Sun, 12 May 2024 04:21:07 +1000WeeblyThu, 09 Mar 2023 01:45:08 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/what-is-low-risk-driving-responseIn my patch, a new language item has emerged over recent years; low risk driving. Before Christmas, I posted an article attempting to explain what low risk driving is and is not. For example, low risk driving is not defensive driving re-badged, roadcraft, or advanced driving.
 
I received a timely response to the article from a person whose judgement I respect and value. This person said, that in his experience, (which I can tell you is extensive) people he has driven with have claimed that their driving is 'low risk', however demonstrably not, according to the witness of my colleague in road safety.

So, how do we explain the difference between the self-assessment of this driver, and the observations of an expert in the field?

I'll go into a little more detail to try and paint a picture. The following is taken from a presentation I made recently to a fabulous new client of DTA, Roche Diagnostics Australia.

In plain-English, low risk driving is very cautious driving. However, when we use the term Low Risk Driving, we mean something very different to most people and nearly all driving instructors. It’s important to take a minute or two to explain what we mean when we use the term Low Risk Driving. It includes:

1. A psychological model of the driving task
2. A framework for the development of education and/or training programs
3. A way of driving
4. A way each driver can give themselves feedback on performance
   

So, Low Risk Driving is NOT defensive driving by another name.

1. A psychological model of the driving task. The model considers driving as a psychological process with INPUTS including a person's World View, their Perceptions & Decisions, Motivations and Car Operation Skills. These inputs are factors that produce in the driver certain outputs or PRODUCTS such as Proactive Driving Behaviours and Reactive Driving Behaviours.
 
Using the model in the same way a technician uses a circuit diagram (schematic) to repair an electronic device, the user (of the model) can diagnose why a driver might or might not display appropriate (cautious) behaviours when necessary. To be effective, the user requires a detailed knowledge of the model.
 
2. A framework for the development of teaching and assessment programs. The teacher or course designer can, after careful consideration of the audience, their experience and the nature of the driving to be performed (Training Needs Analysis) choose, as in the case below, PRODUCTS (Outputs), Theme-Reactive Driving Behaviours.

Here’s an example of 3 teaching topics from the Theme, Reactive Driving Behaviours.
 
Topic 43 Braking
Topic 44 Swerving
Topic 45 Skid Management

At Driver Training Australia, our one-day Low Risk does NOT teach topics from PRODUCTS (as above), we focus on learning experiences residing in the INPUTS area of the model i.e. Motivations, Perceptions & Decisions etc.

3. Naturally, it (Low Risk Driving) is way of driving. The Framework provides strategies that enable a trainer, or a group of trainers, to objectively measure, demonstrate (model) and teach. It provides a definition of a driving risk, and a method of measuring risk taking behaviour that is independent of a driver's self-assessment of personal knowledge or skill.

4. The Framework describes ways a driver can give themselves feedback on their performance, not just their observable behaviour, but the psychological factors that might encourage risk taking behaviour like an unrealistically optimistic thinking style.

So, a Low Risk Driver is not limited to considering what they do, but also why they do it (INPUTS). They should be able to explain, for example, why they failed to check right and left when driving though an intersection with a green light. It's possible the driver may be applying an 'external explanatory style', believing drivers approaching a red light must stop. Knowing that in reality, not all drivers do stop at red lights.

Creating and assessing learning experiences that help drivers develop competence in these four areas is the aim of the Framework.

Any driving instructor who claims to be teaching and driving in a Low Risk style, must by definition, understand in detail the NSW RTAs, A Framework for Driver Education - An essential guide for the production of driver education programs and assessment systems. If they don't, then we really have no idea what they mean by low risk driving.

So, I hope this helps those who are keen to discern the difference between people who use the words, and people who know the science.

If you’d like help understanding, applying, or sharing these principles, please ask.
 
Cheers, Jeremy Williams www.drivertrainingaustralia.com.au
 
First published on Linkedin March 2023. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-low-risk-driving-response-driver-training-australia
]]>Tue, 11 Oct 2022 01:03:06 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/what-is-low-risk-drivingWhat is Low Risk Driving?
 
This article will explain the difference between Low Risk Driving and Defensive Driving and why the differences matter for those people responsible for fleet safety.
 
Recently I noticed an error warning on our new clothes washing machine “EFA”. My daughter explained the machine was crashing and banging, and generally making a huge racket.
 
With an abundance of caution, and a desire to document any faults in the warranty period, I booked a service call with the manufacturer. 
 
The service technician arrived, and to my amazement, performed a diagnostic assessment including a recall of all error messages. It turns out, “EFA” stands for extremely unbalanced load. Good news. After testing all of the settings, no faults were found and the technician reset the memory.
 
So what has this got to do with the differences between Low Risk Driving and Defensive Driving? Well in the same way clothes washing machines look pretty much the same from outside, it’s what happens inside that makes all the difference: the design, including the ability to find faults and remember them.
 
A Defensive Driving Course is a generic term that includes pretty much any driver training activity an instructor wants it to feature. There is no universally accepted authority on what a defensive driving course is. However, these courses are based on a universal paradigm, or set of course beliefs. Here’s an overview. Crashes are bad. Drivers crash because of errors. Making better, more knowledgeable and skilled drivers, who make less errors, will deliver safer drivers. If only it were that simple! Sadly, it doesn't work that way. 
 
As an example of the differences amongst so called Defensive Driving Courses, take the northern hemisphere. In far northern latitudes, over the years, courses have included icy- road, slippery surface, or anti-skid training. There is a certain logic to this thinking. However, when empirically studied, this type of training doesn’t reduce crashes. Fact.
 
Now there is typically no snow at Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne’s latitudes. Nevertheless, “loss of control” crashes are a significant and regular feature of crash statistics. It’s no surprise that Australian Defensive Driving Courses still include the development of car control activities like skid-control, emergency braking, or brake & evade. When these courses are scientifically studied by independent experts, guess what? No positive change. In fact, sometimes drivers actually crash more. Fact.   
 
We shouldn’t be surprised at these results, they happen all over the world, and have been rigorously tested and re-tested. It’s a bit like having an unbalanced load in your washing machine, heading off to do something else, and believing that you can wait until you hear the unbalanced machine, during the spin cycle (at some point in the future) and successfully get back to the machine and take action to avoid lasting damage. Fortunately washing machines are generally robust and can handle a lot of miss treatment. In this example, the person washing clothes is reacting to a problem after it happens; and can only do so if they’re paying attention and able to respond quickly. Driving is similar, but traffic crashes are a less forgiving.
 
Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, “We cannot solve problems with the same thinking we used when we created them”.
 
A genuine and authentic Low Risk Driving Course is based on a very different paradigm indeed. Here’s an overview. Crashes are bad. Drivers crash because they fail to protect themselves from known crash events. Drivers can learn how to think and act in ways that prevent crashing before an event is imminent. Reactive driving skills are usually unreliable. If only it were that simple! But, it can be done. 
 
Low Risk Driving is based on what is called the “Low Risk Driving Teaching Model”. The model, published by the NSW RTA some years ago, is designed to be the course designer and driver trainers’ authoritative reference. Trainers wishing to positively influence driver behaviour can learn and understand the “inputs” such as ‘world view of the driving task”, “motivations and attitudes” distinct from, “perceptions and decisions” or “car operation skills”. A well-designed program can include learning outcomes in any of these domains. These “inputs” deliver outputs or “products” in the form of “proactive driving behaviours” or “reactive driving behaviour”.
 
The model explains why focusing on the teaching of “car operation skills” an “input”, in the hope it will deliver a timely “reactive driving behaviour” is unlikely. Whereas, creating learning experiences that positively influence a driver’s “motivations and attitudes” (for example) thus producing “proactive driving behaviour” is far more likely to deliver safer drivers, and is shown to be efficacious. Fact.
 
All of our training personnel are highly experienced workplace trainers and assessors who understand the model intimately.
 
If you are considering a driver training course for your staff, and a provider calls their course a Low Risk Driving Course, without being able to explain how it varies from a regular defensive driving course, you should be highly suspicious. Many training providers have simply started calling their defensive driving course a low risk course, by adding phrases like “risk-taking”, “motivation” and “attitudes” to their website and course materials. 
 
My washing machine technician can produce a ‘schematic’ that shows each of the components, the sensors, solenoids and the processors. He can explain all the various inputs and the relationships that produce the range of outputs. This is necessary to diagnose, and deliver a reliable outcome (repair), in a timely and efficient manner, every time. Why would I call anyone else when I need help? In my situation, I didn’t need a repair; I’m glad I was proactive! No harm was done, but I had to invest. I’m happy with that.
 
If you’d like to know more about this topic, please contact the author, Jeremy Williams by email info@drivertrainingaustralia.com.au
 
First published on LinkedIn October 2022
​Link: ​https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-low-risk-driving-jeremy-williams]]>Fri, 29 Apr 2022 04:55:27 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/nihilism-and-driver-safetyThis article is important for those safety practitioners wishing to reduce crashes and injuries in their organisation.
 
Wikipedia defines nihilism as "a philosophy, or family of views within philosophy, that rejects generally accepted or fundamental aspects of human existence, such as objective truth, knowledge, morality, values or meaning."
 
This idea, and that's all it is, an idea a philosophy, is important because it [nihilism] is in direct and increasingly more prevalent, opposition to the paradigms and assumptions of most safety professionals. Indeed, modern nihilism seeks "the destruction of higher values and the opposition to the affirmation of life."
 
The driving environment is no place to adopt a nihilistic philosophy because absolute truths are real. Gravity, inertia, acceleration, and momentum do exist. Observation, perception, and reaction-times are real. Stopping distances are real. The finite ability for tyres to grip the road through a corner is real.      
 
Traditional approaches to training, those that rely on a common existentialist thinking may be rejected out-of-hand by the nihilist.  
 
Supervisors of personnel making nihilistic statements, promoting nihilistic ideologies, or demonstrating nihilistic behaviours should be on high alert. 
 
If you’d like help understanding, applying, or sharing these principles, please ask. Cheers, Jeremy Williams www.drivertrainingaustralia.com.au
 
First published (on Linkedin) April 2022]]>Tue, 08 Feb 2022 03:07:13 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/covid-risk-down-driving-risk-upFor many Australians the risk of death or serious illness by COVID has dramatically reduced, particularly for those with multiple vaccinations. In addition, much has been learnt about the virus, its variants, and how to treat those effected.
 
As the workplace begins to resume a more 'normal' appearance, we can expect the total number of kilometres travelled per capita to increase.
 
All things being equal, and as exposure increases, the risk increases. Therefor organisations can predict and anticipate a rise in the number of reportable incidents and injuries from motor vehicle crashes.
 
As an organisation, it is very important to monitor these events using a metric something like, "reportable incidents per million kilometres travelled" or "injuries per million kilometres travelled".
 
Given that organisations can predict an increase in incidents as staff return to work, and to driving, now is a good time to review how you're set up to manage driver safety.
 
1. Review motor vehicle and safe-driving policies & procedures to reflect your current situation. This should include known changes to work patterns like working from home but driving personal vehicles for work-related matters. Importantly, set and communicate safety goals for the next twelve months and beyond.
 
Check the currency of all licenses and/or qualifications. Importantly, validate the competency of all your drivers. Despite workplace safety law requiring "supervision", many line mangers assume a driver is competent because they can produce a driver's license, but this is not always the case. If you'd like a free guide to performing a driver competency assessment, contact the author. If your organisation has drivers attend or revise safe driver training periodically, organise this now as it has likely lapsed.
 
2. Audit the fleet to ensure it meets the minimum safety specifications as detailed in your (revised) policies and procedures. Take immediate action to bring all vehicles into specification, including repair of any damage (like a cracked/broken windscreen), wear and tear (like tyres), and general road worthiness.
 
3. Create and communicate a road safety awareness campaign that engages all employees. Use your creativity to produce a collaborative approach to promoting a culture of continuous improvement in driver safety. Smaller organisations with only a few vehicles may be receiving faulty feedback due to (a) a lack of reporting mechanisms in place (b) a reluctance to report a hazard or near-miss, and (c) an absence of incidents in recent times.              
 
If you’d like help understanding, applying, or sharing these principles, please ask. Cheers, Jeremy Williams www.drivertrainingaustralia.com.au
 
First published February 2022

Linkedin:  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/covid-risk-down-driving-up-driver-training-australia]]>Wed, 02 Feb 2022 05:06:41 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/telling-isnt-teachingThis article will help you craft messages in ways that target the full range of listeners' personal preferences in your audience. 

Have you ever sat in a training session and heard the teacher attempt to explain an idea the same way over and over? Or perhaps you've sat through a presentation and felt the message just didn't connect with you?
 
Now imagine you are a fly on the wall in the teachers' staff room. "I don't know what's the matter with that kid, I've told him a thousand times and he just doesn't get it!". 
 
Now it is true that sometimes a message is not relevant to a member of an audience. That's why it's important to screen would-be audience members and clearly and precisely state what a session will be about and how it will help; just like I did in the first sentence above.   
 
In this article I'm really talking about adult learners but learning to pitch the same message in different ways and from different angles will help you improve your effectiveness with kids as well.
 
There are four domains that your message should reflect: behaviour, thinking, emotions and purpose.
 
"Just tell me what to do"
​Some people just want to know what to do. So, take time to demonstrate (if you can) or paint a very clear description of what the desired behaviour needs to look like. You could show a video or use images to illustrate the point. Don't be subjective, be objective. Don't exaggerate, be precise. People need to know the minimum personal effort required to be a success. It needs to be doable. If an idea sounds grandiose, excessive or unrealistic, it will probably be dismissed out of hand. This can adversely impact the remainder of your message.
 
"There's nothing I can do" & "It won't happen to me"
​Human beings are 'guided' and 'driven' by unconscious biases (unconscious thinking). There are at least 180 biases that are known in the world of cognitive psychology (see the Cognitive Bias Codex). There are two particular biases that form 'barriers' to change. The first is a deep-rooted belief that, "There's nothing I can do". A demonstration that the desired behaviour is doable, will go a long way to being persuasive. However, not all situations can be demonstrated. Take time to work through a range of scenarios and examples, drawing on the success and testimonial of others in the group, to leverage and reinforce your message. Warning. Don't attempt to identify and deconstruct an accident that has already happened to someone by asking "What could you have done differently?". This rarely works well in a group setting. Use hypothetical scenarios looking forward into the future. Example. If it rains on the way home tonight, how could you alter your ordinary driving style to reduce the chance of a crash?".  
 
The second likely cognitive barrier is optimism bias. Most people believe that they are less likely to have bad things happen to them than people like them. They also believe that if something bad does happen, they will be more likely to recover than people like them. It's normal to think, "It's not going to happen to me". Being optimistic is great when applying for a job, but potentially disastrous when overtaking etc. Take time to explain how optimism bias can influence decisions subconsciously. Remember you can be safer by behaving more cautiously, but imagining it to be so, won't make it so. Craft your message with realistic statements like "driving with your headlights on will render you more visible and less likely to be involved in a crash". It's doable, and it's real.    
 
"Sometimes I find myself rushing, and I don't know why"
​Broadly speaking, as emotions elevate, positive or negative, so too does the willingness to accept risks. A discussion around emotional intelligence applied to specific scenarios can help. When you understand what can causes an emotional response, you can short-circuit, or lessen the negative behaviour that may follow. Crafting messages like, "Other people may not understand why you're slowing down", sets the scene for managing the emotions if they arise. If you know you're feeling emotional, you could change your plans or arrangements before putting yourself (and others) at risk. When you put pen to paper (or finger to keyboard) remember to consider the person who is guided more by their emotions rather than their thoughts. Failing to consider how people feel about your message could cost you the entire presentation.
   
"I like to reflect on what's really important to ​me, in my life"
Broadly speaking, spirituality relates to being connected with something greater than oneself. It's about meaning and purpose. To more effectively connect with people who spend time in this conscious space, it can be useful to consider questions like "What is really important to me?", "Am I on track?", or "What legacy will I leave after I'm gone?". It's important not make judgements, rather ask questions that cause self-reflection or mindfulness.    
 
So just telling somebody to 'be careful', won't work as well as showing them how to do it. Telling somebody to 'take a bit of ownership, or responsibility' won't work if they can't see and believe the part they play in future events. Telling somebody not to be 'optimistic' won't make any difference unless they can discern  objectively between reality and their own hopefulness. Telling somebody to buy into your agenda probably won't work if it conflicts with a deeply held belief or individual sense of meaning and purpose. 
 
So, telling isn't teaching! Why not try next time to incorporate elements that speak to behaviour, thinking, emotions and purpose, in your message?
 
If you’d like help understanding, applying, or sharing these principles, please ask. Cheers, Jeremy Williams www.drivertrainingaustralia.com.au
 
First published February 2022
 
​View at Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6894504816027017216?updateEntityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_updateV2%3A%28urn%3Ali%3AugcPost%3A6894504816027017216%2CFEED_DETAIL%2CEMPTY%2CDEFAULT%2Cfalse%29
]]>Wed, 02 Feb 2022 05:04:11 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/february-02nd-2022Mon, 31 Jan 2022 22:48:28 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/why-dont-people-listenThis article will help you engage more effectively with people when attempting to be persuasive. 

Have you ever heard someone say "I've told you a thousand times"? I think we've all been on the end of that! So what's at the bottom of this? Why don't people listen? Well, Hugh Mackay wrote an excellent book by that title back in 1994. If you're in the business of communicating with people, teaching, training or leading, you should try and get your hands on a copy. It really is excellent, and worth the effort. Hugh writes about the the three 'Rs'; Relationship, Reinforcement and Relevance.

If you're wondering why you're not hitting the mark as well as you thought you might have, or should have, it's probably because you haven't taken the time to build an authentic personal relationship with the receiver of your message. People are much more likely to buy in to your message if they believe you know them, are interested in them succeeding and generally care about them. Or, perhaps you haven't crafted your message in such a way so as to reinforce important elements of their personal 'world-view'. That is to say, you may not have positively affirmed the receiver's current beliefs, attitudes and behaviours around your message. Or, you may not have taken the time to ensure your message is targeted at what the receiver thinks is important. Just because a message is important to you, doesn't mean it will connect with the receiver.

In the worst case, the person on the end of you message may not trust you, may think your message is far removed from things happening in their world, and not relevant, at least not at this moment in time.
You can use the three 'Rs' as a kind of self-assessment when reflecting on how you talk to people (or talk at people), or perhaps as a diagnostic when things don't go as you planned.
One thing is for sure, and I hope you have picked up on this, that listening is far more important than telling. And as the best teachers will attest, "Telling isn't teaching!".

I'm planning to follow this topic up soon with an article on how positively motivated people engage with requests to change their behaviour. It will be titled, "Telling Isn't teaching". 

If you’d like help understanding, applying or sharing these principles, please ask. Cheers, Jeremy Williams www.drivertrainingaustralia.com.au.

First published January 2022

​View at Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6892733796236570624?updateEntityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_updateV2%3A%28urn%3Ali%3AugcPost%3A6892733796236570624%2CFEED_DETAIL%2CEMPTY%2CDEFAULT%2Cfalse%29
​
]]>Wed, 15 Dec 2021 04:38:36 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/as-designedThis article will help you get more out of the safety features around you that already exist.

Have you ever noticed the car in front drive around a speed hump rather than slow down and go over it?

This is a simple example of how many people don't use existing safety systems 'as designed'. Let's take the speed hump example above. Speed humps don't just appear for no reason to bother drivers. They cost money to install and maintain and only appear where a legitimate need has been identified; in front of a school for example.

Wherever a speed hump (also called a speed bump, or more correctly, a traffic calming device) has been installed, there has been crashes, near hits or complaints of 'speeding  drivers' in that precise location.

That's because ordinary drivers have failed to discern the nature and extent risks of driving  through this location.

When you see the driver in front go around a speed hump at higher than the advised maximum, let's say 20 kph, that driver is intentionally going out of their way to ignore the safety concerns of all those who rallied to have the changes made, and put their own personal motivations first. 

There are many examples of people failing to use the road system 'as designed'. Consider the pedestrian that doesn't use a crossing; or walks across against the 'red man'. Once again, we see how an individual's personal motivations trump a well designed and effective safety system. 

It's hard to imagine a safety system that is perfect, but if a driver put a little extra effort in to slowing before hazards, all cyclists wore helmets, and pedestrians used crossings, all these systems would work better.

Two more examples and I'll finish up. Have you ever noticed cyclists riding on the road in traffic when there is a purpose-built cycle lane off to the left and parallel to the road? It's sometimes hard to reconcile cyclists complaining about drivers on the evening news with an empty cycle lane made specifically to separate cars and bikes. Again, the cyclist has a personal motivation that trumps the safety motivation. 

And finally, have you ever seen an 'after-market' bull bar fitted to 4WD. 4WD vehicle safety has come a long way over recent years, particularly since we started to think about them as SUVs rather than the traditional off-road workhorse.     

An enormous amount of work has been done by vehicle manufactures to make 4WD and SUVs less aggressive. International crash tests and "aggressivity" scores are available and you can compare one vehicle to another. Aggressivity relates to the protection offered to vulnerable road users in a crash; particularly pedestrians and cyclists. Fitting a hard and sharp bull bar usually defeats the intentional soft and rounded profile of a modern 4WD or SUV. In addition, rigid bull bars can defeat or reduce the efficacy of other systems designed to protect the driver and passengers.

You wouldn't be permitted to use a chisel as a screwdriver in trade school. Even though you can probably get away with using the wrong tool for the job in the short term, over a lifetime it will come at a cost. So too with not using the road system 'as designed'.

If you’d like help understanding, applying or sharing these principles, please ask.

Cheers, Jeremy Williams

First published December 2021]]>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 01:59:10 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/relative-risk-or-absolute-risk-why-you-should-careThis article is about the difference between what’s known as ‘relative risk’ versus ‘absolute risk’ and why you need to know the difference. Understanding how to use these ideas is important in a world where often people don’t worry about real and meaningful risks, and often fret about things that almost certainly will never harm them. 
  
When I tune my guitar, I can use relative tuning, or absolute tuning. If I tune my guitar with the correct tonal distance (measured in hertz or the number of vibrations per second) between say the A string and the E string, they are in tune, relatively speaking. When I wind all the strings to the tension necessary to produce the correct tonal distance between them, I can play the guitar and it will sound in tune. BUT, only if I am playing alone. If I want to play with other musicians, I need to use absolute tuning.

When I need to play with other musicians and instruments, it’s critically important that we all set our instruments to the exact frequencies for each note. For example, ‘concert tuning’ means that the A note is generated at 110 hertz. If I’m using relative tuning with my A string tuned to say 95 hertz, we won’t be playing in concert, and the result will be awful to listen to; even though individually we might be in tune (relatively).

Driving is a lot like this. If I always drove on roads by myself, I could do a lot of things that alone were not a problem, and would only affect me if I got it wrong. But when I need to drive ‘in concert’ with others, we need to be working together measuring risks accurately to prevent crashes that could easily be avoided if we were all ‘in tune’ with one another.  

Here are a couple of examples of relative risk.

1. A passenger positioned in the front seat of a car is about 7 times more likely to die in a crash than a passenger seated in the rear seat.
2. Driving with a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of .05% makes the driver about 7 times more like to crash than with a BAC of 0.0%.

Now these real risks are only meaningful if the absolute risk of fatality in a road crash is similarly real and meaningful; and it is.

Here are some examples of absolute risk.

1. The most likely cause of accidental death in Australia (that is not disease or violent crime etc.) is as the result of a road accident.
2. The next most likely cause of accidental death in Australia is as the result of a slip, trip or fall.

For these reasons, I’m particularly careful when I drive, climb or use a ladder etc. When I take my grandchildren in my car, I make sure they sit in the back even though they are old enough to legally travel in the front.   

Now Motorcyclists are around 37 times more likely to be injured or killed in a traffic crash than a car driver/passenger. When I ride, which I do regularly, both the relative risk and the absolute risk are both real and meaningful to me. I put all of my available resources into avoiding a crash and optimizing my safety.

Worrying about flying on a large commercial airliner over a long distance, is not necessary, because the absolute risk of dying in a commercial airliner is so low it is considered ‘risk de minimis’ that is to say, it is very, very, safe indeed and the chance of fatality is almost zero. Now the relative risk between the survivability of an airliner crash by sitting in the front versus the rear of the plane could be calculated, but it’s a moot point, because the absolute risk is so low.
​     
What’s the main message here? The risks associated with being in an injury or fatality producing motor vehicle crash are both real and meaningful at a personal level.

The good news is there is a lot that you can do to reduce your risk of being injured or killed in a car crash to that something like the airliner example above ‘risk de minimis’.

BUT you need to allocate a lot of personal resources, planning, attention and certain proactive behaviours to manage the risks. Accurate risk assessment triggers this personal expenditure and can definitely help. 

If you’d like to know more about these topics, how to apply them to your personal driving, or perhaps across your team, please call or email me. Cheers Jeremy]]>Tue, 04 Aug 2020 14:00:00 GMThttp://drivertrainingaustralia.com.au/news/the-good-news-about-covid
During the global fuel crisis that began in 1973, the price of petrol (gasoline) soared. As the cost of travelling by motor vehicle increased, the total number of kilometres travelled per year reduced. Guess what also fell? The road toll.

In fact, the single biggest event to reduce the road toll in the USA, was the 1970's fuel crisis. No other single factor, social, political or economic has had such a direct and substantive impact on death and injury on the road; not seat-belts, ABS or driver training.

I live in Melbourne Australia, today I cannot leave the house to exercise, and I can only go shopping for food once per day, and not more than 5 kilometres away from home. My movement by motor vehicle has dramatically reduced. So too has my chance of crashing and hurting someone else, or myself.

Because I have spent my working life working in road safety, this is great news. But you might reasonably ask, "What about the deaths caused COVID?" That's a great question. Nobody would wish COVID-19 on anyone or the society in which they live. However, while thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of people have died, or will die due to COVID-19, 1.2 million people die on the world's roads every year, with more than 50 million injuries recorded (according to the WHO). Around 25% of these incidents involve "vulnerable road users" including pedestrians who aren't even drivers or passengers!

So Jeremy, what are you saying? I'm saying that nobody wants to be hurt, but crashes still happen. When we see the cost (including any negative consequences) of driving as high, we tend to protect ourselves more (by driving less, or with more care when we do drive).

Here's another example. Nobody would deny that in winter the driving conditions generally get worse. With less daylight, colder temperatures, foggy windows, and roads impacted by water/snow/ice/mud, you might predict that the road toll would increase. Wrong. Why? Well generally people travel less by car in bad weather, when they do drive they cover shorter distances, and they drive more carefully. This happens virtually everywhere around the world.

So your chances of crashing are significantly influenced by:

• How much you drive, and
• How carefully you drive
  
  

If you took some time to think about how dangerous driving really is, then you could take control and make a significant difference to your chances.

Remember, if you decided to drive more carefully today, or you decided to drive a bit more dangerously today; it wouldn't make any real impact on your 'whole-of-life' chances of crashing. If you truly want to be safer, you need to make the decision to change today, and keep putting in the extra effort every time you drive from here on.

If you're responsible for a fleet of drivers, think about how you can create the circumstances where your team think more about how dangerous driving really is, even if they personally haven't had many crashes.
​
If you’d like help understanding, applying or sharing these principles, please ask. Cheers, Jeremy Williams www.drivertrainingaustralia.com.au
​
First published August 2020 - Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6696598091547725824?updateEntityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_feedUpdate%3A%28*%2Curn%3Ali%3AugcPost%3A6696598091547725824%29]]>