Premortem method - a simple and (probably) effective approach to strengthening the safety culture

I have written this article in an attempt to improve workplace culture – or safety culture – which all too often ends up in mere information dumps or trivial e-learning courses.

For example, many courses sound like this:

“Before you perform a task, you must:

1. Stop
2. Think about it.
3. Make a risk assessment
4. “Shop safely”*

The goal is of course good.

The problem is that almost no one actually uses this mental checklist in pressured or routine situations where you need to solve a task "just quickly".

We don't make mistakes on purpose – but simply conveying information does not guarantee that we will remember or apply it in practice.

Culture is the sum of behavior.

And safety culture is the sum of safe actions.

So if the goal is to ensure good behavior on the construction site, why not try an alternative path – a method that helps us detect and correct hazards before they become accidents?

This is where the premortem method comes into play.

Originally developed in project management to spot errors in a project before it really goes wrong, the method involves imagining that the project has already ended in failure – and then uncovering the possible reasons why it went wrong.

We know from cognitive psychology that this “prospective” approach helps identify more potential problems than if we simply ask: “What could go wrong?”

In the following, I will review how premortem is typically performed and how it – possibly under a new name such as “Troubleshooter” or “3-2-1 check” – can be transferred to a construction site.

The idea is admittedly untested, but is based on promising principles and research from other high-risk areas.

Perhaps this is precisely the practical method that can bring daily behavior to life rather than drowning employees in even more rules, information dumps, and “to-do lists.”

Classic premortem – step by step

1. Introduction of the project
   The project manager explains the goal, schedule, and roles to everyone involved.
2. Imagine failure
   Participants must imagine that the project has already gone wrong – the budget has slipped, the schedule is not being met, or critical errors have occurred.
3. Identify causes
   Each participant describes the factors that could have led to failure: Poor communication, too tight a deadline, lack of resources, etc.
4. Discussion and prioritization
   The most important points are collected, discussed and measures are decided to prevent errors.
5. Follow-up
   At later meetings, you check whether the identified risks are being handled.

"3-2-1 Check" or "Troubleshooter" on the construction site

Although the premortem method was not created for the construction industry, I believe it can be relatively easily incorporated into daily routines – for example, in the short “Toolbox meetings” where the manager usually instructs employees on the day’s tasks. The method can be shortened and given a more colloquial name such as “Troubleshooter” or “3-2-1 Check”, so that it becomes a natural part of the safety briefing:

1. New name, same principle
   Call the exercise “Troubleshooter” or “3-2-1 Check” so it is easy to remember and not too theoretical.
2. Present today's task
   The manager explains what needs to be done – for example, a special lift, scaffolding work or concrete shaping. Just like normal.
3. 3-2-1 check
   Give everyone a minute to imagine that you started the task and something went wrong. The leader says 3-2-1 check, after which everyone points out literally or metaphorically the cause of the accident: Is it time pressure? Lack of instruction in new tools? Bad signage? Myself? A colleague?
4. Short round and adjust
   Each person says a few words about why they pointed there. Together, you identify any changes before you start.
5. Reward the best solution: You could consider voting on who pointed out the “best” problem to create an incentive to come up with good answers. The effect of this should be tested.

Use your existing “Toolbox meeting”
As mentioned, the exercise can be done in a few minutes as an integrated part of the daily briefing, where the manager normally instructs employees on safety procedures and the task at hand. It requires minimal extra time.

Why do I think it works?

• Breaking the optimism bias
  When you assume that the project has already gone wrong, it becomes easier – and more legitimate – to think critically. You look at the situation with new eyes and dare to ask the questions you would otherwise keep to yourself.
  (Gary Klein, 2007. Performing a Project Premortem, Harvard Business Review)
• Prevents excessive optimism
  Classic “let’s see what could go wrong” exercises often end in a common consensus that it’s unlikely to happen to us. But by starting with the assumption that something has already gone wrong, it suddenly becomes real: Something actually went wrong – what was it?
• Make hazards visible
  Whether the problem is poor instruction, lack of time, or “a little shortcut,” pointing it out together becomes legitimate and harmless. It creates a language for the problems before they arise.
• Increases openness
  It is becoming socially acceptable to say: “I actually think that the schedule is our enemy,” or “I’m afraid that I might slouch when we’re under pressure.” Instead of pointing fingers at the accident, you can take the conversation forward – and find solutions in time.
• Creates shared responsibility and social obligation
  When the entire team participates in identifying risks, a collective commitment is created. It becomes harder to ignore the problems later, because they have just been collectively acknowledged. No one can say afterwards, “I had no idea,” when they were the ones who pointed it out five minutes earlier.
• Easy to learn and use
  Instead of another long e-learning module on rules and procedures, you can show a short video of someone doing a premortem exercise – and you’re off and running. It doesn’t require much explanation, but can have a big impact.

An alternative (or supplement) to long courses

In construction, e-learning and physical safety courses are quite common. But the reality is that much of the theory is often forgotten in practice. With a daily or weekly “Troubleshooting” routine in your Toolbox meetings, you get more hands-on action.

We haven’t seen the premortem method tested on a large scale on construction sites yet, but similar approaches have been used in high-risk industries like aviation and healthcare – precisely because they want to uncover potential errors before they happen. There is therefore good reason to believe that the construction industry can also benefit from the method.

Summary

The pre-mortem method is known from project management, where it is used to ensure that project pitfalls are identified early. It can apparently be transferred to the construction site world and strengthen the safety culture by making it a permanent habit to anticipate possible errors and accidents.

• It takes just a few minutes and can be linked directly to an existing Toolbox meeting.
• It reduces our natural tendency to believe that “it will work out” every time.
• It is easy to introduce – perhaps via a two-minute video that demonstrates the principle.
• It creates an open dialogue about what can actually go wrong, rather than simply repeating rules.

By making pre-mortem (or “Troubleshooter”/“3-2-1 check”) an integrated part of your routines, you can jointly correct potential pitfalls before damage occurs – and thus create a more robust, practical and probably more effective safety culture.

Research and sources on the effect of premortem

1. Gary Klein (2007): “Performing a Project Premortem”
• Harvard Business Review
• Gary Klein, a renowned cognitive psychologist, introduced the premortem method in earnest in an article in the Harvard Business Review. He describes how “prospective hindsight” (looking back from a hypothetical, future failure) can double the amount of risks identified compared to traditional risk assessments.
• Link to the article (in English)
2. Daniel Kahneman and “Prospective Hindsight”
• Kahneman (Nobel Prize winner in economics) and colleagues have repeatedly emphasized that the human brain is typically too optimistic when it comes to anticipating potential problems. The method of imagining failure in advance (“prospective hindsight”) forces us to break with this optimism bias.
• See, for example, Kahneman's book Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011), where he discusses how various cognitive biases prevent us from seeing future mistakes.
3. NASA's “Murder Board” and similar methods
• NASA has a long tradition of using “prelaunch reviews” and “murder boards,” where you assume something will go wrong and investigate every possible weakness. These methods are related to premortems and have been shown to be effective in improving safety.
• Although not always called 'premortem', the principles are based on the same logic of imagining the worst-case scenario and then finding the causes.
4. Behavioral Science and Behavioral Design
• Robert Cialdini & Noah Goldstein (2004): Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity . This discusses, among other things, how by making a commitment in front of colleagues (e.g. by pointing out possible mistakes) one gets a stronger motivation to actually avoid them.
• Although it is not directly about premortem, it supports the idea of making potential errors visible and sharing them openly in a group.
5. Project management and premortem
• Project Management Journal and other professional publications in the field of project management regularly feature articles on how premortems can reduce errors because project teams systematically uncover risks. Example: Greenberg, Harvey R. (2009). “Emancipatory Potential of the Project Post-mortem: A Case for a 'Premortem' in Project Management.”