There's a misunderstanding here that's rooted in how we view "accidents". I think Sidney Dekker explains this well, so paraphrasing from the preface of his Fiel

There's a misunderstanding here that's rooted in how we view "accidents". I think Sidney Dekker explains this well, so paraphrasing from the preface of his Field Guide to Understanding Human Error: > So you are faced with a human error problem. What do you do? * You can see human error as the cause of a mishap. In this case, "human error" is the end of your investigation and understanding. * You can see human error as the symptom of deeper troubles. You will look into how human error is systematically connected to people's tools, tasks, and environment. You're working under the former, the "old view" of human error. This article, and most of people working in safety nowadays, try to work in the latter, "new view" by understanding the entire systems that lead to human error.