Abstract
Suggests that sources of data on human failure, particularly case studies of specific disasters, have not been able to offer a generalized theory. Suggests that this can best be effected at the level of middle range theory based on analysis of the comparative structure of a workplace organization. Offers an adaptation of an approach from anthropology and cultural theory, that supplies four distinct, exclusive and archetypal workplace structures. Each is associated with a distinct cluster of sustaining and justifying values and attitudes that are manifest as four associated patterns of behaviours. Particular attention is directed at the normal kinds of workplace deviance, including sabotage, shown to be typical of each of the four archetypes. Their incumbent attitudes to risk are delineated, as are their typical patterns of industrial relationships.