How Metaphors of Organizational Accidents and Their Graphical Representations Can Guide (or Bias) the Understanding and Analysis of Risks.

Abstract

The history of safety science has seen the flourishing of several models and metaphors aimed at describing organizational accidents' dynamics. Metaphors and their graphical representations are powerful tools to frame risks and adverse events in socio-technical systems; they help in coping with systemic complexity but can also become a constraint and even bias the understanding of our environment. This paper aims to investigate how metaphors and their graphical representations influence the comprehension of organizational accidents, how they could be misinterpreted, and, as a result, generate misunderstandings of events. To address these questions, we analyze three paradigmatic accident causation models, typical of three phases in the evolution of models in the last century, describing how the related metaphors and depictions could influence the perception and understanding of risk factors. In addition, we present some possible misunderstandings that could be produced by the metaphor and graphical features of representations, with a particular focus on safety outcomes. Eventually, we provide a framework with the basic characteristics of an effective model and metaphor for the description and analysis of organizational accidents in modern complex socio-technical systems. This framework could be used as a guide for proposing new and more effective models in safety science.