Early versions of the Flying Fortress cockpit had two identical-looking levers, one for the aircraft flaps and one for the undercarriage. In the heat of a landing, confusion over which was which often spelled disaster. The solution wasn’t more training or bigger warning labels. It was an ergonomic redesign: a wheel-shaped end on the undercarriage lever and a wing-shaped end on the flap lever, so pilots could choose correctly by feel.
For Technical Principal for Safety by Design Sophie, that’s the essence of safety by design - baking safer choices into the design.
Technical Director for buildings Jason and Principal Project Manager for Water Paul add that Safety by Design is about making sure structures and facilities are safe not just for those building them, but for the people who will use, inspect, maintain and eventually decommission them.
“Ultimately, it’s taking a safety lens across the full life of the asset,” says Jason. “Using design decisions to eliminate or reduce foreseeable hazards.”
Sophie says this often shows up via practical decisions that are very impactful, but don’t need to be complex and costly. She describes a transport pick-up and drop-off layout that, on paper, met all requirements. The risk only became obvious when the team asked how people would behave in real life. “To reach the entrance, pedestrians had to go out of their way to use the footpaths,” she says. “So, most people were likely to cross right where vehicles were turning. That insight allowed the design team to change the layout to mitigate this risk.”
All three emphasise that timing of Safety by Design considerations is critical. “Early adoption really matters,” says Sophie. “When Safety by Design is left until a late workshop, teams tend to default to what can be done quickly and often justify the chosen design outcome rather than maximising the safety impacts.”
By that point, there’s often no time or budget left to meaningfully change the design, and little room for innovation. Paul notes that the earlier a risk is identified, the more options there are to land the best solution. In practice, that can be as simple as making Safety by Design a standing agenda item in regular project catch-ups, with processes that prompt the right questions early.
Who’s involved also matters. Sophie recalls workshops where a hazard was debated repeatedly until an operator joined and said, in effect, ‘that’s not an issue, we deal with it every day’, with controls already in place. They then pointed to another, unrelated issue that was the real concern.
Jason stresses the importance of distinguishing Safety by Design from day‑to‑day site safety. “It’s not about slips, trips and falls in the sense of executing the work on site,” he says. “It’s about making design decisions that mitigate hazards and reduce risks, that may arise during construction, operation and right through to demolition and disposal of the asset.”
That distinction shifts thinking up the hierarchy of controls: first, eliminating, substituting or isolating hazards through design, then using engineering controls to reduce exposure, and only then relying on administrative controls such as procedures and signage.
A great example comes from a rail project where WSP inherited a preliminary design that relied on gas detection in pits - an administrative control that stopped work but didn’t prevent gas build-up. “Gas detection was useful,” says Jason, “but when those detectors went off, the workers would be required to go home.” The alternative was an engineering solution – the installation of a ventilation system to prevent gas build-up in the first place, with gas detection as a back‑up. The result was a more resilient operating approach. An alarm might mean a short stand-down, rather than a full shutdown. The client accepted the added cost because the control was both more effective, practical and enhanced safety for the workers.
Of course, Safety by Design decisions sit within real‑world constraints. Budget and aesthetics are often central to the conversation, because projects must work within finite resources.
The task, says the team, is to apply engineers’ problem‑solving skills to find an effective design solution; one that delivers the greatest safety benefit in an ‘as far as reasonably practicable’ manner. Being proportionate matters, adds Paul. “There may be excellent controls available, but they’re not always proportionate to the likelihood, consequence or frequency of a risk. The discussion must stay grounded in the project’s overall safety objectives.”
The benefits of Safety by Design are easiest to see when framed as outcomes, not paperwork. It reduces the risk of high‑consequence failure by changing the work itself - removing hazards where possible and reducing exposure where they can’t be eliminated. It also improves operability and maintenance, so routine inspection and access don’t become high‑risk activities.
In short, Safety by Design delivers safer build methods, safer maintenance, and more Future Ready® assets.
In a post‑earthquake coastal reinstatement programme, for example, Jason recalls rockfall mitigation walls built from driven steel members with stacked timber planks acting as a retaining structure for small debris. “The question wasn’t just how to build it, but how to keep it effective,” he says. “How do we inspect for build‑up behind the wall?” The solution was a simple design detail: a small gap left at eye level between planks, allowing observers to safely check conditions and identify when debris needed to be cleared, without exposing themselves to unnecessary risk.
Sophie shares a similar maintenance focused example from a transport project with a drop down to an abutment shelf. Permanent ladders were ruled out, and the default assumption became that maintenance teams would bring their own. Through a Safety by Design process, the outcome shifted to designed access: a pathway down the side to the abutment, controlled by a gate so access was safe and deliberate.
Importantly, the same questions extend beyond the worksite. Early Safety by Design thinking can be linked to Future Ready® outcomes - asking whether an asset is in the right place, how flood risk has been considered, and how it will perform as climate patterns change.
In public infrastructure, the payoff can be significant. Assets become more usable for ageing or less mobile populations, better connected for communities, and more adaptable under extreme rainfall through features such as expanded swales and water detention systems.
For Sophie, Jason and Paul, the end state is simple: make safety a design habit, not an add‑on. Done early, it leads to practical and impactful design decisions that reduce exposure to safety related risks during construction, make assets safer to operate and maintain, and help communities to confidently and safely use the asset over its life.
