Hiring the Wrong Safety People is a Risk

Originally published by Jessica Urquhart.

Hiring the wrong safety person is not a small issue, it is a business risk.

I have seen organisations invest heavily in systems, procedures and training, only to watch it unravel because the wrong person was placed in a safety role. Culture declines, trust disappears, workers become disengaged, leaders become frustrated and ultimately risk increases.

On the flip side, the right safety professional can transform a business. They build trust, simplify systems, improve decision-making and strengthen critical risk controls.

So how do you get it right?

The Real Risk of Hiring the Wrong Safety Person

Many organisations still hire safety people based on qualifications alone. Others hire based on personality or availability. Both approaches miss the point.

A poor safety hire can:

• Create a "policing" culture where workers feel monitored instead of supported
• Overcomplicate systems that should be simple and usable
• Focus on paperwork instead of real risk
• Fail to identify critical controls and high-consequence risks
• Damage leadership credibility and trust with workers
• Drive underreporting of incidents and hazards

This is where businesses go wrong. Safety is not compliance alone, it is operational risk management.

If your safety person cannot influence how work is actually done, they are not managing risk.

First Step: What Does Your Business Actually Need?

Before you even write a job description, you need clarity. Too many businesses expect one person to do everything:

• Systems
• Audits
• Training
• Risk Management
• Critical Control Management
• Investigations
• Field presence
• Culture improvement
• Data analysis and trending
• Reporting

That is not realistic. It is also why many safety roles fail.

Instead, define the role based on your needs:

WHS Coordinator

• Systems, administration and documentation
• Maintaining registers and procedures
• Supporting compliance requirements

Safety Officer

• Front-line, field-based presence
• Monitoring work practices
• Supporting supervisors and workers

Safety Advisor

• Incident response and learning
• Delivering training and toolbox talks
• Supporting implementation of safety initiatives

If you expect a single safety officer to manage systems, training, investigations, audits and culture in a high-risk, high-incident workplace, you will be constantly reacting instead of improving.

A better approach is separation:

• Field-based roles focused on real work and risk
• Administrative and analytical roles focused on systems and improvement

NOTE: Avoid adding "Risk" to a role title unless the person has demonstratable skills and qualifications in Risk Management. Basic risk management (SLAM, Take 5, JSEA) is not the same as Critical Risk Management for fatal risks and critical control management. Developing risk bowties and developing critical control systems is a specialised skill.

This is how mature organisations create stability and progress.

What to Look for in a High-Quality Safety Professional

Qualifications matter, but they are not enough. You are looking for capability.

Core Technical Capability

A strong safety professional should be able to:

• Develop and maintain practical WHS systems
• Conduct audits that identify real gaps, not just checklist compliance
• Lead or support incident investigations with clear outcomes
• Build and manage risk registers that reflect real operational risk
• Deliver engaging training and inductions
• Understand critical topics such as:
  • Mobile equipment interactions
  • Fires and hazardous chemicals
  • Working at heights
  • Confined spaces
  • Emergency management
  • First aid and response
  • Critical controls

Critical Behavioural Skills

The best safety professionals consistently demonstrate:

• Strong communication with both workers and executives
• Integrity in decision-making, even when it is uncomfortable
• Empathy and the ability to understand operational pressures
• Clear, professional written communication
• A sense of urgency when managing risk
• The ability to triage competing priorities

If your safety person cannot influence people, they cannot influence risk.

Challenge Testing: How to Separate Real Capability from Theory

Interviews should not be conversational only, they should test thinking. Here are some practical ways to challenge candidates:

1. Terminology and Understanding

Ask: "What is the difference between a hazard and a risk?" "What is a critical control?"

Then follow up with: "Give me an example from your experience."

You are looking for application, not textbook answers.

2. Risk Appetite and Decision-Making

Ask: "How do you determine if a risk is acceptable?" "When would you stop work?"

This reveals how they think under pressure and whether they understand organisational risk tolerance.

3. Legislative Knowledge

Ask: "What are the key duties of a PCBU?" "How do you apply 'reasonably practicable' in a real scenario?"

Then give a scenario and ask them to apply it. Anyone can quote legislation, very few can apply it.

4. Scenario-Based Testing

Give them a realistic situation: "A worker bypasses a control to get the job done quicker. What do you do?"

Watch for:

• Do they jump straight to discipline?
• Do they explore why the behaviour occurred?
• Do they consider system failures?

This is where you identify "policing" behaviour versus real risk thinking.

The "Safety Police" Problem

"Police-style" safety professionals are not effective.

They:

• Focus on catching people doing the wrong thing
• Rely on rules instead of understanding risk
• Create fear instead of trust
• Miss the underlying causes of incidents

And most importantly, they do not improve safety outcomes.

Effective safety professionals:

• Work with people, not against them
• Understand how work is actually performed
• Focus on critical risks and controls
• Influence behaviour through respect and credibility

If your safety person is not trusted, your systems will fail regardless of how good they look on paper.

The Consequences of Poor Safety Advice

Poor safety advice does not just create inefficiency, it can directly contribute to incidents.

Across multiple high-profile events, investigations have shown that risks were often known, but not effectively managed. Controls were either not in place, not working, or not verified.

This is where ineffective safety capability becomes a real business risk.

When safety professionals focus on paperwork instead of critical controls, or fail to escalate serious risks, organisations can develop a false sense of security. Leaders believe risks are being managed, while in reality, critical gaps remain.

Specialist Skills You Should Not Assume

This is another common mistake. Many organisations assume their safety hire can manage:

• Contractor management
• Psychosocial risk
• Project risk
• Change management
• Critical control management

These are specialist disciplines. If they are critical to your business, you have two options:

• Invest in targeted training and development
• Outsource to specialists when required

A Smarter Hiring Strategy

If you want to avoid costly mistakes:

• Define the role clearly based on business needs
• Separate field and system responsibilities where possible
• Test real capability, not just knowledge
• Prioritise behavioural skills as much as technical skills
• Do not expect one person to do everything
• Invest in ongoing development

This is how you build a safety function that actually reduces risk.

Final Thought

Hiring a safety professional is not about filling a position, it is about influencing how risk is understood, managed and controlled across your entire organisation. Get it wrong, and you will feel it quickly. Get it right, and it will quietly transform everything.

Before you hire your next safety professional, ask yourself: have you clearly defined what your business actually needs, or are you about to hire another role that will be set up to fail?

Hiring the wrong safety people is a risk and the longer the wrong person is in the role, the greater the risk becomes.