Is 'human error' ever acceptable as a cause?
People make mistakes, or decide on a course of action, inside of a context. This context is based on experiences, organisational pressures, what they can interpret from their environment, and a hundred other variables. The decision usually seems like the right one at the time, and with the power of hindsight, we can see that it was incorrect or inappropriate. When we use language like "human error", we automatically place our focus on the person involved, and that they were at the source of the failure. In reality, the person is just another cog in the machine, where the machine itself has not been designed perfectly. We could focus on the error, or the reasons that the error was made. I know which one is more likely to result in improvements