a crowd, and the extremes of behaviour that can result, become equally as important as understanding the laws of dynamics. My own experience of working with large crowds at outdoor music festivals confirms this view and I agree entirely with Sime (1993, 1995), who argues that a comprehensive approach to crowd safety design, management and risk assessment needs to integrate psychological and

engineering frames of reference.

There is somewhat of a tension here, as traditionally psychology and engineering are



I also believe that the time is conducive to developing a more strategic and holistic risk management framework. Over the last decade, the issues of safety and reliability have moved to the centre of both scientific and managerial interest. This is probably connected to an increasing interest in the broader concept of risk which ahs become a central theme in contemporary social science through the work of Ulrick Beck (1992) and Anthony Giddens (1990). While accidents were traditionally seen as ‘engineering failures” or “human error”, more recent approaches also identify and emphasise organisational conditions as an important determinant of the safety of organisations.

The reason for the increased interest in organisational factors is, of course, the prospect of building organisations that are able to control hazards in a satisfactory manner. The literature on safety management specifies a number of strategies which are meant to improve or maintain high levels of organisational safety. However, organisations are sometimes unable to move beyond specific ways of seeing and doing things. This rigidity may also manifest itself in organisations’ approaches to safety management. Antonsen, Ramstad and Kongsvik (2007) maintain that the factors behind such lock-in processes include traditional strategies which mange safety through a top-down perspective.

The report, Organising for Safety by the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (ACSNI 1993) is the first comprehensive review of the literature on

organisational safety (Hale & Hovden 1998). The report divides the history of attempts to regulate organisational safety into 3 phases, all of which can be found in organisations to varying degrees.

The first phase is largely a punishment-based approach and is characterised by what can be described as a ‘scapegoat mentality’. When an incident occurs, the main focus is to find someone responsible and have them punished. This approach tends to see accidents as the result of unsafe individual acts and pays little attention to whether the unsafe act has anything to do with systemic conditions. This approach is based on classical behaviourist psychology.

The second phase is characterised by what is labelled as “prescribing in advance” (ACSNI 1993:3) and may be called a bureaucratic approach. Detailed rules and work procedure are the main regulating devices in this approach, which is a firmly structural one. Safety is seen as a management responsibility, and as something that can and should be directed and controlled by management. The principles underlying this approach can be traced back to Heinrich (1931), but general management theories from the 1960s and 1970s also comprise a heavy influence (Haukelid 1999). The bureaucratic approach represents a development compared to the first phase, as it recognises the impact of organisational conditions on safety. It relies quite heavily on control-oriented actions, as it aims at achieving control through compliance oriented measures and policies (DeJoy 2005). The bureaucratic approach is the managerial method most frequently applied in order to improve or maintain organisations’ safety levels (Barling & Hutchinson 2000).

The Big Day Out response to the 2001 Sydney incident was firmly rooted within this bureaucratic approach. However, one needs to be careful that the focus on designing and maintaining the system does not become so all-consuming that the question of whether it works as intended is completely ignored.



tasks effectively. Problems occur when the scope of permitted actions shrinks to such an extent that violation of procedures becomes routine practice.

Another problem is that the procedures to ensure safe work operations from a lack of requisite variety. In virtually all hazardous operations, the variety of possible unsafe

behaviours is much greater than the variety of required productive behaviours. Therefore, the requisite variety of the procedures necessary to govern safe behaviours will always be smaller than the possible variety of unsafe situations.

The third problem is that often the procedures are developed by “experts” who are not involved at the operational level. Morgan (1986) argues that one of the most far-reaching consequences of the rational approach is that planning and pre-programming are separated from the people performing the work.

The third phase may be labelled the cultural approach, as it is characterised by an interest in the relationship between organisational culture and safety (commonly described as ‘safety culture’). This approach is conceived as a way of thinking that is fundamentally different to the previous phases – by moving beyond the setting of externally imposed criteria in the form of rules and regulations, emphasis is instead to be placed upon the more informal parts of the organisation, such as the climate or culture in work groups and contractors.

Glendon and Stanton (2000) introduce a useful distinction as they propose a further division of the cultural approach into 2 sub-categories – functionalist top-down approaches and interpretative bottom-up approaches. Their distinction is an important one, because only the interpretative approach represents a fundamental break with the traditional approaches to safety management.

The top-down perspectives see culture as something readily assessed and modified by managers. These perspectives continue the heavy emphasis on strong leadership inherent in the punishment-based and bureaucratic approaches to safety management. A great deal of existing research on safety culture rests on such top-down perspectives.

Fortunately, my involvement with Big Day Out and the other major events in which I have been involved is such that I am present while work is being undertaken and I can interact fairly readily and easily with workers and contractors undertaking the work. In the last 3-4 years, I have managed to move to this type of approach with a considerable number of the Big Day Out contactors involved in the preparation of the venue or the events (‘build’

contractors). I believe that this has been possible through deliberate relationship building with them. They, like me, are generally on site for 5-7 days prior to the event and it has been possible to engage with them fairly readily as I ‘supervise’ the site works. This allows me to operate “from the inside”, so to speak, being participative and adopting an action research methodology to make adjustments to safety practices as required. In this way, action research is a tool for achieving democratic social change at the workplace (Greenwood & Levin 1998).



somewhere between the bureaucratic and the top-down cultural approach. Engagement with them occurs prior and post event through debriefs, which include the emergency response and government agencies.

In recent years the research on safety culture has adopted a more bottom-up oriented perspective by drawing upon more advanced theories of organisational culture (eg: Guldenmund 2000; Gherardi & Nicolini 2000; Richter & Koch 2004). The bottom-up perspective does not exclude the role of managers in influencing cultures; it does imply, however, that safety cultures cannot be as easily changed as functionalist-oriented researchers and managers may wish.

Research within this framework is characterised by a more descriptive, rather than normative stance towards the study of culture. I agree with Waring and Glendon (1998) that this


Table 1 - Decision-making settings
Table 2 – types of decisions  Expected
Table 4 – The Project CIPP Evaluation Matrix
Table 5: Overview of the investigation methods  Research Question Hazard Identification


Related documents

They usually can take different shapes: plain old to more fluent Application Programming Interface (APIs) ; internal or embedded DSLs written inside an existing host language ;

boom in independent narrative formats informed by the editorial values and production expertise of public service media, and produced increasingly by breakaway former US public

Every employer, self-employed person and principal (including contractor and sub-contractor) must conduct a risk assessment in relation to the safety and health

LM test shows significant results across the three return series in table 6. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis of no ARCH effects. that capture the volatility effects

If dried with a convective jet, wool shows the typical behaviour of the low hygroscopic media: no zone at a constant drying rate is observed, while for

The results from the Cragg’s double hurdle model show that in the first hurdle, age, experience, access to credit and awareness positively influenced the decision to adopt

Message type - MMS Message of type: m-retrieve-conf: A message received by an MMS device containing MMS media content... – tag 0x96 is field ‘Subject’ with value:

[20] The bill, which died in committee last session, would have placed a one-year moratorium on the RAC permanent program in an effort to provide CMS with sufficient time