ICAM Beyond Safety: Applying the Same Framework to Psychosocial, HR, and Industrial Relations Incidents

Why ICAM Isn’t Just for Safety

The ICAM (Incident Cause Analysis Method) framework is world-renowned for investigating safety incidents and operational failures. But many organisations are realising something powerful:

The same human and organisational factors that cause physical harm also cause psychosocial, HR, and IR incidents.

Bullying, stress, burnout, misconduct, and workplace disputes all have system-based causes. The great strength of ICAM is that it doesn’t need to be rewritten to handle them.

Let’s explore how ICAM can seamlessly apply to people-based incidents - without changing a single part of its process.

The Universality of Human Factors

At its heart, ICAM is about human systems.

Whether someone slips, shouts, or strikes, the same principle applies: behaviour happens within a system.

• A bullying case may involve leadership style and unclear boundaries.

• A stress claim may reveal under-resourcing and poor workload management.

• A union dispute may arise from communication breakdown and mistrust.

ICAM captures them all - because it’s not about the type of event, it’s about the conditions that allowed it.

Understanding the Differences Between Psychosocial, HR, and IR Incidents

Although these incident types often overlap, they each have distinct features, impacts, and regulatory frameworks.

Psychosocial Incidents

These involve harm (or potential harm) to a person’s psychological health and wellbeing. They’re governed by WHS legislation and the Model Code of Practice: Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work.

Examples: bullying, harassment, stress, burnout, role conflict. Focus: health, safety, and prevention of harm.

ICAM lens: why did the environment allow psychological harm to occur?

HR Incidents

These involve breaches of policy, behavioural expectations, or disputes about fairness. Managed under internal HR procedures and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Examples: misconduct, performance issues, grievances, or unfair treatment. Focus: fairness, consistency, and procedural compliance. ICAM lens: why did this behaviour or breakdown occur? What system factors contributed?

IR (Industrial Relations) Incidents

These concern disputes between management and workers (or unions) over employment conditions and rights. Governed by enterprise agreements, modern awards, and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Examples: strikes, roster disputes, breaches of consultation requirements. Focus: lawful and fair management of industrial instruments. 

ICAM lens: what organisational conditions caused the dispute to escalate?

At a Glance

How They Overlap

A single issue can cross all three domains. A bullying complaint might start as a psychosocial hazard, trigger HR misconduct action, and escalate into an IR dispute if mishandled.

ICAM unites them through one consistent, system-based approach.

Applying the ICAM Process

Step 1: Define the Event

Describe what happened - clearly and factually. Example: “Apprentice reported receiving inappropriate messages from supervisor.” Not: “Supervisor behaved inappropriately.”

Step 2: Gather Data

Interview those involved, review communications, policies, and training. Keep it factual, evidence-based, and trauma-informed.

Step 3: Build the Timeline

Map the sequence of events. Psychosocial and HR incidents evolve over time - identifying when things started to go wrong reveals missed intervention points.

Step 4: Identify Contributing Factors

ICAM looks at:

• Human Factors: behaviours and decisions

• Workplace Factors: immediate environment and systems

• Organisational Factors: leadership, resourcing, culture

• Defences: what should have prevented this

Step 5: Identify Absent or Failed Defences

Policies, procedures, or systems that didn’t work as intended:

• Code of Conduct

• Bullying and harassment policies

• HR or grievance pathways

• Leadership training

• EAP access

Ask: Were they present? Adequate? Trusted?

Step 6: Identify Organisational Factors

Here’s where deeper learning happens.

Investigate:

• Leadership and management: were they equipped to act?

• Communication: were expectations clear and consistent?

• Resourcing: were workloads and supervision realistic?

• Culture: was poor behaviour tolerated or ignored?

• Change management: were changes implemented safely?

This is the bridge between incident analysis and true organisational learning.

Step 7: Develop Systemic Recommendations

ICAM’s goal is not blame - it’s learning.

Actions might include:

• Leadership and emotional intelligence training

• Stronger communication channels

• Refreshed policy awareness programs

• Enhanced supervision and mentoring frameworks

• Clearer workload management systems

Common Psychosocial and HR Scenarios

Scenario 1: Workplace Bullying Complaint

Event: Employee alleges ongoing intimidation from supervisor. Findings: Supervisor unaware their approach was perceived as bullying; HR policy poorly implemented. Outcome: Leadership coaching, improved complaint process, cultural reset sessions.

Scenario 2: Burnout and Stress Leave

Event: Multiple employees take stress leave due to unsustainable workloads. Findings: Chronic under-resourcing, unrealistic deadlines, poor support. Outcome: Workload tracking, manager training on psychosocial risks, proactive wellbeing monitoring.

Scenario 3: Industrial Relations Dispute

Event: Employees refuse overtime following sudden roster changes. Findings: Lack of consultation, poor communication, inconsistent application of enterprise agreement. Outcome: Improved consultation procedures and IR training for supervisors.

Scenario 4: Grooming of an Underage Apprentice

Event: An underage apprentice receives personal messages and inappropriate attention from a senior tradesperson. Findings:

• No safeguarding or child safety training

• Outdated Code of Conduct

• Supervisory oversight gaps Outcome: Mandatory safeguarding program, confidential reporting process, clear mentoring standards, and stronger supervision of apprentices.

Why ICAM Works Without Modification

“ICAM is about how systems fail - not what kind of harm results.”

Same Logic

ICAM’s foundation in Reason’s Swiss Cheese Model means it works for physical, psychological, and organisational systems alike.

Same Goal

Whether a hand or a heart is harmed, the goal is the same: uncover system weaknesses and prevent recurrence.

Same Outcome

The result is fairness, learning, and cultural maturity - not blame.

Benefits of Using ICAM Across All Incident Types

✅ Consistency: One framework for all incidents 

✅ Fairness: Evidence-based, transparent, defensible outcomes 

✅ Psychological Safety: Builds trust in reporting and response 

✅ Learning Culture: Encourages openness and accountability 

✅ Regulatory Alignment: Supports WHS and Fair Work compliance together

Bridging Safety, Wellbeing, and Culture

When ICAM is used for psychosocial, HR, and IR events, it unites three often separate disciplines - safety, human resources, and wellbeing - under one common language of learning.

It shifts organisations from:

• Compliance to culture

• Reaction to prevention

• Blame to understanding

Final Thoughts

ICAM is far more than a safety investigation tool. It’s a universal learning system that helps organisations understand why harm, conflict, or failure occurs - and how to prevent it next time.

By applying ICAM to psychosocial, HR, and IR incidents, leaders gain a deeper understanding of their culture, systems, and people.

The methodology doesn’t just investigate incidents. It helps build workplaces that are safe, fair, respectful, and resilient.