Skip to main content

Are safety KPIs counter-productive?


A colleague who works with a major international oil and gas company said “Safety KPIs achieve the exact opposite of their original intent”. Whilst he was undoubtedly being provocative to stimulate internal debate, the basis for such a bold statement can be seen in organisations that have comprehensive reporting mechanisms but still suffer from major safety incidents.

Safety performance metrics face an inherent difficulty in that managers have a strong temptation to make their numbers as good as possible when they report their performance.  This will be true for safety just as it is for production, sales, financials and any other business performance metric.  Unfortunately, this tendency is the exact opposite of what is required for good safety performance. 

A common theme in many of the major catastrophic industrial incidents is the fact that warning signs were there but were not reported.   If there is a bias that emphasises the good and glosses over the bad, there is likelihood that the first indication senior management get of problems will be too late.  The report of the Baker Panel into the explosion at BP’s Texas City refinery in 2005 highlighted the fact that clear warning signs were not acted upon and that filtering and softening of bad news from the plant to BP’s executive management was a contributor to the lack of priority given to solving the refinery’s many safety issues.

Trust plays a big part in the willingness to report bad news upwards.  Two factors will be barriers to open and honest reporting of safety related concerns in an organisation:

·         a history of senior levels reacting badly to negative news

·         a history of reported problems being ignored

Both will add further bias toward reporting good news and hiding bad news.

Therefore, there is a danger that the bias toward reporting good news will undermine the objective of safety performance metrics:  to provide information to senior managers to make decisions to improve safety, such as increasing capability and capacity of staff, increasing capital investment and increasing maintenance budgets.

This bias towards good news in safety KPIs is aided by the lack of rigour often found in the measurement of safety metrics.    Whether incidents or near misses (or near hits as they perhaps should be called) are reported will remain a function of how much importance the whole organisation places on improving its safety.  It is the organisation’s culture, its values and the behaviours they drive, that will determine the diligence with which safety metrics are reported.

·         Does the foreman view an injury to one of his team as an opportunity to learn, for him and the whole organisation, or something negative to try and avoid reporting if possible?  Are injured employees encouraged to report to work to ensure that there is no lost time incident to report?

·         Will the Maintenance manager accept an unplanned valve overhaul onto his already overloaded critical maintenance schedule?   Or will he try a quick patch and tell Operations it’s good to go to avoid having to ask for more money to complete critical work?  How will the plant general manager react to the double impact of missing the critical maintenance KPI and having to spend more than budgeted to fix the valve?

The use of targets for certain lagging safety performance indicators, such as lost time incidents, injuries and losses of containment, requires careful handling for similar reasons.  That they need to be measured is not in doubt, and is often a legal or regulatory requirement, but the only morally and logically correct target is zero.  Targets for incidents like injuries or deaths can be used to focus an organisation in a situation of chronic underperformance, but once performance is within acceptable, industry average ranges they should replaced with an ambition for zero.

For safety KPIs to achieve their intents the following is required:

Management systems: as a foundation the requirements for safety reporting and KPIs must be clear and unambiguous to all and there must be some provision to verify the accuracy of reported information

Trust:  all levels of the organisation must trust that bad news will be received in a constructive way and that it will not lead to a witch-hunt

Learning and continuous improvement:  all incidents and near misses have to be viewed by the whole organisation as opportunities to learn

Leadership: leaders need to visibly demonstrate the behaviours that encourage open and honest reporting of incidents.

Tackling these areas will set the cultural basis for safety KPIs to achieve their original intent: visibility of real frontline safety performance that then provides an accurate picture of the organisation’s risks.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My retail therapy

I am not one who usually enjoys shopping.  When I need to buy something I like to do it with a quick surgical strike 1. Know what you want before entering store | 2. Locate item once inside store | 3. Purchase item | 4. Exit store.  No browsing, no chit chat with shop staff, no impulse purchases. Spending time in shops that aren’t selling food or drink for on-site consumption isn’t really my thing.   Professionally as well, despite working in many industries, retail has not featured strongly in my CV.   However, recently I was fortunate to get involved in a change project with a very large retail organisation with thousands of stores across the United States. As well as learning about some of the key processes in retail and meeting a variety of great people working in stores across the US, I got a first hand exposure to some of the forces currently impacting retailers.   There are new technologies are being introduced principally to increase efficiency an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Brown paper bag accounting

I recently had cause to recall a type of work I did whilst studying to become a chartered accountant and in the period just after I qualified - brown paper bag accounts .  This is not some kind of under the table tax evasion scheme but a phrase used to describe the accounts preparation work for the smallest of small businesses. It describes what the client would provide in terms of records from which to draw-up accounts, submit their VAT returns and produce their tax returns.  It would be a bag (ok, sometimes and folder or a box) of expense receipts of various types, from shop tills and handwritten chits to vellum fee notes from solicitors.  There would also be a bunch of bank statements and credit card bills.  If you were lucky there would be a cash book which may record the client's drawings (money taken from the business for personal use) but often not. This was at first a huge struggle for a new trainee, but with guidance from senior colleagues a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Countng Cards

This is, unfortunately, not about how to break the bank in Las Vegas, but a view on measures and targets for the completion of safety observation cards.   Many companies in high hazard industries employ some form of mechanism for all employees to record unsafe acts or unsafe conditions they identify whilst carrying out their duties.   The cards are used to also record the action they took as a result, be it the steps taken to fix something that was out of place or the conversation had with the perpetrator of an unsafe act.     Pre-printed cards are often used and there are standard approaches available, such as Behavioural Observation Safety System (BOSS) and Dupont’s STOP TM , that provide the back-up training and coaching to use the cards and intervene in the right way. These observation cards also provide a set of data on which to gauge safety performance and culture.   Many organisations use targets for individuals to complete a defined number of observ...
Post a Comment
Read more