Editors note: This is an update to a post from February 3, 2020
In recent investigations, we’ve noticed a pattern: when asking why an incident occurred, the answer often comes back to one word—complacency.
Why did someone continue a task without identifying and mitigating all hazards? - Complacency.
Why wasn’t the required PPE worn? - Complacency.
The problem is that complacency, much like human error, is a label rather than an explanation. It tells us what happened but not why. If we want to prevent similar incidents in the future, we need to dig deeper into the factors that contribute to complacency and how we can address them.
What Is Complacency?
People use the word complacency to describe a range of attitudes and behaviors. Some see it as simply going through the motions, while others describe it as overconfidence. According to Merriam-Webster, complacency means:
- Self-satisfaction especially when accompanied by unawareness of actual dangers or deficiencies
- An instance of usually unaware or uninformed self-satisfaction
In both definitions, complacency is rooted in a lack of concern for potential dangers. Why would that happen?
How We Become Complacent
Complacency is a natural byproduct of the brain’s tendency to automate repetitive tasks. In Thinking, Fast and Slow1, Daniel Kahneman explains this process by describing two systems of thinking: System 1 (fast, automatic, routine) and System 2 (slow, deliberate, analytical).
%20(1).gif?width=750&height=238&name=Brain%201%20vs%20Brain%202%20(3)%20(1).gif)
Our brains are designed to shift tasks from System 2 to System 1 whenever possible. Think about the first time you drove to a new job. You were hyper-aware of every turn, constantly checking your GPS—engaging System 2. But after a few weeks, the route became second nature, and you barely thought about each turn—System 1 took over. This automation is efficient, but it can also lead to moments of inattention, where we overlook potential risks simply because nothing bad has happened before.
Complacency is Real, But It’s Not the Whole Story
Complacency is a normal part of human behavior, driven by how our brains are wired. So, when we see “complacency” as a cause in an investigation, it’s likely accurate—just as “human error” is often accurate. But neither label tells the whole story. They don’t explain why it happened or how to prevent it from happening again.
If we stop at identifying complacency, we risk blaming individuals for something that is an inherent part of human nature. Instead, we need to look at the system. What cues, feedback loops, or design flaws allowed complacency to set in? More importantly, what can we do to mitigate its effects?
Counteracting Complacency
Instead of waiting for a serious incident to highlight complacency, we should be proactive in identifying and addressing it. One way to do this is through near-miss reporting and post-task debriefs. When someone catches a small problem before it becomes a major issue, do we treat it as a valuable lesson learned? Sharing these moments reinforces why critical steps exist and helps recalibrate risk perception before an incident occurs.
Another strategy is to observe and verify process performance in a way that feels supportive rather than punitive. Simple check-ins—asking workers how things are going, if any steps feel unnecessary, or if obstacles exist—can provide insights into where drift is happening. Many high-severity incidents involve gradual drift from intended procedures, often unnoticed until something goes wrong. Routine process reviews, reminders, and well-designed cues help identify and correct this drift before it leads to failure.
Finally, we need to consider whether what we call “complacency” is actually a flaw in the design of the task. Are critical steps easy to overlook? Are procedures unnecessarily complicated? Continuous process improvement, driven by those performing the work, helps ensure that safety measures aren’t just followed but also make sense in practice.
At its core, counteracting complacency isn’t about making people try harder to stay vigilant. It’s about designing systems that make it easier to do the right thing, even when attention wanes. By focusing on lessons learned, process improvements, and early intervention, we can address complacency in a way that leads to real, lasting improvements.
