September/October 1988
Learn why a safety program may fail--and how to make one work. By David M. Wassum
David M. Wassum is director of risk management for the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Washington, D.C.
What makes a safety program fail? In many cases the reason is a narrow focus on losses. Following a serious loss, the company attempts to modify its operations to prevent such an incident in the future. Unfortunately, the thing to be avoided--the loss--has already occurred. The safety effort has been reactive.
The objective of a safety management program should be to reduce or eliminate potential risks. To fulfill this objective, a program should focus on identifying the risks to safety, determining acceptable levels of risk based on frequency and severity of potential losses and costs of control, and implementing measures to reduce risks to these acceptable levels.
But how does a company achieve these goals? The primary requirement of an effective safety program is management direction. Without active direction--and commitment--from top management, a safety program is not likely to succeed. Top management and supervisors are frequently perceived to emphasize production over loss control efforts. That perception must be changed.
Once management has determined the safety program objectives, it can begin to organize the program. This step includes developing a company policy, formulating operating procedures, and assigning responsibilities.
Closely tied to the safety program is a company's training program. When employee skills must be expanded, effective training is essential. In addition, training is often required for compliance with various standards and regulations. Specialized instruction must be provided to certain equipment operators, and new "right-to-know" rules require that all employees exposed to hazardous chemicals in the workplace receive relevant instruction.
An effective communication system is essential to safety, too. Employees must be made aware of all operating procedures. Also, since employees often have knowledge about safety-related problems of which management might be unaware, employee input must be encouraged and managers must develop mechanisms to solicit and act on this information.
Although facility and equipment maintenance is often viewed as a separate function, it is closely related to safety. Routine maintenance programs react to routine operational problems; safety-minded preventive maintenance programs prevent losses.
An effective safety program includes systematic review procedures for identifying and evaluating all "mistakes." In the context of a safety management program, these "mistakes" can include not only losses and accidents but deviations from prescribed operating procedures. Results of these periodic reviews form the basis for enforcing accountability.
Motivation also plays a role in safety. When an employee is not motivated to perform in the desired way it becomes extremely difficult to obtain optimal-including safety-minded--performance. Supervisors must try to understand the motivation of each employee, especially if it becomes necessary to take action to change an employee's behavior.
Quality of job performance is the result of a complex interaction between such factors as ability, rewards, role perception, and individual effort. Employers can influence or directly control many of these factors. The employer must describe to the employee exactly what behavior is desired, then monitor progress by measuring job performance. If a particular skill or other ability is lacking, it can be learned through appropriate training programs. In other cases, the employer can encourage appropriate behavior by using rewards or other incentives, including performance measurement.
Once management makes the decision to systematically identify risks to safety, involves employees by training them and requesting their input, and sets up a system to review safety program and employee performance, a safer work environment will result. Reducing losses in this way makes a safety program an active, rather than a reactive, way to combat risks.