Purpose
This paper aims to present a practitioner-oriented Safety Ethogram for military exercises. Its purpose is to make safety-related learning practices easier to observe, discuss and improve during planning, execution, debrief and after-action review.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper draws on qualitative content analysis of interview material on safety planning, coordination, deviation, intervention and learning in military exercises. Of 42 interview transcript files, 38 were readable and analysed through 74 traceable meaning units using a structured coding framework focused on interview-described safety practices.
Findings
Four recurring areas of practice were identified: formal safety governance and risk work, deviation and drift from intended practice, intervention to correct or redirect exercise activity and learning through experience and institutional memory. Together, these areas show that safety in exercises is not maintained by rules alone. It also depends on how governance is translated into action, how drift is recognised, whether intervention is legitimate and usable and whether lessons identified are carried forward into future planning.
Research limitations/implications
The framework is based on interview-described practice rather than direct observation. It should therefore be read as a practice-informed tool that requires further testing in live exercise settings.
Practical implications
The safety ethogram offers a practical vocabulary for those who plan, lead, observe and evaluate exercises. It can be used to strengthen observation, structure debriefs, diagnose drift and improve the link between after-action learning and future safety governance.
Originality/value
This paper contributes a practice-based framework for examining how safety is enacted in military exercises as workplaces. Rather than treating safety as an abstract cultural property, it makes visible the concrete patterns through which safety is supported, weakened, corrected and learned.