Why Colour Codes Might Not be the Best Choice for Lifeguard Communication
In the realm of lifeguarding, effective communication is critical to the success of responding to an incidnet. Whether it's communicating vital information about a swimmer in difficulty or coordinating a rescue operation, clear and concise communication can mean the difference between an effective or ineffective response. However, the adoption of colour codes and numbers for radio communication in aquatic leisure, recreation and attractions may not be the optimal solution. While colour codes and numbers may have their merits in other industries, their application in aquatic leisure and recreation settings could pose significant challenges to effective communication.
Initially derived from military and emergency services, colour codes and numbers were designed to facilitate discreet communication using a range of code words and numbers. In these environments, extensive training ensured that personnel could recall and interpret various codes as part of inherent operations. However, the transition of colour codes into the modern workforce has resulted in industry-specific implementations lacking a central standard or approach. For instance, the interpretation of a "Code Blue" can vary significantly, encompassing scenarios such as a medical emergency, a person in distress, or even an evacuation, depending on the context and the specific protocol of the workplace or industry such as emergency services, aged care facilities, and hospital settings. The challenge arises from the fact that across different industries, each colour code or number holds distinct meanings and associated actions, making it difficult for a worker to interpret and potentially causing confusion, thus inhibiting effective communication.
Recent audits undertaken by Aquatic Risk Services Australia, revealed inconsistencies across multiple aquatic facilities when adopting colour codes or numbers. Upon further analysis, it became evident that staff across these facilities were operating in venues where the meanings of each code did not align to the required actions which presented as a potential issue and barrier to effective communication.
In addition to conducting audits, we also undertook a review of three lifeguard training providers, specifically their learner resources to gain a deeper understanding of the learner content, particularly regarding radio communications. Surprisingly, our findings revealed significant variations across each provider, shedding light on the potential origin of the problem. This discrepancy in training materials suggests that inconsistencies in communication protocols may stem not only from divergent practices among aquatic facilities but also from disparities in the educational resources available to lifeguards.
Table 1: Comparison of Lifeguard Training Provider & Radio Codes
Lifeguard Training Provider 1 | Lifeguard Training Provider 2 | Lifeguard Training Provider 3 | |
Total Number of Colour Codes | 8 | 4 | 6 |
Total Number of Number Codes | 3 | 36 | 22 |
In a critical incident, the ability to swiftly and accurately communicate information is key. Yet, reliance on colour codes can introduce a layer of complexity that may impede effective communication. If lifeguards and other workers struggle to recall or interpret the meaning of a specific code, the response to an emergency could be delayed or compromised.
When discussing this subject, it is not uncommon for operators to raise concerns about members of the public overhearing sensitive information. While there is some validity to the concern, it prompts the question: what sensitive information are workers transmitting over a radio? In many cases, if a critical incident is unfolding, members of the public are likely already aware. However, depending on the nature of the scenario, the adoption of colour codes or numbers may indeed be justified. Yet, in situations where a worker requires support as a result of a rescue or first aid, the expression of "rescue, rescue, rescue" along with the location is clear, concise, and easily comprehensible. Additionally, to address concerns alternative controls can be adopted such as limiting volume, utilising earpieces and good radio discipline.
Table 2: Basic Example of Mixed Meanings when Adopting Radio Codes across Workplace Settings
Workplace 1 | Workplace 2 | Workplace 3 | Hospital (Health) | Mining | |
Code Green | First Aid | Evacuation | First Aid | Emergency Activation | Electrical Failure |
Code Black | Lockdown | Fatality/Death | Threat | Bomb Threat | Major Accident |
Code Blue | Pool Closure | First Aid | Fatality/Death | Medical Emergency | Medical Emergency |
Code 100 | Water Rescue | Disturbance | - | - | - |
Code 1 | Evacuation | Alarm | - | - | - |
The table above demonstrates the differences in interpreting radio codes across different aquatic based workplaces and other industries. Across all five settings, there are various discrepancies in the interpretation and meaning behind each code. Therefore, demonstrating the possibility for a worker to be potentially confused as a result of various meanings.
Training Activity: The Adoption of Codes VS Simplified Terminology
Each workplace is different and has unique risk exposures. However, there is value in conducting a training activity with workers to understand if they can recall and understand the meaning of your organisations codes (inc. colours and numbers).
How to: The activity involves conducting a training exercise with workers to assess their ability to recall and understand the meaning of your organisation's code words, including colours and numbers.
Start by listing on a paper the types of colour codes and numbers that the organisation adopts.
Have workers take 10 minutes to write down the meaning and actions required for each code.
At the end of the training session, review the responses and quantify the percentage of workers who were able to correctly identify the meaning associated with each colour code or number.
If the exercise reveals that a significant number of workers were unable to complete the task successfully or if there is a low success rate overall, it indicates a need to reassess current communication methods and controls or simplify the system of work. This evaluation helps ensure that communication protocols are effective and easily comprehensible for all staff members, thereby enhancing workplace safety and efficiency. Ultimately, the goal should be to prioritise communication effectiveness over the adoption of complex systems that may hinder operations.
In conclusion, while the adoption of colour codes may seem appealing, operators in the aquatic recreation, leisure and attraction industry must critically evaluate their efficacy in facilitating clear and concise communication. Effective communication is not just about transmitting information—it's about ensuring that information is readily understood and acted upon. By prioritising clarity and simplicity in communication methods, workers can effectively respond to an incident without potential confusion or delay.
© 2023 Ashley Presser. All rights reserved.
"Colour Codes and Numbers May Inhibit Effective Communication."
For permissions or inquiries, contact Ashley Presser.
Commentaires