Bridging the Gap Between Safety Policy and Practice from Crisis to Control

A panel from WHS Show Melbourne 

Ian McLeod, Executive Director Strategic Safety – Victorian Infrastructure Delivery Authority  

Kurt Warren, Head of HSEQ & Sustainability – Hansen Yuncken  

Ingrid Fuentes, General Manager Network Safety & Risk – Energy QLD  

Brett Solomon, Principal Consultant – Sentis 

Moderator: Rae Bonney OAM, Workplace Mental Health, Safety & Wellbeing 

What does it truly mean to move from reactive crisis management to proactive safety leadership?

At the Workplace Health and Safety Show, a panel of seasoned professionals tackled this complex issue with raw honesty, deeply personal experiences, and practical advice for organizations ready to evolve. 

This was not a conversation about procedures for procedure’s sake. It was a challenge to reassess how organizations approach safety, beyond compliance checklists and surface-level controls. The key message was that culture, not paperwork, protects people. 

When compliance becomes a false sense of security 

Ian McLeod opened the session with a story that highlighted a common but dangerous misconception. He described visiting a depot where every safety policy had been dutifully documented and filed. Just two weeks later, the organisation suffered a fatality. 

This incident served as a stark reminder that having policies on paper is not the same as protecting people in practice. Ian warned that organisations which allow themselves to operate in a constant state of crisis, reacting to issues as they arise, are on a path to failure. The antidote is proactive planning and scenario mapping. 

He pointed to Boeing as a cautionary tale, where a cultural shift toward profitability over safety eventually led to tragic outcomes. In Ian’s view, leadership must do more than talk about safety. They must demonstrate commitment by allocating time, resources, and genuine attention to what matters most, human lives. 

Closing the gap between theory and reality 

Kurt Warren shared his experience investigating a fatal incident shortly after joining Hansen Yuncken. His reflection focused on the disconnect between “work as imagined” and “work as done.” While safety systems might look thorough on paper, they often fail to reflect what workers actually face on the ground. 

In the aftermath of the tragedy, Kurt’s team ran a simple yet powerful exercise. They asked workers what should be stopped, started, or continued. The responses revealed blind spots and barriers that leaders would have otherwise missed. This helped the company reshape its safety approach with greater accuracy and empathy. 

For Kurt, the core takeaway was that meaningful safety practices begin with listening. Without open, honest input from frontline workers, leaders risk building systems that are out of touch with reality. 

Understanding human limits under pressure 

Brett Solomon brought a behavioral lens to the discussion, highlighting the impact of stress, time pressure, and conflicting demands on safety-related decision-making. Even with the right policies in place, people under strain can make poor decisions. 

He noted that unless technology completely takes over human roles, a future he jokingly welcomed, organisations must account for the fact that people are not infallible. Systems should be designed to support better decision-making under pressure rather than relying on perfect compliance. 

Brett urged leaders to take cultural investment as seriously as they take physical controls. Most people want to act safely and do the right thing, but without the right environment and support, those good intentions can falter. 

Building a shared sense of responsibility 

Ingrid Fuentes reinforced the idea that safety is not the sole responsibility of the employer. While organisations must provide robust systems and clear guidance, employees also have a role in making sound decisions in real-world situations. 

She emphasised that the objective should not be to eliminate every risk, which is unrealistic, but rather to create environments where people are equipped and empowered to act safely and confidently. 

Ingrid also spoke to the challenges of dispersed and hybrid workforces. In these environments, trust, clarity, and vulnerability become even more important. Safety cannot be managed by hierarchy alone. It relies on open dialogue, mutual respect, and shared ownership. 

What should leaders do differently? 

To close the session, the panelists offered tangible advice for leaders who want to shift from crisis response to a culture of control and care. 

1. Moving beyond compliance. While audits and checklists have their place, they do not drive behavioural change. True transformation happens when safety practices align with values, not just rules. 
2. The focus must shift from metrics and actions to attitudes and mindsets. Changing what people do begins with changing how they think and feel about safety.
3. Leaders were encouraged to be more visible and present. By walking the floor, asking questions, and showing genuine curiosity, leaders signal that safety is a shared priority and not just a top-down directive.
4. Create channels for feedback was identified as essential. Listening is only part of the equation, leaders must also be prepared to act on what they hear and make visible changes in response.
5. The definition of leadership itself must evolve. Safety cannot live solely in the hands of managers or health and safety officers. It must be embedded across the organization, empowering every employee to take initiative and ownership.

Culture happens where the work happens 

Perhaps the most important insight from the panel was that culture does not live in strategy documents or boardroom slides. It is built day by day through everyday actions, honest conversations, and leadership that is willing to see the organisation as it truly is, not as they hope it is. 

To move from crisis to control, organisations must do more than react to the next incident. They must build systems and cultures that anticipate risk, invite participation, and value the human side of safety. 

This shift requires courage, commitment, and above all, connection. And it’s that connection between leadership, systems, and people that ultimately shapes a safer future.