The Unintended Consequences of No Blame Ideology for Incident Investigation in the US Construction Industry
A discourse analysis of 34 simulated incident investigation interviews with construction safety experts, which identified an unexpected phenomenon the authors term 'New Blame'. Dogmatic no-blame ideology, rather than eliminating blame, redirects it: interviewers become reluctant to explore the actions and decisions of the people involved and instead focus attention on inanimate objects, paperwork, and organizational procedures — things that can be blamed without interpersonal consequence. At its extreme, New Blame returns incident investigation to something resembling Acts of God: diffuse, faceless systemic factors that no-one is responsible for and nothing can be learned from. The study emerged as an accidental finding within a larger project on cognitive bias in investigative interviews. The practical implication: no-blame, if implemented dogmatically and in isolation from restorative justice frameworks, can be as much a barrier to learning as retributive blame — just a different kind of barrier.
Save this paper to a bibliography, keep notes on it, and export citations. Create a free account →
Neighbours (13)
- From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper
- Human Error: Models and Management
- Independent Review on the Care Given to Mrs Elaine Bromiley
- Local Rationality
- The Criminalization of Human Error in Aviation and Healthcare: A Review
- The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process
- Why Hospitals Don't Learn from Failures: Organizational and Psychological Dynamics That Inhibit System Change
- A Question of Trust
- Blametropism
- HOP
- Just Culture
- PSIRF
- WAI vs WAD