This comment is from a group of directors I was chatting to at a conference. They are all from different industries, and they all say the same thing. So much information, not enough insight on what to do with it. Dashboards. Reports. Metrics. Updates. It never stops, does it? When it's time to make an informed decision...there's an uncomfortable pause where nobody is quite sure what the data is telling them. I'm living this dream right now. We have 2 new principals in my workplace. Both super keen to understand what's really happening. Both going in completely different directions trying to make sense of the same information. It's equal parts fascinating and frustrating to watch. All the best for this week folks. I definitely need it. Don't get too lost in all the data.

Spent some time on YouTube recently, and I'm looking forward to sharing something new with you. I've also changed the name of the community to better reflect what we're about. CrewFusion Safety Leadership. What do you think? First up, a video on why an RAF aircraft crash that occurred back in 2006 is showing the same failure patterns in incidents today. I actually took some of these concepts into work this week and dropped them in front of senior leadership. Wasn't sure how it'd land, but it resonated more than I expected. A few of the seven findings mapped straight onto conversations they'd already been having. Good reminder that a twenty-year-old investigation can still hold up a mirror to what's happening right now. Hope you're all doing well. Good to be back...again. More soon. Easty

G’day everyone! Yes, it’s been awhile since I’ve posted. It’s great to be back. I’m out in Junee this week doing some WHS training with a team of grateful, down to earth people. It’s a beautiful little town. Some of the safety concepts that we’ve brought up have met some stone walls and I’d love your advice on how to knock some of those walls down. What do you do when an organisation is overlooking some sections of the law and disregarding that people’s health as a result? This question relates to testing the hearing of your team that works in high noise zones. In order to help the team out, how would you attack it from a leadership point of view to give these teams the skills to go to their managers to query why a noise program doesn’t exist?

I want to introduce you to a crazy word. Recrudescence. Sounds like something you'd need a prescription for, right? Or maybe a villain in a sci-fi film. Probably best if you don't use it in general conversation. People might think you're a little weird. Despite the fact that no one ever uses this term, it's actually one of the most important concepts in organisational safety. I somehow managed to tie it onto my latest YouTube video. It means the return of something dangerous that you thought was gone. Not a new failure. An old one. Quietly coming back through the cracks while nobody was watching. In 2024, NASA space junk from a battery pallet, discarded from the ISS back in 2021, crashed through a family's roof in Florida. Imagine that. Having a piece of the space station crash into your lounge room. The formal investigation that followed was pretty slack, considering how big NASA is and how scary the consequences could have been. They produced 4 PowerPoint slides for the formal investigation. Four. Compare that to the post-Challenger report. The post-Columbia report. The depth, the rigour, the organisational honesty those investigations demanded. The scary thing about recrudescence isn't the event. It's the slow, invisible erosion that made the event possible. Skills fade. Standards quietly drop. Nobody decides to do less. It just becomes the norm. Until a piece of space hardware falls through someone's living room ceiling. Have you seen recrudescence happen in your own organisation, even if you didn't have a word for it at the time? Here's my example. I just watched a large company stop using a really awesome piece of programming software that had heaps of functionality, and go back to using Excel spreadsheets. The only reason they stopped using it? The contract was up for renewal, and the software company charged too much. They added one too many zeros, so the company has gone back to the 90's to try to manage a really complex system. It's a set-up for failure. Something is going to be missed.