The concept of safety culture was introduced to the nuclear industry in 1986, shortly after the disastrous accident at the Chernobyl Unit 4 in the Ukraine. The concept originated in the chemical industry, where it had been shown to enhance human performance by emphasizing the individual responsibili­ties of operators for the safe performance of the facility.

The International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group (INSAG) has issued two documents, INSAG-4 (1991) and INSAG-15 (2002), on the subject of safety culture. Safety culture is included as one of the important manage­ment principles (IAEA, 2006, p. 8). Safety culture has been defined many times in several different ways. On the other hand, the idea itself seems to be quite simple — it is a methodology intended to maximize human perform­ance. Figure 10.2 represents a cycle of human performance that we all can recognize. Some days we feel bright and confident, ready to deal with any situation that arises during our working day. On other days we feel that we are (almost) superhuman. Then, there are days when boredom sets in, and nothing seems to be worth doing. And lastly, there are days when we are unsure of our ability to perform any complex task in a competent fashion.

Now, imagine a group of people trying to complete a cooperative task. Some happen to be at the high point in their cycle and others at the low point. The supervisor’s job description says that he is to make the whole group perform in the upper-right quadrant of the cycle; that is, with safety and confidence. However, he or she is also human, and subject to the same cyclic behaviour.

If the group is ‘in sync’, and all are operating in the upper right quadrant, a great deal of valuable work can be done. But if the group is ‘in sync’ and all are at a low point in their personal cycles, then the whole group is inef­fective, and possibly unsafe.

The job descriptions often referred to as ‘senior management’ can exert a powerful influence on this success-failure cycle. They can consistently encourage staff to work up to their best potential and thereby tend to keep them in the high-performance category, or they can discourage staff by their own attitude, job performance, or opinions of their work groups they peri­odically express.

‘Safety culture’ refers, therefore, to a complex matter involving human behaviour in groups. Since human beings are by far the most complex element in any power plant, it is vital to study and maintain sound

methodologies and organizational infrastructure that work best within the larger social culture of the local community. This subject is at least as impor­tant to safe operations as are the hardware and equipment installed in the plant.