While work-related, light injuries have declined in recent years across the United States, many organizations have not seen a parallel trend in fatalities. Federal safety agencies have published data showing that fatal work-related injuries rose by 2% from 2003 to 2004. The increase in fatalities among older workers in the same time was 10%. In fatalities due to falls, the increase came to 17%. This trend has alerted safety leaders to the need to focus on ways they can decrease and eliminate fatalities in their organizations. What can senior-most leaders of organizations do to prevent fatalities? Can the same set of actions that works so well for lowering injury rates be put to service for reducing job-related deaths? Today, more senior leaders are making noteworthy advances towards stemming serious injuries and fatalities by doing just that; employing certain safety and leadership best practices. This paper discusses the factors that contribute to the current situation and presents solutions based on a holistic approach to safety performance.
Until recently, the common view was that either employee behavior or equipment and facilities were the two categories to choose from when determining the causal factors of an incident. A high percentage of incidents, perhaps 80–90%, were considered to be the results of behavioral causes, with the remainder being attributed to equipment and facilities. This dichotomy is neither useful nor strictly accurate. It can even be harmful.
We believe that this paradigm contains a false dichotomy. Equipment doesn't simply malfunction independently of how it has been designed and maintained. Workers don't merely work unsafely, isolated from the system configuration. Rather, workers interact with technology (see Exhibit 1). This interaction constitutes a system, and this system has a multitude of variables influencing it. These variables include facility and equipment design quality, relevant and adequate training, the quality of leadership onsite, and the climate and culture of the workplace.
(available in full paper)
The old, either-or paradigm was even deleterious to safety initiatives because it often led to blame. If equipment was faulty, management was blamed. Otherwise, the finger was pointed at the worker. Blame inevitably drives injury reporting underground, and workers continue to work even when they're in pain. Fear of reprisals and discipline often outweigh, in their perception, the reasons for reporting an injury. Blame also shortchanges the investigation of the real root causes behind injuries. The useful question is not, "Who is at fault?" but, "How should the whole system of design, technology, and worker be influenced to create safety and prevent accidents?"