Practical work. Real feedback. Clearer insight.
Sensitive, high-stakes topics like sexual assault, sexual harassment, workplace culture and retention need more than policy language and generic awareness sessions.
They need delivery that people recognise as relevant, safe enough to engage with, and practical enough to use in the real world.
This page shares early evidence and results from my work so far, including maritime education delivery and sector-based SASH sessions. The purpose is simple: to show what participants experienced, what shifted, and what the feedback is beginning to tell us about safer, healthier maritime cultures.ple recognise as relevant, safe enough to engage with, and practical enough to use in the real world.
Why this matters
Training on sensitive issues is often judged by whether it was delivered.
That is not good enough.
For work like this, I want to know whether people found the session relevant, whether they felt psychologically safe enough to engage, whether the content helped them think differently, and whether it improved confidence around what to do in real situations.
That is the level I am interested in.
Featured evidence: Warsash Maritime School
Between February and July 2026, I delivered SASH at Sea – Live Skills to Warsash Maritime School cadets.
Feedback was collected from 255 cadet feedback records across the delivery period. The results showed a clear positive impact, but they also revealed something bigger.
This was not just feedback on one training session. It showed how SASH prevention connects directly with wider cadet experience: confidence, hierarchy, communication, reporting trust, mental health, loneliness, expectations of sea life and retention.
These issues are not separate. They are different parts of the same reality at sea.
What cadets told us
Knowledge increased from 2.58/5 to 3.87/5
Confidence to intervene increased from 3.13/5 to 3.77/5
Confidence to intervene increased from 3.13/5 to 3.77/5
At the start of the session, only 14% of completed responses rated their knowledge of SASH prevention as 4 or 5.
By the end of the session, this had increased to 81%.
Confidence to intervene increased from 3.13/5 to 3.77/5
Confidence to intervene increased from 3.13/5 to 3.77/5
Confidence to intervene increased from 3.13/5 to 3.77/5
Cadets were asked how comfortable they would feel intervening in a realistic scenario involving a First Officer harassing a cadet.
The increase was positive and realistic. Knowledge can shift quickly in one session. Confidence to intervene in a hierarchy-heavy environment is more complex, and needs practical tools, repetition and clear escalation routes.
94% scored knowledge-check accuracy
Confidence to intervene increased from 3.13/5 to 3.77/5
85% rated the session useful or extremely useful
The knowledge check was used as a practical learning check rather than a formal exam.
Cadets demonstrated a strong understanding of safe bystander intervention, responding to a disclosure, recording factual notes, using alternative reporting routes, and understanding neutral safety steps during an investigation.
85% rated the session useful or extremely useful
67% had avoided asking a question because of expected senior response
85% rated the session useful or extremely useful
Cadets consistently described the course as practical, relevant and needed.
93% agreed the session felt psychologically safe
67% had avoided asking a question because of expected senior response
67% had avoided asking a question because of expected senior response
This matters.
SASH is a sensitive and uncomfortable subject. The feedback shows that cadets felt able to engage with the topic in a way that was safe, respectful and practical.
67% had avoided asking a question because of expected senior response
67% had avoided asking a question because of expected senior response
67% had avoided asking a question because of expected senior response
The most common reason was fear of being judged as incompetent. This matters because when cadets feel unable to ask questions, uncertainty can remain hidden.
What cadets told us
SASH: practical confidence and relevance
The clearest message from the feedback was that cadets did not value the session simply because it was informative. They valued it because it felt usable.
Cadets repeatedly highlighted the importance of practical response tools, realistic shipboard scenarios, reporting routes, and knowing what to say or do when something feels wrong. The most valued parts of the course included:
- group discussion and hearing other perspectives;
- realistic scenarios and case studies;
- reporting routes and support organisations;
- practical response tools;
- safe, open and relatable delivery;
- discussion of boundaries, grey areas and behaviour standards.
This matters because cadets do not just need definitions. They need confidence, language and routes they can realistically use onboard.
What cadets said they would do differently
The feedback also showed intended behaviour change. Cadets said they would:
- speak up sooner;
- report or take action where needed;
- spot warning signs earlier;
- support, check in on or listen to others;
- be more aware of their own conduct and boundaries;
- record factual information;
- use reporting routes and external support where appropriate.
That moves the course beyond awareness. It shows practical behavioural readiness.
Communication and hierarchy reality check
The feedback also gave a clear picture of the communication gap cadets are experiencing with senior officers and, in some cases, lecturers. In the feedback:
- 62% said they experience misunderstandings with senior officers or lecturers sometimes, often or always;
- 67% said they had chosen not to ask a question because of how they expected a senior person to respond.
That is significant.
The most common reason cadets avoided asking questions was fear of being judged as incompetent.
This does not suggest cadets are unwilling to learn. It suggests that some cadets are managing perceived risk before they ask for help. In a maritime training and safety environment, that matters. If someone avoids asking a question because they expect judgement, humiliation or dismissal, uncertainty can stay hidden for longer. Cadets were clear about the behaviours that make communication harder:
- unclear instructions;
- assuming they should already know;
- dismissing questions;
- only giving feedback when something is wrong;
- sarcasm or mocking humour;
- inconsistent standards;
- shouting outside urgent safety moments;
- correcting in public or humiliating.
They were also clear about what helps them learn fastest:
- clear standards and what “good” looks like;
- demonstration, then watching them repeat;
- explaining “why” when time allows;
- calm correction in the moment;
- private feedback for sensitive issues;
- encouraging questions about safety.
This is not about lowering standards. It is about making sure communication helps people learn, rather than shutting them down.
What cadets want senior officers to understand
We asked cadets what they would want senior officers to understand about how their generation works best. Their responses were remarkably consistent.
They were not asking for less accountability. They were asking for clearer expectations, constructive feedback, an explanation of why tasks matter, and space to ask questions without being treated as difficult, weak or disrespectful. A few comments captured this clearly:
“Asking questions is not questioning authority.”
“Questions mean we’re intrigued and want to do a good job, not that we’re trying to insult.”
“Give constructive criticism to learn from, instead of ‘having a go’.”
“We work much better when we understand the tasks given and their reasoning.”
This matters because the generational issue is not about fragility. It is about whether communication builds confidence or erodes it.
Reporting barriers
The feedback made something else very clear: the main barrier to reporting is not simply lack of policy awareness. It is fear.
Cadets repeatedly referred to fear of judgement, shame, embarrassment, stigma, gossip, retaliation, career impact, social exclusion, not being believed, and concern that nothing would change. The strongest reporting barriers identified were:
- judgement, shame, embarrassment and stigma;
- career, job, assessment or progression impact;
- gossip, reputation damage or being labelled a snitch;
- retaliation or making the situation worse;
- hierarchy and power imbalance;
- not being believed or not taken seriously.
This matters because people can know the right route on paper and still feel unable to use it in practice.
Reporting is not just a systems issue. It is a culture issue.
Culture and onboard norms
The feedback also highlights the everyday culture conditions surrounding SASH.
Cadets repeatedly identified banter crossing lines, gossip, isolation, mixed-gender living and working boundaries, shore leave and alcohol environments, and pressure to fit in as situations where people are more likely to feel unsafe or excluded.
This is important because it moves the conversation away from seeing SASH as only about major incidents. The broader culture matters too. Everyday behaviour, group norms and what gets laughed off or normalised all shape whether someone feels safe, included and able to challenge something early.
Several comments also suggest that cadets are not asking for a softer environment. They are asking for one consistent standard of respect, clearer expectations, and an onboard culture where speaking up does not automatically carry social or career risk.
Teaching style and delivery
The feedback also showed that cadets valued the way the session was delivered. That matters because SASH content can easily become uncomfortable, overly legalistic or tick-box. The Warsash feedback suggests the session worked because it was practical, discussion-led and psychologically safe.
Cadets described the delivery as clear, engaging, open, calm, professional, informative, interactive and well-structured. Selected feedback included:
“This session was clear, open and informative, and I didn’t feel uncomfortable.”
“Key information relayed in a calm and safe way.
“Course is interactive and engaging whilst learning a lot about safety at sea.”
“Very helpful and informative, done in a way where having your own opinion on the subject matter feels safe.”
“Really excellent teaching, very detailed presentation, very active with the class; would recommend to others.”
For me, this is important. The subject matter matters, but so does the way it is held in the room.
What this suggests
The Warsash evidence suggests that cadets engage most strongly when training is realistic, psychologically safe and directly connected to the realities of shipboard life.
It also suggests that SASH, communication, hierarchy and retention are not separate issues. They overlap.
If maritime organisations want safer cultures and better retention, they cannot just focus on policy. They also need to look closely at how people are taught, corrected, supported and listened to on a day-to-day basis.
Copyright © 2026 EJB MARITIME - All Rights Reserved.
Photography by Finlay Twiss