When talk isn’t cheap: Language and safety In two states’ human services

This paper integrates the concepts of first and second stories as well as Symbolic Interactionism and provides a framework that emphasizes the local rationality of practitioners and the social construction of meaning within their organizations. This paper will first consider some of the assumptions that characterize today’s safety discourse(s) because they inform how CS works with clients. What Symbolic Interactionism provided here is not the basis for any kind of evaluative project. What it did instead is create opportunities for staff narratives, interactions, and cultural interpretations to become visible and available for analysis and interpretation. Then, using qualitative methods, this paper tracks how formative practices surrounding several safety interventions in the human service organizations in two states led to shifts in how staff talk about accidents and work. This helped us better appreciate how professional work is enacted, negotiated, and legitimatized by individuals in social and organizational contexts. Using first and second stories for example has revealed some of what these practitioners had previously taken for granted regarding critical work incidents. Through the lens of first and second stories, informant knowledge could be elicited about authority, responsibility and safety. This can help move safety interventions beyond the normative and enable us to address issues like the place hierarchy, power and professionalism have in the modern workplace.