The hidden tech workforce: why your safety manager is actually a data professional

Walk into most large organisations and you'll find safety data scattered across an archipelago of disconnected systems. Incident reports in one database, near-miss logs in another spreadsheet. Audit findings in a standalone application. Training records in the LMS. Risk assessments in shared folders. Each system was probably procured at a different time, by a different department, with minimal consideration for integration.

For IT professionals, this is painfully familiar — the classic data silo problem. But here's what makes it particularly acute in safety: when you can't easily correlate incident patterns with training completion rates, or link near-misses in specific locations to recent process changes, critical safety insights remain hidden. I once watched an organisation spend six months investigating a spike in incidents, only to discover through better data integration that it perfectly correlated with a change in shift patterns three months earlier. The data to spot this pattern existed from day one, it was just trapped in systems that didn't talk to each other.

The technical debt in safety data infrastructure is substantial. Many organisations still rely on manual data entry, with safety officers transcribing handwritten incident reports into spreadsheets. Others have invested in sophisticated safety management systems but failed to implement proper data governance, resulting in inconsistent categorisation, duplicate records, and fields that mean different things across different sites. Research from EY confirms that digital technologies in HSE are often ‘poorly designed, disconnected and implemented to solve isolated problems’, with organisations struggling to translate technological changes into improved performance.

This isn't a problem safety professionals can solve alone. It requires exactly the kind of systems thinking, integration expertise and data architecture skills that IT professionals bring. Yet safety and IT teams rarely collaborate effectively on these challenges, often because neither fully understands the other's domain.

AI and machine learning in safety

Artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) are beginning to make inroads into safety management, though adoption lags far behind finance or marketing. The potential is compelling, with natural language processing analysing thousands of incident reports to spot recurring themes, computer vision detecting unsafe behaviours in CCTV footage, and predictive analytics forecasting where incidents are most likely to occur.

But here's where it gets interesting, and complicated. Unlike a marketing algorithm that might incorrectly predict customer behaviour (annoying but hardly catastrophic), a safety AI that fails to detect a genuine hazard could result in fatalities. That's not hyperbole. A false negative in safety isn't just a missed opportunity; it's a potential coroner's inquest.

This demands a level of rigour that goes well beyond typical ML deployment. We're not talking about A/B testing and iterative improvement here, we're talking about systems where ‘move fast and break things’ is quite literally the worst possible approach. Every model requires exhaustive testing, validation against edge cases and ongoing monitoring that would make a financial services compliance team look relaxed.

The data literacy gap

Here's the uncomfortable truth: the biggest challenge isn't technical architecture or AI implementation, it's data literacy. Across the safety profession, there's a substantial gap between the data available and the ability to interpret and act on it effectively. Most safety professionals received comprehensive training in hazard identification and risk assessment, but little or no training in statistical analysis, data visualisation or evidence-based decision making.

The manifestations are everywhere: safety reports that present data with no context, making it impossible to judge whether performance is improving or deteriorating;  visualisations that mislead rather than illuminate (I once saw a safety dashboard where changing the y-axis scale made a 3% improvement look like a 300% triumph); organisations implementing major safety initiatives without any measurement strategy, making it impossible to know whether the expensive new programme actually works or just feels like it should.

This mirrors the data literacy challenges IT professionals have observed across sectors. Just as finance teams needed to develop analytical capabilities to work effectively with modern business intelligence tools, safety professionals now need similar development. The irony? Many don't recognise themselves as being ‘in data’ even though they spend hours each week cleaning incident data, building reports and trying to spot trends. If you're spending that much time with data, you're doing data work — you've just not been trained to do it effectively.

As safety management becomes increasingly technology enabled, there's a clear gap in professional development that bridges these worlds. Traditional safety qualifications like NEBOSH or IOSH provide excellent foundations in hazard management but rarely address the technical and analytical skills that modern safety roles demand.

Conversely, data analytics courses often use examples from marketing or finance — contexts that may feel distant from safety professionals' daily work.

Building the bridge between professions

The future of safety management is inextricably linked to technology, data infrastructure and analytical capability. Yet in most organisations, IT and safety teams operate in parallel universes with limited collaboration and mutual understanding. This isn't sustainable: 95% of business leaders now believe digital EHS transformation is essential for company success. Bridging this gap requires effort from both sides and recognition from leadership that these silos are actively dangerous.

For you

Be part of something bigger, join BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT.

For IT professionals, this means understanding that safety data challenges aren't just another project — they're often more complex and consequential than they appear. A poorly designed interface in a business application is frustrating. A poorly designed interface in a safety reporting system might mean incidents go unreported until someone gets seriously hurt. That analytics platform that's ‘good enough’ for business intelligence? It might not cut it when reliability standards are literally life or death.

It also means developing at least basic familiarity with safety management concepts and operational realities. You don't need to become a NEBOSH-qualified safety expert, but understanding enough to ask the right questions makes you remarkably valuable. As someone who's worked across both domains, I can promise you: organisations are desperate for people who can translate between technical possibilities and safety requirements. It's one of those rare skills gaps where demand vastly exceeds supply.

For safety professionals, it means accepting that data work isn't something you can delegate to ‘the IT people’ — it's now a core part of your role. It means investing time in technical literacy and learning to articulate requirements clearly when working with IT teams. And yes, it means accepting that Excel alone might not be adequate for modern safety data challenges, no matter how comfortable those formulae feel.

The regulatory landscape is evolving too. Standards like ISO 45001 explicitly require organisations to determine what data needs collecting and how it should be analysed. We're likely heading toward regulations as prescriptive about data quality as those that financial services organisations face, which means safety data infrastructure can't remain an afterthought. It demands the same investment and governance as your financial systems.

Conclusion

The organisations that thrive won't be those with the most sophisticated safety management systems, they'll be the ones that recognise safety as a fundamentally tech-enabled discipline requiring robust data infrastructure, sophisticated analytical capabilities and professionals comfortable working across traditional boundaries.
Whether you're an IT professional looking for meaningful work or a safety specialist seeking to enhance your capabilities, this intersection represents more than just another application domain: it’s an opportunity to grow your career and also, possibly, to save lives too.