Academic literature on the topic 'Figure-ground perception'

The appearance of visual objects varies substantially across the visual field. Could such spatial heterogeneity be due to undersampling of the visual field by neurons selective for stimulus categories? Here, we show that which parts of a bistable vase-face image observers perceive as figure and ground depends on the retinal location where the image appears. The spatial patterns of these perceptual biases were similar regardless of whether the images were upright or inverted. Undersampling by neurons tuned to an object class (e.g., faces) or variability in general local versus global processing cannot readily explain this spatial heterogeneity. Rather, these biases could result from idiosyncrasies in low-level sensitivity across the visual field.

The temporal sequence of neural processes supporting figure–ground perception was investigated by recording ERPs associated with subjects' perceptions of the face–vase figure. In Experiment 1, subjects continuously reported whether they perceived the face or the vase as the foreground figure by pressing one of two buttons. Each button press triggered a probe flash to the face region, the vase region, or the borders between the two. The N170/vertex positive potential (VPP) component of the ERP elicited by probes to the face region was larger when subjects perceived the faces as figure. Preceding the N170/VPP, two additional components were identified. First, when the borders were probed, ERPs differed in amplitude as early as 110 msec after probe onset depending on subjects' figure–ground perceptions. Second, when the face or vase regions were probed, ERPs were more positive (at ∼150–200 msec) when that region was perceived as figure versus background. These components likely reflect an early “border ownership” stage, and a subsequent “figure–ground segregation” stage of processing. To explore the influence of attention on these stages of processing, two additional experiments were conducted. In Experiment 2, subjects selectively attended to the face or vase region, and the same early ERP components were again produced. In Experiment 3, subjects performed an identical selective attention task, but on a display lacking distinctive figure–ground borders, and neither of the early components were produced. Results from these experiments suggest sequential stages of processing underlying figure–ground perception, each which are subject to modifications by selective attention.

Figure-ground segregation occurs when one of two regions sharing a border is perceived as a shaped entity (a figure) and the other is perceived as a shapeless background to the figure. The mechanism of figure-ground perception is inhibitory competition. Peterson and Skow (2008) showed that a familiar configuration that loses the competition for figural status is not perceived consciously and is suppressed, at least at the level of categorical shape. A remaining question is whether the semantics of the familiar configuration are also accessed and suppressed. The present study investigates this question through binocular rivalry. Binocular rivalry occurs when separate images are simultaneously presented to the left and right eyes. Typically one dominates at any given moment, and awareness alternates back and forth between these two images. The image that is not perceived is suppressed (Wheatstone, 1838). The present experiments investigated how the suppression in figure-ground perception and the suppression in binocular rivalry interact. In one eye, subjects viewed a silhouette that initially dominated because a dynamic, colorful pattern was presented within the confines of the figure. In the other eye, participants viewed a word string either a word that named a familiar configuration or a non-word; the letter string was initially suppressed. Experiment 1 explored whether the time required for the letter string to reach awareness between a silhouette that had a hidden, familiar configuration on the ground side or a silhouette with a novel configuration on the ground. Experiment 2 observed the time required to make a lexical decision once the letter string arrived to awareness. Both experiments failed to yield evidence for an interaction between figure-ground and binocular rivalry suppression. This suggests that during binocular rivalry, a shape suppressed by figure-ground competition fails to interact with a word corresponding to the suppressed shape.

There is a question of what cognitive resources underlie bistable figure-ground alternation. Figure-ground alternation is accomplished via inhibition. Research highlighting the role of inhibition in working memory processes point to the possible involvement of working memory in figure-ground alternation. We examined this issue by asking participants to simultaneously maintain a working memory load and indicate their perceptual reversals of figure-ground stimuli. Two separate types of working memory tasks were used, a verbal (multi-modal) task and a visual task. Concurrent visual working memory load caused perceptual alteration to speed, while verbal working memory load had no significant effect. This implies that working memory space is needed to maintain the current percept, while inhibition keeps the alternate interpretation from coming to dominance.

We assessed age differences in the ability to resolve competition for figural status in stationary displays using small, enclosed, symmetrical silhouettes that participants classified as depicting "novel'' or "familiar'' shapes. The silhouettes were biased such that the inside was perceived as the shaped figure, and the outside was perceived as a shapeless ground. The critical manipulation was whether a portion of a meaningful object was suggested on the outside of the border of some of the novel silhouettes but not others M(+)Ground and M-Ground novel silhouettes, respectively). This manipulation was intended to induce greater inhibitory competition for figural status from the groundside in M(+)Ground silhouettes than M(-)Ground silhouettes. In previous studies, young adults classified M(+)Ground silhouettes as "novel'' faster than M(-)Ground silhouettes (Trujillo, Allen, Schnyer, & Peterson, 2010), suggesting that young adults may recruit more inhibition to resolve figure-ground when there is more competition. We replicated this effect with young adults in the present study, but older adults showed the opposite pattern and were less accurate in classifying M(+)Ground than M(-)Ground silhouettes. These results extend the evidence for inhibitory deficits in older adults to figure assignment in stationary displays. The (M(+)Ground - M(-)Ground) RT differences were evident in observers' longest responses, consistent with the hypothesis that inhibitory deficits are evident when the need for inhibition is substantial.

In this study we sought to determine whether infants, like adults, utilize previous experience to guide figure/ground processing. After familiarization to a shape, 5-month-olds preferentially attended to the side of an ambiguous figure/ground test stimulus corresponding to that shape, suggesting that they were viewing that portion as the figure. Infants’ failure to exhibit this preference in a control condition in which both sides of the test stimulus were displayed as figures indicated that the results in the experimental condition were not due to a preference between two figure shapes. These findings demonstrate for the first time that figure/ground processing in infancy is sensitive to top-down influence. Thus, a critical aspect of figure/ground processing is functional early in life.

We examined age-related differences in figure-ground perception by exploring the effect of age on Convexity Context Effects (CCE; Peterson & Salvagio, 2008). Experiment 1, using Peterson and Salvagio's procedure and black and white stimuli consisting of 2 to 8 alternating concave and convex regions, established that older adults exhibited reduced CCEs compared to younger adults. Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated that this age difference was found at various stimulus durations and sizes. Experiment 4 compared CCEs obtained with achromatic stimuli, in which the alternating convex and concave regions were each all black or all white, and chromatic stimuli in which the concave regions were homogeneous in color but the convex regions varied in color. We found that the difference between CCEs measured with achromatic and colored stimuli was larger in older than in younger adults. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that the senescent visual system is less able to resolve the competition among various perceptual interpretations of the figure-ground relations among stimulus regions.

Figure-ground perception can be modeled as a competitive process with mutual inhibition between shape properties on opposite sides of an edge. This dissertation reports brain-based evidence that such competitive inhibition can be induced by access to preexisting object memory representations during figure assignment. Silhouette stimuli were used in which the balance of properties along an edge biased the inner, bounded, region to be seen as a novel figure. Experimental silhouettes (EXP) suggested familiar objects on their outside edges, which nonetheless appeared as shapeless grounds. Control silhouettes (CON) suggested novel shapes on the outside.In an initial task, human observers categorized masked EXP and CON silhouettes (175 ms exposure) as "novel" versus a third group of silhouettes depicting "familiar" objects on the inside. Signal detection measures verified that observers were unconscious of the familiar shapes within the EXP stimuli. Across three experiments, novel categorizations were highly accurate with shorter RTs for EXP than CON. Event-related potential (ERP) indices of observers' brain activity (Experiments 2 and 3) revealed a Late Potential (~300 ms) to be less positive for EXP than CON, a reduction in neural activity consistent with the presence of greater competitive inhibition for EXP stimuli. After controlling for stimulus confounds (Experiment 3), the P1 ERP (~100 ms) was larger for EXP than CON conditions, perhaps reflecting unconscious access to object memories.In a second task, observers were informed about familiar shapes suggested on the outsides of the EXP silhouettes before viewing masked (Experiments 1 and 2) or unmasked (Experiment 3) EXP and CON silhouettes to report whether they saw familiar shapes on the outside. Experiment 3 observers were more accurate to categorize CON vs. EXP stimuli as novel vs. familiar, with shorter RTs for EXP than CON. Task 2 N170 ERPs (~170 ms) were larger for EXP than CON in Experiments 2 and 3, reflecting the conscious perception of familiar shape in the outsides of EXP silhouettes. LP magnitudes were greater for CON than EXP, although ERP polarity was dependent on the presence/absence of a mask. Task 2 LPs may reflect competitive inhibition or longer processing times for CON stimuli.

Object perception is necessary to our understanding of the visual world, yet its neural mechanism remains poorly understood. The goal of this dissertation is to shed light on this mechanism. Current computational models of object perception suggest that regions on opposite sides of a shared border compete, with the winner perceived as the shaped object and the loser as its locally shapeless background (or ground). Recent behavioral work indicates that the result of this competition is suppression of the ground at the level of object shape--a finding not predicted by models. Here, I present three studies that extend this previous research on ground suppression as a mechanism by which object perception is accomplished. I first show that the amount of suppression applied to the ground depends on the amount of competition for object status (Salvagio, Cacciamani, & Peterson, 2012). I then provide the first neural evidence of ground suppression from shape-level competition at both high and low levels of the visual hierarchy, with the latter arising from top-down feedback (Cacciamani, Scalf, & Peterson, submitted). Finally, I show that semantic information pertaining to the ground is accessed prior to the assignment of object status, but unlike shape information, is not suppressed (Cacciamani, Mojica, Sanguinetti, & Peterson, 2014). Together, the three studies that comprise this dissertation demonstrate that ground suppression arising from shape-level competition underlies object perception. This research contradicts traditional theories stating that objects are processed unidirectionally through the visual system in a single feedforward pass; instead, it supports theories of object perception entailing dynamical feedforward and feedback processes.

The visual system receives a series of fluctuating light patterns on the retina, yet visual perception is strikingly different from this unorganized and ambiguous input. Thus visual processes must organize the input into coherent units, or objects, and segregate them from others. These processes, collectively called perceptual organization, are fundamental to our ability to perceive and interact with objects in the world. Nevertheless, they are not yet understood, perhaps because serial, hierarchical assumptions that were long held impeded progress. In a series of experiments, this dissertation investigated the mechanisms that contribute to perceptual organization and ultimately to our ability to perceive objects. A new hypothesis is that during the course of object assignment potential objects on either side of a border are accessed on a fast pass of processing and engage in inhibitory competition for object status; the winner is perceived as the object and the loser is suppressed, leading that region to be seen as part of the shapeless background. Previous research suggested that at least shape level representations are accessed on the fast pass of processing before object assignment. In the first series of experiments (Chapter 1), we found that meaning (semantics) is also accessed on the fast pass of processing for regions that are ultimately perceived as shapeless grounds. This finding contradicts traditional feed-forward theories of perception that assumed that meaning is accessed only for figures after object assignment. The experiments in Chapter 2 examine activity in the alpha band of the EEG, which has been used as an index of inhibition. More alpha activity was observed when participants viewed stimuli designed such that there was more competition for figural status from the region ultimately perceived as the ground. The results support the proposal that inhibitory competition occurs during the course of object perception, and these results are the first online measure of competition during figure assignment. The final series of experiments (Chapter 3) investigated how quickly saccadic behaviors that required perceptual organization can be initiated. The experiments show that participants can initiate saccades that are based on perceptual organization approximately 200 ms after stimulus onset, much faster than was assumed on feed-forward models of perception. Collectively, these experiment support models of object perception that involve the mutual interaction and competition of objects properties via feedforward and iterative feedback processing, and the eventual suppression of the losing ground regions before object assignment.

How do infants segment objects from the complex visual environment? Investigations of figure-ground perception have been dominated by studies assessing infants' sensitivity to depth and figure cues; few studies have assessed what information infants' use to perceive figures as separate from grounds. Research examining word segmentation suggests that statistical learning might aid segmentation in visual scenes. Despite the numerous studies investigating figure-ground segmentation, none have investigated the role of spatial transitional probabilities as a means for segmentation. To examine this question, we used a habituation/familiarity-preference procedure to assess whether background variability enables 5.5-month-old infants' perception of figures as separate from the background. The results of Experiments 1 and 2 indicated that statistical learning extends to scene segmentation, scene contexts allowed extraction of statistical distribution. Experiment 3 demonstrated that matching the configuration of visual arrays during training and test is essential; mismatched stimuli impede the measurement of segmentation.

Although it is easy to read our patchy evidence about Columbanus as depicting a lone Irish figure with his deviant Easter tradition battling against a continental ecclesiastical hierarchy comprising bishops and the pope, this paper’s close reading and contextualization of the evidence provides a more nuanced picture. It reveals extensive common ground between the high Christian standards of both Columbanus and Gregory the Great, over against the laxity of the Gallic episcopate, and then focuses on the issue of “shunning,” or withholding oneself from relations with Christians one perceives as sinful, although they have not been excommunicated. A second section examines the Insular background to this, focusing on Gildas’s writings. Finally the third section turns to Columbanus’s dealings with the Merovingians, using the Insular tradition of shunning as a way of re-reading Jonas’s account of how relations between Columbanus and the royal court soured, ending in his exile. Encounters between Columbanus and those with whom he came into contact on the continent have been characterized as confrontation and controversy, reflecting one important aspect of his relations with leading figures. This perception of Columbanus arises from the patchy nature of historical sources. This chapter interrogates the few available sources and tries to place them in context and understand the issues surrounding them. First it investigates his relationship with Gregory the Great, raising the issue of “shunning,” or withholding oneself from relations with Christians one perceives as sinful, although they have not been excommunicated. Then it turns to Columbanus’s dealings with the Merovingians leading up to his exile, using the awareness of shunning as a way of re-reading Jonas’s account of how relations between Columbanus and the royal court soured, ending in his exile.

AbstractThis chapter examines the Napoleonic subprefects who have been in office in the Netherlands and Northwest Germany. Within the prefectoral system, these sous-préfets were the highest officials at arrondissement (disctrict) level. Activities of subprefects, somewhat neglected by historians, give insight into how French tried to rally the locals, and how this affected the daily functioning of the Empire. Discussed are subprefects’ sociocultural backgrounds, imperial careers, and perception of Napoleonic governance. Subprefects had to balance national, local, and personal interest. Integration at district level was hard when the letter of the administrative legislation and the precise instructions from above were rigidly adhered to. Subprefects traveling the Empire linked events in the Netherlands and Northwest Germany to developments elsewhere, promoting integration into the Empire. Circulation patterns reflect different ideas on the required level of integration. It is argued that the figure of the subprefect was a potential ‘tool of integration’. That subprefects were close to the ground could contributed to the effectiveness of Napoleonic governance. But subprefects also coped with demanding prefects, and interference of other agents of the central state. Reversely, unwilling subprefects were in a position to hinder the integration process.

This paper is concerned with the nature of ‘front’ along the front/back axis. The languages taken up for the study are Bengali, a language belonging to Indo-Aryan language family, and Kannada, a language belonging to Dravidian language family. The terms for denoting ‘front’ for Bengali are ‘samne’ and ‘aage’ and for Kannada are ‘yeduru’ and ‘munde’. Experience and embodiment of spatial arrangements play an important role in the spatial cognition, and language use takes into account the different points of view. Many factors such as proximity, vantage point, specificity, etc. play an important role in describing a given situation. It is worth mentioning that the choice of the usages of the words for denoting ‘front’ as location or direction has been seen as different in some situations and overlapping in others. The data were collected using a questionnaire which aimed to elicit the expressions for ‘front’ for the entities, whose relationship is described in terms of Figure and Ground (Talmy, 1983; 2000), from the speakers of both the above mentioned languages, and then analysed for the factors involved.

Attention to safety and health are of ever-increasing priority to industrial organizations. Good Safety is demanded by stockholders, employees, and the community while increasing injury costs provide additional motivation for safety and health excellence. Safety has always been a strong corporate value of DuPont and a vital part of its culture. As a result, DuPont has become a benchmark in safety and health performance. Since 1990, DuPont has re-engineered itself to meet global competition and address future vision. In the new re-engineered organizational structures, DuPont has also had to re-engineer its safety management systems. A special Discovery Team was chartered by DuPont senior management to determine the “best practices’ for safety and health being used in DuPont best-performing sites. A summary of the findings is presented, and five of the practices are discussed. Excellence in safety and health management is more important today than ever. Public awareness, federal and state regulations, and enlightened management have resulted in a widespread conviction that all employees have the right to work in an environment that will not adversely affect their safety and health. In DuPont, we believe that excellence in safety and health is necessary to achieve global competitiveness, maintain employee loyalty, and be an accepted member of the communities in which we make, handle, use, and transport products. Safety can also be the “catalyst” to achieving excellence in other important business parameters. The organizational and communication skills developed by management, individuals, and teams in safety can be directly applied to other company initiatives. As we look into the 21st Century, we must also recognize that new organizational structures (flatter with empowered teams) will require new safety management techniques and systems in order to maintain continuous improvement in safety performance. Injury costs, which have risen dramatically in the past twenty years, provide another incentive for safety and health excellence. Shown in the Figure 1, injury costs have increased even after correcting for inflation. Many companies have found these costs to be an “invisible drain” on earnings and profitability. In some organizations, significant initiatives have been launched to better manage the workers’ compensation systems. We have found that the ultimate solution is to prevent injuries and incidents before they occur. A globally-respected company, DuPont is regarded as a well-managed, extremely ethical firm that is the benchmark in industrial safety performance. Like many other companies, DuPont has re-engineered itself and downsized its operations since 1985. Through these changes, we have maintained dedication to our principles and developed new techniques to manage in these organizational environments. As a diversified company, our operations involve chemical process facilities, production line operations, field activities, and sales and distribution of materials. Our customer base is almost entirely industrial and yet we still maintain a high level of consumer awareness and positive perception. The DuPont concern for safety dates back to the early 1800s and the first days of the company. In 1802 E.I. DuPont, a Frenchman, began manufacturing quality grade explosives to fill America’s growing need to build roads, clear fields, increase mining output, and protect its recently won independence. Because explosives production is such a hazardous industry, DuPont recognized and accepted the need for an effective safety effort. The building walls of the first powder mill near Wilmington, Delaware, were built three stones thick on three sides. The back remained open to the Brandywine River to direct any explosive forces away from other buildings and employees. To set the safety example, DuPont also built his home and the homes of his managers next to the powder yard. An effective safety program was a necessity. It represented the first defense against instant corporate liquidation. Safety needs more than a well-designed plant, however. In 1811, work rules were posted in the mill to guide employee work habits. Though not nearly as sophisticated as the safety standards of today, they did introduce an important basic concept — that safety must be a line management responsibility. Later, DuPont introduced an employee health program and hired a company doctor. An early step taken in 1912 was the keeping of safety statistics, approximately 60 years before the federal requirement to do so. We had a visible measure of our safety performance and were determined that we were going to improve it. When the nation entered World War I, the DuPont Company supplied 40 percent of the explosives used by the Allied Forces, more than 1.5 billion pounds. To accomplish this task, over 30,000 new employees were hired and trained to build and operate many plants. Among these facilities was the largest smokeless powder plant the world had ever seen. The new plant was producing granulated powder in a record 116 days after ground breaking. The trends on the safety performance chart reflect the problems that a large new work force can pose until the employees fully accept the company’s safety philosophy. The first arrow reflects the World War I scale-up, and the second arrow represents rapid diversification into new businesses during the 1920s. These instances of significant deterioration in safety performance reinforced DuPont’s commitment to reduce the unsafe acts that were causing 96 percent of our injuries. Only 4 percent of injuries result from unsafe conditions or equipment — the remainder result from the unsafe acts of people. This is an important concept if we are to focus our attention on reducing injuries and incidents within the work environment. World War II brought on a similar set of demands. The story was similar to World War I but the numbers were even more astonishing: one billion dollars in capital expenditures, 54 new plants, 75,000 additional employees, and 4.5 billion pounds of explosives produced — 20 percent of the volume used by the Allied Forces. Yet, the performance during the war years showed no significant deviation from the pre-war years. In 1941, the DuPont Company was 10 times safer than all industry and 9 times safer than the Chemical Industry. Management and the line organization were finally working as they should to control the real causes of injuries. Today, DuPont is about 50 times safer than US industrial safety performance averages. Comparing performance to other industries, it is interesting to note that seemingly “hazard-free” industries seem to have extraordinarily high injury rates. This is because, as DuPont has found out, performance is a function of injury prevention and safety management systems, not hazard exposure. Our success in safety results from a sound safety management philosophy. Each of the 125 DuPont facilities is responsible for its own safety program, progress, and performance. However, management at each of these facilities approaches safety from the same fundamental and sound philosophy. This philosophy can be expressed in eleven straightforward principles. The first principle is that all injuries can be prevented. That statement may seem a bit optimistic. In fact, we believe that this is a realistic goal and not just a theoretical objective. Our safety performance proves that the objective is achievable. We have plants with over 2,000 employees that have operated for over 10 years without a lost time injury. As injuries and incidents are investigated, we can always identify actions that could have prevented that incident. If we manage safety in a proactive — rather than reactive — manner, we will eliminate injuries by reducing the acts and conditions that cause them. The second principle is that management, which includes all levels through first-line supervisors, is responsible and accountable for preventing injuries. Only when senior management exerts sustained and consistent leadership in establishing safety goals, demanding accountability for safety performance and providing the necessary resources, can a safety program be effective in an industrial environment. The third principle states that, while recognizing management responsibility, it takes the combined energy of the entire organization to reach sustained, continuous improvement in safety and health performance. Creating an environment in which employees feel ownership for the safety effort and make significant contributions is an essential task for management, and one that needs deliberate and ongoing attention. The fourth principle is a corollary to the first principle that all injuries are preventable. It holds that all operating exposures that may result in injuries or illnesses can be controlled. No matter what the exposure, an effective safeguard can be provided. It is preferable, of course, to eliminate sources of danger, but when this is not reasonable or practical, supervision must specify measures such as special training, safety devices, and protective clothing. Our fifth safety principle states that safety is a condition of employment. Conscientious assumption of safety responsibility is required from all employees from their first day on the job. Each employee must be convinced that he or she has a responsibility for working safely. The sixth safety principle: Employees must be trained to work safely. We have found that an awareness for safety does not come naturally and that people have to be trained to work safely. With effective training programs to teach, motivate, and sustain safety knowledge, all injuries and illnesses can be eliminated. Our seventh principle holds that management must audit performance on the workplace to assess safety program success. Comprehensive inspections of both facilities and programs not only confirm their effectiveness in achieving the desired performance, but also detect specific problems and help to identify weaknesses in the safety effort. The Company’s eighth principle states that all deficiencies must be corrected promptly. Without prompt action, risk of injuries will increase and, even more important, the credibility of management’s safety efforts will suffer. Our ninth principle is a statement that off-the-job safety is an important part of the overall safety effort. We do not expect nor want employees to “turn safety on” as they come to work and “turn it off” when they go home. The company safety culture truly becomes of the individual employee’s way of thinking. The tenth principle recognizes that it’s good business to prevent injuries. Injuries cost money. However, hidden or indirect costs usually exceed the direct cost. Our last principle is the most important. Safety must be integrated as core business and personal value. There are two reasons for this. First, we’ve learned from almost 200 years of experience that 96 percent of safety incidents are directly caused by the action of people, not by faulty equipment or inadequate safety standards. But conversely, it is our people who provide the solutions to our safety problems. They are the one essential ingredient in the recipe for a safe workplace. Intelligent, trained, and motivated employees are any company’s greatest resource. Our success in safety depends upon the men and women in our plants following procedures, participating actively in training, and identifying and alerting each other and management to potential hazards. By demonstrating a real concern for each employee, management helps establish a mutual respect, and the foundation is laid for a solid safety program. This, of course, is also the foundation for good employee relations. An important lesson learned in DuPont is that the majority of injuries are caused by unsafe acts and at-risk behaviors rather than unsafe equipment or conditions. In fact, in several DuPont studies it was estimated that 96 percent of injuries are caused by unsafe acts. This was particularly revealing when considering safety audits — if audits were only focused on conditions, at best we could only prevent four percent of our injuries. By establishing management systems for safety auditing that focus on people, including audit training, techniques, and plans, all incidents are preventable. Of course, employee contribution and involvement in auditing leads to sustainability through stakeholdership in the system. Management safety audits help to make manage the “behavioral balance.” Every job and task performed at a site can do be done at-risk or safely. The essence of a good safety system ensures that safe behavior is the accepted norm amongst employees, and that it is the expected and respected way of doing things. Shifting employees norms contributes mightily to changing culture. The management safety audit provides a way to quantify these norms. DuPont safety performance has continued to improve since we began keeping records in 1911 until about 1990. In the 1990–1994 time frame, performance deteriorated as shown in the chart that follows: This increase in injuries caused great concern to senior DuPont management as well as employees. It occurred while the corporation was undergoing changes in organization. In order to sustain our technological, competitive, and business leadership positions, DuPont began re-engineering itself beginning in about 1990. New streamlined organizational structures and collaborative work processes eliminated many positions and levels of management and supervision. The total employment of the company was reduced about 25 percent during these four years. In our traditional hierarchical organization structures, every level of supervision and management knew exactly what they were expected to do with safety, and all had important roles. As many of these levels were eliminated, new systems needed to be identified for these new organizations. In early 1995, Edgar S. Woolard, DuPont Chairman, chartered a Corporate Discovery Team to look for processes that will put DuPont on a consistent path toward a goal of zero injuries and occupational illnesses. The cross-functional team used a mode of “discovery through learning” from as many DuPont employees and sites around the world. The Discovery Team fostered the rapid sharing and leveraging of “best practices” and innovative approaches being pursued at DuPont’s plants, field sites, laboratories, and office locations. In short, the team examined the company’s current state, described the future state, identified barriers between the two, and recommended key ways to overcome these barriers. After reporting back to executive management in April, 1995, the Discovery Team was realigned to help organizations implement their recommendations. The Discovery Team reconfirmed key values in DuPont — in short, that all injuries, incidents, and occupational illnesses are preventable and that safety is a source of competitive advantage. As such, the steps taken to improve safety performance also improve overall competitiveness. Senior management made this belief clear: “We will strengthen our business by making safety excellence an integral part of all business activities.” One of the key findings of the Discovery Team was the identification of the best practices used within the company, which are listed below: ▪ Felt Leadership – Management Commitment ▪ Business Integration ▪ Responsibility and Accountability ▪ Individual/Team Involvement and Influence ▪ Contractor Safety ▪ Metrics and Measurements ▪ Communications ▪ Rewards and Recognition ▪ Caring Interdependent Culture; Team-Based Work Process and Systems ▪ Performance Standards and Operating Discipline ▪ Training/Capability ▪ Technology ▪ Safety and Health Resources ▪ Management and Team Audits ▪ Deviation Investigation ▪ Risk Management and Emergency Response ▪ Process Safety ▪ Off-the-Job Safety and Health Education Attention to each of these best practices is essential to achieve sustained improvements in safety and health. The Discovery Implementation in conjunction with DuPont Safety and Environmental Management Services has developed a Safety Self-Assessment around these systems. In this presentation, we will discuss a few of these practices and learn what they mean. Paper published with permission.