In the corporate software world in Türkiye, one of the most resonant promises is "ease." Easy installation, easy use, fast adaptation, screens everyone can understand... Especially for busy managers and field teams, these promises are extremely attractive. In a mandatory area like OHS, which is often seen as "something that needs to be done anyway," the discourse of ease becomes an even stronger sales argument. Because a significant portion of businesses don't want OHS processes to slow down the production tempo; they want to comply with minimum effort if possible.

However, there is a reality clearly seen over the years in field and regulatory practice: "easy" looking solutions in OHS don't always produce the right results. In fact, in some cases, the promise of ease can inadvertently push the business toward a greater risk by weakening the system's actual need — control and traceability. Therefore, when making software selection in OHS, the question "is it easy to use?" is certainly important, but it should not be the sole determinant. The real question is: Does this software establish a control infrastructure that will enable the business to truly manage its risks?

This article analyzes why OHS in Türkiye is often run by "just getting by"; how the promise of ease can feed this culture of getting by; and what the fundamental criterion expected from software for sustainable safety should be.

The nature of OHS is different from other areas. If there's an error in finance software, you lose money; if there's an error in quality software, you lose customers; if there's an error in OHS, you can lose people. This harsh reality shows that OHS processes are not just documentation but also behavior and process control. In Türkiye practice, however, OHS is often carried out as document management rather than behavior control. Risk assessments are made, trainings are planned, drills are recorded; but the same risks recur in the field. This is why accident statistics have been revolving around the same types of events for years.

At this point, the promise of ease comes into play. Some software oversimplifies the process to not tire the user. Questions are reduced, required fields are removed, follow-up mechanisms are loosened. As a result, the user progresses quickly, the system feels "comfortable." However, this comfort often brings with it: a system is not being established, only records are being kept. Keeping records is necessary in OHS but not sufficient. Because records show the past; control manages the future.

One of the most critical needs for a business in Türkiye to manage its risks is making repetitions visible. The same non-conformity occurring repeatedly in the same department, the same equipment failing the same way, or the same behavior being constantly violated; these are the most valuable signals showing where the system is actually not working. Some systems designed with a claim of ease push the tracking of these repetitions to the background. However, the most expensive thing for a business is not a single error but a recurring error. Because recurring risk becomes normalized over time and the probability of an accident increases.

One of the critical criteria when choosing OHS software is clarifying responsibility. The biggest problem in the field in Türkiye is actions that "everyone knows but no one owns." A non-conformity is detected, written in the report, maybe a photo is taken. Then it doesn't close. A month later it is written again. This cycle continues for years. Actually, the problem here is not the detection of non-conformity; it's the lack of clarity about whose responsibility the actions are. This is where software creates real value: It assigns responsibility, gives a deadline, makes delay visible, brings it to the management screen. Without this control mechanism, ease of use is not an advantage but a weakness that breaks sustainability.

There is a similar reality in the dimension of labor law as well. When an occupational accident occurs in Türkiye, it's not just asked "is there a document?"; it's examined whether there was a control mechanism in the process. Was the risk known, was it reported, was action taken, did it recur, did management follow up? The answers to these questions seriously affect the business's legal position. Therefore, it's important that OHS software is not "easy" but establishes a traceable and evidence-producing system. Because if the system is working in OHS, it should be possible to show this not just on audit day but every day of the year.

The OJHS model in Türkiye also affects this picture. Since many businesses run OHS with external service, the reflex to establish a system internally weakens. The perception that "the expert comes, writes the report, paperwork is complete" is dominant. However, the real benefit of OJHS reports to the business depends on the closure of actions. If actions don't close, the report only becomes an archive. Therefore, software should not be a screen that makes the OJHS's job easier; it should be a structure that enables the employer to establish control in the field. When this structure is established, OJHS also works more efficiently because the report transforms into action.

"Easy" looking software in OHS can provide short-term comfort for some businesses. However, the reality in the field shows this: OHS is not an area that can be managed with comfort alone. OHS requires discipline and control. Therefore, the right software selection should be evaluated based on system-building capacity before ease of use. Ease of use is certainly important, but it should be provided without weakening the system's control capability.

EGEROBOT's approach is shaped exactly at this point. The goal is not to tire the user but to make the business's risks manageable. The aim is to build a structure that makes risk repetitions visible, tracks actions, brings delays to the management screen, creates corporate memory, and keeps the field counterpart of regulations alive. When such a system is established, OHS stops being an obligation remembered from audit to audit; it transforms into a management discipline that strengthens the business's sustainability.

The biggest need of OHS in Türkiye is for the habits carried out by "just getting by" to give way to a measurable and traceable system. What will provide this transition is not just documents but control infrastructure. EGEROBOT ISG-SIS® exists to establish this infrastructure and strengthen the business's real risk management.