The Hidden Risks Right in Front of Us

A few moths ago, I found myself sitting in a darkened conference room in California, pen in hand, surrounded by fellow safety professionals, engineers, and leaders from across high-hazard industries. It was the kind of setting where big ideas often surface, but this time, it wasn’t the flashy new technology or catastrophic case studies that stayed with me.

It was the quiet, deliberate voice of organisational scientist Kathleen Sutcliffe reminding us that the biggest risks to safety may not be the ones we think.

This line, quoting from a New York Times piece by Jared Diamond, set the tone for her talk, and challenged us to reconsider our attention. Sutcliffe’s thesis was deceptively simple: if we want to advance safety and reliability, we must stop fixating on extreme, one-off events and instead build systems that help us notice and respond to the everyday signals we routinely overlook.

Beyond the Big Bang

In an industry obsessed with preventing black swan events, it was refreshing, and a bit uncomfortable, to hear a different framing. Sutcliffe didn’t deny the value of traditional risk management. But she warned of a dangerous imbalance:

Instead, Sutcliffe pointed to the patterns of mundane organisational failure that quietly sow the seeds for catastrophe. Her focus was on “organising,” not just “operations”, on the daily dynamics that make an organisation resilient, or not.

That line stuck with me. I’ve heard similar sentiments in my work on psychological safety and inclusion, ideas that leadership isn’t a one-time act, but an ongoing practice. Sutcliffe’s call to focus on the “daily drudgery” echoed that deeply.

The Power of Micro-Practices

Rather than offer a silver bullet, Sutcliffe outlined what she called a “bundle” of interconnected organisational practices that support vigilance and resilience. These included strong HR systems, heedful coordination, deliberate routines, and, most importantly, a culture of trust.

On HR, Sutcliffe highlighted four standout practices from her research into high-performing organisations:

It was an important reminder that equity and safety are intertwined. Sutcliffe noted that in surgical training, for example, women and people of colour often receive fewer opportunities to practise autonomously, meaning they have fewer chances to build capability before being judged.

As someone deeply embedded in equity conversations, I found this particularly validating. Safety isn’t just about systems, it’s about who gets to participate fully in them.

From Rescuing to Organising for Resilience

Perhaps the most compelling section of the keynote was Sutcliffe’s redefinition of “failure to rescue.” Rather than see safety as simply preventing things from going wrong, she invited us to reframe it as the capability to intervene effectively when things do.

This was not theoretical hand-waving. Sutcliffe pointed to hospitals with lower post-surgical mortality, not because they had fewer complications, but because they were better at recognising complications early and responding swiftly. That’s the power of organising for reliability: systems designed to adapt in real time.

That line landed hard. It made me think of all the moments when engineering teams or frontline workers have felt stuck, where constraints on autonomy or poorly designed feedback loops made it impossible to surface and solve problems in time. Sutcliffe’s work reminds us that capability shapes cognition.

Trust is Not a Soft Skill

The final cornerstone of Sutcliffe’s framework was perhaps the most critical: trust and respect. It’s a message we’ve heard increasingly in safety and inclusion circles, and Sutcliffe didn’t shy away from the science.

The implication is clear: psychological safety isn’t a “nice-to-have.” It’s a foundation for safe operations. Without trust, there is no learning. Without respect, there is no willingness to speak up. And without voice, the system becomes brittle, unable to respond in the moments that matter most.

The Fallacy of Centrality

One moment in her talk drew a quiet gasp in the room. Sutcliffe recalled sitting on a panel with a CEO of a major industrial conglomerate. His comment?

Her reaction, jaw dropped, said it all. But she used the story to illustrate a deeper concern: the “fallacy of centrality,” where senior leaders assume all is well simply because they haven’t heard otherwise.

It was a sobering reminder that silence is not safety. And that leadership requires active listening, not just to metrics, but to people.

A Dynamic, Daily Discipline

In closing, Sutcliffe called for a shift in language, from high reliability “organisations” to high reliability “organising.” The former is static. The latter, dynamic.

This emphasis on the moment-to-moment nature of safety resonated with me deeply. As someone who trains engineering leaders to build inclusive, psychologically safe cultures, I see the same patterns. It’s not enough to install a process or host a workshop. True change comes from the routines, interactions, and mindsets we reinforce daily.

It reminded me of the first time I heard the phrase, “every system is perfectly designed to get the results it gets.” Sutcliffe’s talk pushed that further. Every organisation is perfectly designed to miss the risks it refuses to see.

If we want to be safer, we must be more curious, more attentive, and more human.

See Mark in Action!