Author: Craig Smith, COMET Head of Learning & Development

Most organisations say they want to build a strong safety culture. But when something goes wrong, their instinct is still to find fault, assign blame, and move on as quickly as possible.

The truth is, a culture that learns from mistakes is always stronger than one that pretends not to make them. And in high-risk industries, that difference matters. A lot.

At COMET, we’ve worked with safety leaders across energy, manufacturing, ports and marine, water, utilities, transport, construction and beyond. We see the same patterns repeat, regardless of industry, geography, or structure.

Strong teams aren’t defined by the number of incidents they avoid. They’re defined by what they do when those incidents happen. The best don’t sweep things under the rug or default to blame. They ask uncomfortable questions. They go deeper. They invest in learning, even when it’s messy.

That’s what separates ticking a box from genuinely preventing repeat incidents.

But no matter how strong your intentions, investigations still come down to people. And people fall into patterns. Certain habits, mindsets and behaviours, often well-meaning, can end up limiting the quality of an investigation and holding back your safety performance.

We call these patterns the Imperfect Investigator Profiles. They’re not criticisms. They’re familiar behaviours we’ve all seen or slipped into ourselves. The point isn’t perfection. It’s awareness. Because once you can recognise the habit, you can start doing something about it.

That’s also why so many organisations are moving towards structured, standardised methodologies supported by immersive investigation and RCA tools like COMET. By reducing bias, enabling collaboration, and guiding the investigation process from start to finish, teams uncover clearer root causes and spot patterns hiding in plain sight.

The Imperfect Investigator profiles

1. Cursory Colin: Rushing through investigations



Personality traits:
Busy, time-constrained, pragmatic, results-oriented

Behaviour:
Colin operates under pressure. He’s always got five things on his plate and another three arriving in his inbox. He doesn’t cut corners on purpose. He’s just focused on clearing the task list. But in investigations, that speed comes at a cost. Key facts get missed. Analysis feels shallow. And contributing factors slip through the cracks.

Real-life example:
After a slip-trip incident at one site, Colin wrapped up the investigation within a day, citing “wet floor due to weather” as the cause. He didn’t speak to the cleaning contractor, didn’t check drainage issues raised previously, and missed that the area lacked proper signage and lighting. A month later, someone else fell in the same spot.
‍
‍

Tips for Improvement:

  • Treat investigations as a preventative measure, not just a reactive task
  • Block out dedicated time in the calendar for deeper thinking
  • Use a structured investigation workflow like COMET to maintain consistency without sacrificing efficiency
  • Recognise that spending time now can save far more time later by stopping repeat incidents before they spiral


2. Wrong-reason Wray: Overcoming bias in investigations



Personality Traits:
Biased, opinionated

Behaviour:
Wray is confident and assertive. He’s experienced and has seen patterns before. But his instinct to identify the cause early on often leads to tunnel vision. Rather than exploring all possibilities, he gathers only the data that backs up his theory. His intentions are honest, but the outcome is skewed.

Real-life example:
When an equipment failure occurred, Wray immediately blamed operator error, as the same technician had made a mistake six months ago. He focused the investigation on training records and ignored maintenance logs. It later emerged the part had a known defect, and the issue had nothing to do with human error.
‍

‍

‍Tips for Improvement:

  • Approach investigations with curiosity instead of conclusions
  • Invite input from colleagues with different perspectives
  • Let the evidence shape the outcome, not the other way around
  • If you are a COMET user: Use COMET’s Root Map feature to visualise cause and effect objectively and limit personal bias


3. Lone Linda: Collaboration for well-rounded insights

‍


Personality traits:
Independent, self-reliant, introverted, task-oriented

Behaviour:
Linda prefers working independently. She’s focused, diligent, and thorough. But by going it alone, she misses out on the collective experience of her team. Investigations lack operational nuance and human factors insight. There’s no forum for challenge, validation, or deeper understanding.

Real-life example:
Following a near-miss involving a forklift, Linda completed the report without consulting the shift lead or operations supervisor. She missed that the area layout had changed the week before and that signage was temporarily down. Her report focused on driver vigilance rather than system-level risks.



Tips for improvement:

  • Use collaborative tools to involve colleagues even if you are remote or working asynchronously
  • Create a culture where peer input is a strength, not a sign of weakness
  • Share outcomes early for feedback rather than waiting until everything feels final
  • For COMET users: Let COMET help structure input from multiple stakeholders while maintaining clarity

‍

4. Micro Martin: Balancing detail and clarity in reports 



Personality Traits:
Detail-oriented, perfectionist, analytical, risk-averse

Behaviour:
Martin is laser-focused on accuracy. He double-checks every data point and builds extensive timelines. But his reports are so detailed that the message often gets lost. Decision-makers don’t have time to parse through 40 pages of granular data. The result is technically correct but practically ineffective.

Real-life example:
After a machinery fire, Martin’s report included diagrams, sensor readings, minute-by-minute temperature logs and a 10-page appendix of maintenance history. But the recommendation summary was buried on page 38. The ops team didn’t implement the corrective action because they didn’t know what it was.




Tips for Improvement:

  • Strike a balance between attention to detail and the need for concise reporting
  • Set clear report objectives and filter information accordingly
  • For COMET users: COMET’s structure keeps reports focused, clear, and aligned to action without compromising depth

‍

‍

5. Maverick Mike: Embracing standardised procedures



Personality traits:
Independent, non-conformist, innovative, confident

Behaviour:
Mike likes to reinvent the wheel. He adapts templates, skips steps, and operates with confidence in his judgment. But when each investigation follows a different format, it’s nearly impossible to compare outcomes, identify trends, or build a shared understanding across teams. Creativity becomes inconsistency.

Real-life example:
Mike created a colourful mind map for a vehicle collision incident, skipping the company’s standard RCA format. While the visual was engaging, it lacked clear contributing factor categories or timeline traceability. When asked to compare findings across three other similar incidents, there was no way to align the data.




Tips for improvement:

  • Use your creative thinking to improve outcomes, not ignore frameworks
  • Commit to process consistency to ensure insights are usable at scale
  • Trust that the methodology is there to support, not restrict you
  • For COMET users: With COMET, you can customise fields and workflows while staying anchored to best practice standards

 
6. Infrequent Ingrid: Staying current in the field



Personality Traits:
Forgetful, non-committal, resistant to change, procrastinator

Behaviour:
Ingrid means well, but change feels overwhelming. She sticks with old methods because they’re familiar. She’s not against learning, she just keeps putting it off. Over time, she’s missed system updates, tool upgrades, and modern investigation approaches. Her work lags behind, even if her effort doesn’t.

Real-life example:
During an investigation into a line stoppage, Ingrid used an outdated paper-based template and missed key process steps that had since been added to the current investigation framework. As a result, her report overlooked a new risk assessment stage introduced company-wide the previous quarter. The omission led to follow-up confusion and duplication of effort.



Tips for Improvement:

  • Schedule small but regular blocks of time for learning
  • Keep a shared knowledge base of investigation best practices
  • Use tools like COMET that evolve with your organisation and provide intuitive user prompts
  • Make growth part of the routine rather than an add-on
    ‍

Educational tools for growth

These profiles are not here to criticise. They’re here to help. Each one represents a common behaviour pattern that limits the impact of investigations. By recognising them, you create the space to challenge them and build something better.

Strong investigators are made, not born. And strong cultures are shaped by the choices we make every day in how we respond to failure.

Proactive identification for continuous improvement

When these behaviours go unnoticed, they quietly erode the effectiveness of your safety strategy. But when recognised and addressed, they unlock smarter, more transparent, and more impactful investigations. Here’s what starts to improve:

Sharper analytical skills - You begin to see past symptoms and into the systems that shape them.

Better collaboration - Investigation becomes a team sport. More insight. More accountability. Stronger results.

Clarity without compromise - Reports are readable, relatable, and ready for action.

Consistency at scale - Organisations gain the ability to spot patterns, track effectiveness, and course-correct faster.

A team that stays ahead - By keeping tools and knowledge up to date, your investigations stay relevant and your people stay empowered.

 

It’s not about perfection

Perfection is not the goal. Progress is. The Imperfect Investigator Profiles offer a way to understand, regroup, and rethink your approach.

Each investigation is an opportunity to strengthen your system, build your team’s confidence, and embed a learning culture that works under pressure.
‍
How COMET can help

As part of our COMET Resilience offering, we provide a Human and Organisational Performance Toolkit designed to help teams improve how they learn from day-to-day work. These sessions are delivered in person or online, and they’re suitable for operators and leaders at every level of an organisation.

The idea is simple. Rather than treating mistakes as failures, we explore the conditions behind them. We focus on how work actually gets done, not just how it was expected to be done. This helps uncover risks earlier, and it removes blame from the conversation, which opens the door to more honest and useful insights.

Through guided Learning Team sessions, your people will:

  • Explore the difference between work as imagined and work as done
  • Spot hidden risks before they result in harm
  • Shift from blame to understanding, creating space for learning

It’s about building a culture that does not wait for anincident before it starts asking the right questions. Learn more about our COMET HOP offering.

Supporting smarter investigations with the right tools

Changing how people think is important. But to make that change stick, they also need tools that support better investigations day today.

COMET’s Investigations and Root Cause Analysis module gives teams a clear, consistent way to understand what happened and why. It helps investigators ask better questions, make sense of complex events, and see the bigger picture without losing sight of the details.

The platform makes it easier to:

  • Map causes and contributing factors in a visual, structured way
  • Collaborate across teams without losing clarity
  • Remove bias and follow a consistent process from start to finish
  • Track actions and make sure lessons turn into results
  • Learn from patterns across incidents over time

This is how organisations move from one-off fixes to real, repeatable learning. It is how safety teams stop chasing symptoms and start changing systems. And it is how you build confidence in your investigations across the board.

Final thoughts

Every organisation has blind spots. The difference is whether or not you’re willing to look for them.

The Imperfect Investigator Profiles are not about blame. They are about reflection. About having honest conversations with yourself and your team. About recognising habits that may be holding your investigations back and choosing to do something about them.

Real learning comes from facing the uncomfortable moments head-on. From building the skills and systems to make sense of what went wrong. From creating space to talk openly and ask better questions.

If you are ready to improve how your organisation investigates and learns, we are here to help.

Find out more about COMET Investigations and Root Cause Analysis - Explore the module or speak to our team.