Organizations committed to protecting the whole worker and improving their experience are becoming more aware of the benefits of integrating psychological health and safety (PHS) into their occupational health and safety (OHS) programs or systems.

The reality is, we can’t meaningfully separate the mind from the body, culture from compliance or psychological safety from operational safety.

The challenge isn’t philosophical; it’s practical.

How do you design systems that prevent physical and psychological harm?
How do you identify hazards that affect human performance across both domains?
How do you move beyond blame- and behaviour-based approaches to changing the conditions that set workers up for failure?

Human and organizational performance principles (HOPP) offer one option

HOPP is a framework for understanding how people behave in work environments and for designing systems that prevent harm. It starts with a basic truth: people are fallible, and errors are predictable. Instead of trying to “fix” workers, HOPP focuses on shaping conditions, workflows and culture so that mistakes don’t lead to serious consequences.

HOPP focuses on human factors, system design and learning cultures. Its core idea is that when organizations understand how people work within systems, they move beyond siloed programs towards an integrated prevention strategy that strengthens both physical and psychological safety.

HOPP offers a shared language and operating philosophy that allows OHS practitioners to address psychosocial hazards alongside physical ones systematically.

HOPP’s five core principles are:

Error is normal.
Blame fixes nothing.
Context drives behaviour.
Learning is vital.
Leaders’ responses to failure matter.

When HOPP is done well, the outcome is a workplace where:

Systems support safe behaviours, rather than relying on perfect human performance.
Leaders and workers learn from everyday work, not just from incidents.
Accountability means improving conditions, not blaming individuals.
Weak signals are surfaced early because people feel safe reporting what’s not working.

PHS aligns naturally with HOPP. Just as HOPP aims to reduce the likelihood that human error results in physical harm, PHS aims to reduce the likelihood that workplace pressures, behaviours, or conditions result in psychological harm. Both share the same prevention mindset: build environments where harm is less likely by design.

In short, HOPP strengthens operational reliability, while PHS strengthens emotional and psychological well-being through a system approach that promotes two-way accountability between employers and employees. Together, they form a unified prevention strategy that protects the whole worker.

OHS protects the body.
PHS protects workers from psychological harm and injury and promotes mental health.
HOPP protects the conditions under which people think, act, decide and perform.

How HOPP bridges physical and psychosocial hazard management

HOPP provides a bridge between traditional OHS practice and PHS implementation as they share a systems-based prevention philosophy. Both recognize that the same organizational factors, workload, job design, communication patterns and leadership behaviours influence physical and psychological safety outcomes.

When applied together, HOPP provides the human factors methodology while PHS provides the psychosocial hazards framework, creating a comprehensive approach to workplace safety. Together, they create a comprehensive approach that protects the whole worker.

Many physical incidents have psychological precursors, including stress, fatigue, distraction, moral distress, low trust and fear of reporting. Similarly, many psychosocial harms are shaped by operational realities such as workload, staffing, job design and role clarity. When organizations fail to integrate the two sets of factors, they see only part of the causal chain. HOPP creates a unified lens to see the connection, looking not only at what could happen, but also at the working conditions, system design and organizational context that shape performance and behaviour.

When organizations apply PHS and HOPP principles, hazard identification becomes more comprehensive, capturing physical exposures and psychosocial factors.
Controls are better matched to the proper causal and contributing factors.
The hierarchy of controls can be applied to psychosocial hazards as well as physical ones.
Learning reviews generate richer insights that prevent recurrence.
Psychological safety increases, which strengthens physical safety outcomes. Employees report hazards, speak up, engage in problem-solving and remain adaptable under pressure.

HOPP’s core contribution: Human factors as a common language

HOPP does not replace OHS or PHS; it provides an opportunity to connect them by reframing how organizations understand human behaviour and system performance. Both physical and psychological hazards influence human performance. HOPP emphasizes:

System design
Task demands
Environmental conditions
Cognitive load
Decision context
Operational pressure

These are shared determinants of both physical and psychological harm.

The culture shift

HOPP shifts organizations from:

Asking “Who is at fault?” to “What set the person up for failure?”
Relying on compliance to designing for variability and resilience.
Punitive responses to curiosity and learning.

This shift enables improvements in both physical and psychological safety.

Practical coaching tips to help OHS and PHS leaders work as one

For organizations striving to protect the whole worker, alignment between OHS and PHS is no longer optional; it’s essential. The following coaching tips can help leaders break down silos, adopt a shared prevention mindset, and build systems in which physical and psychological safety reinforce each other. When done well, this alignment reduces harm, improves learning and strengthens operational reliability and employee well-being.

1. Start with a shared purpose

Agree that physical and psychological safety are inseparable elements of human well-being and operational excellence. Create a joint mission statement or shared charter to reinforce this common commitment.

2. Use a unified assessment approach

Integrate audits, risk assessments, and learning reviews so physical and psychosocial hazards are captured in a single process.

Examples:

Apply HOPP-based learning reviews that explore context, system factors and organizational behaviour for all incidents.
Embed psychosocial hazard identification into existing OHS risk assessments using the same job hazard analysis process.
Use HOPP learning reviews that examine physical and psychosocial system factors simultaneously, asking not just “What happened?” but also “What conditions made this likely?

3. Build joint capability

Develop cross-functional understanding.

Train OHS professionals in human factors, psychological safety, and core PHS concepts, including psychosocial factors, trauma-informed practice, and psychological hazard assessment.
Train HR/PHS professionals in operational realities, hazard controls (including the hierarchy of controls) and learning reviews.
Offer cross-functional shadowing to build empathy and shared understanding.

4. Shift leadership mindsets together

Coach leaders to:

Respond with curiosity instead of blame
View human error as information, not failure
Model psychological safety consistently
Ask better questions, such as:
- “What conditions shaped this decision?”
- “Where did the system fail the worker?”

5. Co-design controls and interventions

Move away from HR “programs” and OHS “procedures.” Instead, design integrated controls using the hierarchy of controls framework:

Workload redesign (elimination/substitution)
Leadership competencies and accountability systems (engineering/administrative controls)
Clear role expectations and decision-making authority (administrative controls)
Standardized team communication practices (administrative controls)
Supportive supervision models (administrative controls)
Fatigue management systems (administrative controls)

6. Align around integrated OHS and PHS indicators

Track indicators that reflect physical and psychological safety:

Lead indicators:

Reporting rates for all hazard types (physical and psychosocial)
Time from report to resolution
Percentage of reports resulting in system changes
Participation in learning reviews
Psychological safety, climate scores
Error reporting patterns
Hazards resolution timeliness

Lag indicators:

Absenteeism and turnover trends
Uptake of early intervention resources
Lost-time injury rates and psychological injury claims

Shared metrics support data-driven collaboration and help teams stay aligned with what matters most: preventing harm.

The transformation begins with a mindset shift: stop separating the...

Talent Canada

Message History

Delivery option(s)