Safety of plant, equipment + people
Arjen de Bruin, Group CEO at OIM Consulting, says most mine safety incidents start with decisions taken under pressure, not machinery or conditions. OIM’s latest data confirms that behaviour is where safety holds or breaks. Behind most mine incidents
juggle administration, production pressure and constant interruptions. When a delay hits or something breaks, that pressure lands on the crew, and people move faster to keep the shift on track instead of sticking to the safest method. That’s how the paperwork ends up looking perfect but the work turns risky. So, safety paperwork is complete – but the hazard is still present. In one operation, for example, we saw one technician use the same shortcut repeatedly without consequence, and over time he began to treat it as normal. Once a shortcut works a few times, people start becoming reliant on it, and no amount of documentation pulls them back. Frontline supervisors influence safety more than any system on site. Under pressure, teamwork sits at 75%, which shows crews work well together. But receptiveness drops to 54% – a clear indication that many workers stop taking in guidance when they feel pressure. When instructions shift or conditions change, people push ahead with whatever feels familiar rather than adjusting to the safer option. Psychological fitness at 58% reinforces the point: workers manage a normal day, but once pressure rises, their ability to absorb information and make steady decisions thins out. That is when incidents happen. Supervisors hold the line Supervisors sit at the centre of this. Crews take their cues directly from the person leading them. When a supervisor explains the next step clearly and sets a workable pace, teams follow the safer path even when the shift goes off track. When a supervisor reacts sharply or rushes to recover time, the crew closes up as well. We see the difference in the numbers: coached supervisors record fewer incidents because their teams still listen, still raise concerns and still adapt safely when the plan breaks down. The path forward counts on mines moving from ‘safety as a system requirement’ to ‘safety as a personal standard’, where workers understand why rules matter, where people speak up without fear, where supervisors lead rather than enforce, and where behaviour is shaped through daily reinforcement. South Africa’s mines have come a long way in system compliance. The next frontier is behavioural capability. If we tackle that gap with the same intensity applied to engineering controls and documentation, the industry can make real progress, with fewer incidents and stronger crews. OIM is an experienced business consulting company in South Africa, specialising in organisational development, operations management and people management across mining, manufacturing, FMCG (fast moving consumer goods) and other sectors.
A ccording to de Bruin, South Africa’s mines still see injuries and fatalities for one dominant reason: human behaviour under pressure. OIM’s latest analysis, drawn from more than a decade of on-site data, shows that close to 80% of incidents occur as a result of human actions, and only 3% stem from unsafe conditions. That means most accidents occur even when equipment is sound and safety procedures are in place. They happen when stress, time pressure and split-second decisions override the rules. For years, the mining sector has been diligent about safety, although this has historically been seen by some as more of a box-ticking or compliance exercise. Procedures have been updated and equipment has improved, yet incidents still occur because the focus has in many instances been in the wrong place. OIM’s SafetyDNA data makes it clear that the real issue is behaviour under pressure – this is measured by how consistently workers apply safe habits during real operational demands. The scale runs from one to ten and reflects the strength of behaviour, not knowledge. Following the rules averages 7.74, which shows that crews understand what is required. But two indicators expose the real risk: risk aversion sits at 3.79, and emotional control at 5.26. These figures show that the moment a shift falls behind schedule or the plan changes without warning, people start cutting corners to regain momentum – and that is when accidents occur. When pressure hits underground Interviews across sites tell the same story. Workers know the rules, but they carry too much, and supervisors Arjen de Bruin, OIM Consulting.
For more information visit: https://oimconsulting.com/
22 Electricity + Control APRIL 2026
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker