Psychosocial Safety: Applying Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Theory Across High-Risk and Complex Industries
As organisations across industries increasingly recognise the importance of psychosocial safety—the protection of employees’ mental and emotional well-being—many are realising that addressing this challenge requires more than isolated policy changes. Drawing from Socio-Technical Systems (STS) theory, organisations can take a more holistic and sustainable approach that balances the interdependencies between people, processes, and technology.
When considering psychosocial safety, I often reflect on the work I’ve done with diverse industries globally, including mining, oil & gas, manufacturing, healthcare, defence, and professional sport across regions such as the US, Australia, Latin America, India, and Europe. These industries, characterised by high-risk environments and complex operational ecosystems, demand a nuanced understanding of both technical processes and the human systems that interact within them.
Socio-Technical Systems (STS) and Psychosocial Safety
STS theory, first developed by Eric Trist and the Tavistock Institute in the 1950s (and advanced by academics and practitioners like William Pasmore), highlights that organisations are open systems comprising two interdependent subsystems:
The Technical System: Refers to the tools, processes, and technologies used to perform tasks.
The Social System: Encompasses people, relationships, cultures, and structures that influence how work is done.
When these systems are misaligned, stress, confusion, and uncertainty arise—leading to increased psychosocial risk. Conversely, when properly designed, STS can create a balanced work environment where employees feel supported, engaged, and safe.
Applying STS to Mitigate Psychosocial Risk: Key Insights from Global Practice
As a Visiting Fellow at The Australian National University, every year I teach a course on Organisational Development and Change. last year, I had the opportunity to guide my students through a mid-term project exploring how organisational theory and frameworks can be applied to enhance psychosocial safety. Their findings reinforced what I’ve seen in practice—real transformation happens when organisations recognise and optimise the interaction between people and technology in their operational environments.
In my work across high-risk industries over the past decades, I’ve seen first-hand how STS principles can mitigate psychosocial hazards by addressing the following key dimensions:
1. Job Design and Role Clarity
Poorly designed work processes or ambiguous roles contribute to role conflict, ambiguity, and workload stress.
Through STS, organisations can redesign workflows to align job roles with individual capabilities, reducing uncertainty and enabling autonomy.
Case Example: In the oil & gas sector, optimising shift handovers using STS-based analysis reduced communication gaps, lowering operational stress and decision fatigue.
2. Decision-Making Empowerment
Empowering frontline workers with decision-making authority can mitigate feelings of helplessness and disengagement, a key contributor to psychosocial harm.
Case Example: In a high-risk mining project, decentralising operational decision-making and empowering autonomous workgroups improved both safety outcomes and employee engagement.
3. Communication and Trust
Transparent communication and psychological safety are essential for surfacing concerns and building trust.
STS-based interventions ensure that feedback loops between management and employees are continuous, fostering an open environment where issues are identified early.
Case Example: In the manufacturing industry, implementing continuous improvement feedback systems empowered workers to voice safety concerns, reducing near-miss incidents.
4. Technology Adoption and Change Management
Rapid technological change without adequate support leads to technostress and decreased well-being.
STS theory emphasises participatory design—involving end-users in system design—to ensure that technology serves as an enabler rather than a stressor.
Case Example: In the healthcare sector, involving clinicians in the design of an electronic health records (EHR) system improved adoption rates and reduced implementation fatigue.
STS and ISO 45003: Strengthening Psychosocial Safety Compliance
Organisations operating in high-risk environments often face compliance obligations under ISO 45003, the international standard for managing psychosocial risks. Leveraging STS principles ensures that compliance goes beyond documentation by embedding psychosocial safety into the fabric of the organisation.
Hazard Identification: An STS lens helps identify systemic causes of psychosocial hazards.
Risk Mitigation: Proactively addressing misalignments between social and technical systems reduces psychosocial harm.
Monitoring and Continuous Improvement: STS-driven continuous feedback ensures that risks are mitigated dynamically over time.
From Theory to Practice: Global Impact
Over the years, I’ve had the privilege of applying STS principles across diverse industries. The outcomes consistently highlight that addressing psychosocial safety through STS principles leads to:
✅ Increased workforce engagement ✅ Reduced operational errors and fatigue ✅ Improved trust and communication ✅ Enhanced organisational resilience
Reflections and Future Directions
As I reflect on my experience and the insights gained from guiding my clients and students, it’s clear that the integration of STS theory with psychosocial safety practices is no longer optional—it’s imperative. For organisations operating in high-stakes industries, fostering a psychosocially safe environment is a strategic advantage that enhances both employee well-being and operational performance.
In a world where complex systems and human factors intersect, STS principles offer a pathway to creating safer, healthier, and more resilient organisations. It’s time to move beyond compliance and truly embed psychosocial safety in the DNA of our workplaces.