8.2 Learning Theory

Learning the process wherein we acquire knowledge and skills that can lead to behavioural change—is an important outcome of training. As we saw in the discussion of social construction in Chapter 1, our behaviours are often shaped by our assumptions about the world. OHS training is no different: we each have a theory (albeit perhaps incomplete and poorly articulated) about how “best” to teach others. Over time, educational theorists have identified several different approaches to training.  These learning theories are conceptual frameworks that describe how learners absorb, process, and retain information. These descriptions of learning often contain prescriptions about how to teach. Two learning theories that are broadly used to structure OHS training are behaviourism and social cognition.

Behaviourism asserts that attaching rewards and punishments to specific worker actions can shape how workers behave. In effect, workers can be conditioned to act in desired ways via positive and negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement is essentially rewarding a worker when the worker demonstrates a desired behaviour in order to elicit further instances of the desired behaviour. Negative reinforcement  is removing some sort of undesirable stimulus (such as no longer yelling at the worker) when a worker demonstrates a desired behaviour. (Negative reinforcement is different from punishment, wherein undesired behaviour results in sanctions.) Over time, behaviourism asserts, workers begin to exhibit the desired behaviour even when there is no more positive or negative reinforcement.^[1]

The value of behaviourism is that it draws our attention to the fact that rewards and punishment affect learning and that this effect occurs both during and after the training process. For example, we might train workers to always walk around a vehicle to look for hazards or dangerous conditions prior to entering the vehicle and starting it up. This training may require positive reinforcement (e.g., praise) or punishment (e.g., discipline if the worker is observed not doing a walk-around). More importantly, behaviorism tells us that, if workers who act in accordance with their training are mocked by co-workers or hassled by their supervisor for holding up the delivery process, it is unlikely that the workers will continue to do vehicular walk-arounds. This suggests that training may need to also address workplace cultural practices if we want the training to be effective.

Social Cognition theory asserts that learning occurs through observation and imitation and thus through formal and informal interactions with others. The social learning process typically begins by workers observing how others act and the consequences of those actions. Workers may then emulate safety behaviours that appear successful for others, assuming the worker has the confidence and skill necessary to perform these actions. Box 8.3 highlights the time and support that are sometimes necessary for workers to successfully emulate safety behaviours and the need for workers to adapt such behaviours to the continually changing demands of work.

Social cognition theory also suggests workers are often able to manage their own safety behaviours through self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-rewarding.^[2] This belief in worker self-regulation stands in contrast to the external regulation emphasized in behaviourism. Behaviourism’s emphasis on external regulation of workers’ behaviours (i.e., workers cannot be trusted to act safely) sometimes harkens back to the negative views of workers embodied in the careless worker myth that we read about in Chapter 1.

More generally, learning theories draw our attention to the fact that training is not done to employees, but rather requires their participation. Consequently, the effectiveness of training is enhanced when it is developed with workers’ interests and preferences in mind. For example, an organization may provide WHMIS training primarily to comply with legislative requirements. Workers may be more engaged by the training if it is presented as a way to reduce their risk of injury from hazardous materials and is delivered using training methods that are both practical and interesting.

Skilled trainers also recognize that workers may have both vocational (i.e., job-related) and non-vocational goals when participating in training. Some workers may see training as a way to advance their careers or interact socially with co-workers, or simply as a novel experience. Creating room for workers to meet their non-vocational goals may increase their engagement with the job-related material. One way to better address the needs of workers is to involve workers in the development of the OHS training they must take.

As in other aspects of OHS, competing workplace interests shape training. Employers are conscious of productivity and the cost of training, and so they will prefer training that delivers the information quickly, inexpensively, and with minimal impact on production or service delivery. As noted above, workers’ interests in training are more varied. Union-sponsored safety education is normally the only alternative source of OHS training available to workers.