Thinking
Outside The Box
To Measure Safety
BY : MICHAEL FACKLER
MEASURE SAFETY
As a safety professional , I care about people . In business , I care about performance and measurable results . And yet , I find myself prefacing any discussion about measuring safety performance with the obligatory “ I ’ m not talking about accident-based metrics ” statement . Why do I do that ? It ’ s likely due to some basic human need to affiliate with others and be socially accepted that is hard-wired into my brain . My brain likely senses disagreement and the risk of being isolated from people “ on the right side of safety theory .” But safety professionals should not fear being ostracized for the belief that people should be held accountable for performance . As with a lot of things , the devil is in the details . As safety professionals , we must become more comfortable talking about what works , what doesn ’ t , and why . We have to understand that it ’ s okay to talk about metrics and safety performance in the same sentence . And in order to be taken seriously as business leaders , not just safety leaders , we must learn how to hold people accountable and be held accountable to achieve higher levels of performance . To get there requires getting comfortable talking about “ the numbers .”
The question is , what numbers should we talk about ? I can tell you , it ’ s not about accidents . As far back as 1996 , safety pioneer Dan Petersen wrote how measuring performance through accident-based metrics was a “ waste of time ” and “ meaninglessness ” ( Petersen 1996 , 15 – 33 ; Petersen 2001 ). Petersen stated that organizations should use “ anything but accident-based metrics ” to measure the performance of management and instead focus on the activities designed to drive safety performance improvement .
Business leaders understand that to drive performance improvement in any area of business requires an understanding that individual performance is a product of the conditions and environment in which people work . Safety professionals should take a lesson from the business world and work harder to understand how organization systems and processes influence how individuals communicate , collaborate , plan , and execute to get work done safely . Understanding work from this holistic perspective is supported in the safety literature . In 2001 , Petersen wrote the following :
An unsafe act , an unsafe condition , an accident : all these are symptoms of something wrong in the management system ( Petersen 2001 ).
And again in 2009 , the Department of Energy ( DOE ) established a series of guidelines for all DOE facilities titled Human Performance Improvement Handbook Volume 1 : Concepts and Principles . Originally born out of an effort to improve operational safety at nuclear power generation sites , the guide contended the following :
… human performance is a system that comprises a network of elements that work together to produce repeatable outcomes . The system encompasses organizational factors , job-site conditions , individual behavior , and results . The system approach puts a new perspective on human error : it is not a cause of failure , alone , but rather the effect or symptom of deeper trouble in the system ( U . S . Department of Energy 2009 ).
And finally , “ New View ” academic and safety theorist Sidney Dekker wrote
5 that any strategy to improve safety must include a focus on organizational systems and processes . Dekker stated as much in his Field Guide to Understanding Human Error :
[ A ] system isn ’ t automatically safe ; people have to create safety through practice at all levels of the organization ( Dekker 2014 , 4 – 6 ). It ’ s not that accident-based metrics don ’ t matter ; it ’ s just that other metrics matter more ! A lot more . Here is an example of what I am talking about . Recently , I posted the following question on LinkedIn :
How safe is your workplace today ? How do you know ? Really , how do you know ? I ’ m interested in what metrics people use to measure ‘ safety .’ I am not interested in TRIR , LTIR , # of days without a blah , blah , blah . Give me something meaningful !
FINISH THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
MICHAEL FACKLER , CSP , ARM , MBA
Michael works with Trinity Safety Group , a nationwide leader in safety management consultation and staffing services . As Director of Captive Safety Services , Michael is responsible for executive direction and operational oversight of the Trinity Safety Group Captive Services Division nationally , and to the Staffing and Safety Services Divisions for the Southern Region .