Behavior-based safety critical behaviors

DePasquale, J. P., Geller, E. S. (1999). Critical success factors for behavior-based safety A smdy of twenty industry wide appUcations. Journal of Safety Research, 30(4), 237-249. 

Galloway, S. Critical questions to improve behavior based safety. Safety Culture Excellence, 2008. 

Hidley, John H. Critical success factors for behavior based safety. Professional Safety. 

A traditional Behavior-Based Safety process identifies critical behavior, then establishes management processes that reinforce positive behaviors. 

Researchers have not yet conducted extensive research into the importance of the individual components of these studies, though Komaki s (1986) research suggests that the observation process may be the most critical element of the package. Conducting research into the effectiveness of each of the components of behavior-based safety is difficult because each component contributes to only a part of the effectiveness of the intervention package. The studies that have investigated the individual components of this approach are included below. 

We are motivated by consequences, however, so let s consider certain benefits you can expect to gain from a successful behavior-based safety management process as reviewed in this chapter. Since most injuries are caused in part by at-risk behavior, a reduction in at-risk behavior and an increase in safe behavior will lead to injury prevention. However, we d like you to consider five other benefits that result from people contributing interdependently to an effective behavior-based safety process. These outcomes are critically important and relate to much more than safety. In fact, they can benefit every important function of your organization. In explaining these we ll review most of the key psychological principles covered in this chapter. 

Tools from behavior-based safety have been criticized in an attempt to justify a focus on people s attitudes or values. In contrast, promoters of behavior-based safety have ridiculed a focus on attitudes as being too subjective, unscientific, and unrealistic. Both behavior- and attitude-oriented approaches to injury prevention have been faulted in order to vindicate a systems or culture-based approach. The truth of the matter is that both behaviors and attitudes require attention in order to develop large-scale and long-term improvement in people s safety and health. 

John H. Hidley, "Critical Success Factors for Behavior-Based Safety," Professional Safety, July 1998 pp. 30-34. 

But, what about when a worker is observed not performing an identified safe behavior In these situations, vmder a formal behavior-based safety system, the worker will identify the behavior to the coworker, but in a non-judgmental way. The point here is to reinforce what the desired safe behavior is, but not to be critical. If the coworker offers information on why the behavior was not performed, then note that information. Remember, observations are not used to pmiish employees. The observations are used to make safety improvements and to assess the company s safety efforts. 

The human factors literature is rich in task analysis techniques for situations and jobs requiring rule-based behavior (e.g., Kirwan and Ainsworth 1992). Some of these techniques can also be used for the analysis of cognitive tasks where weU-practiced work methods must be adapted to task variations and new circumstances. This can be achieved provided that task analysis goes beyond the recommended work methods and explores task variations that can cause failures of human performance. Hierarchical task analysis (Shepherd 1989), for instance, can be used to describe how operators set goals and plan their activities in terms of work methods, antecedent conditions, and expected feedback. When the analysis is expanded to cover not only normal situations but also task variations or changes in circumstances, it would be possible to record possible ways in which humans may fail and how they could recover from errors. Table 2 shows an analysis of a process control task where operators start up an oil refinery furnace. This is a safety-critical task because many safety systems are on manual mode, radio communications between control room and on-site personnel are intensive, side effects are not visible (e.g., accumulation of fuel in the fire box), and errors can lead to furnace explosions. 

As readers proceed, it is suggested that they keep in mind Heinrich s emphasis on psychology as a root causal factor and as a means of problem resolution. Also, safety practitioners could profitably reflect on the bases upon which behavioral safety is founded. Some critics have said that behavioral safety is Heinrich repackaged, and they can present an arguable case. 

The challenge is to (1) identify the specific safety-related behaviors for a particular site, (2) establish an inventory of operational definitions for these behaviors, and (3) prepare a checklist based on these critical behaviors for observers to use. Developing this critical behavior inventory serves the following purposes ... 

Abstract. Component-based architectures are widely used in embedded systems. For managing complexity and improving quality separation of concerns is one of the most important principles. For one component, separation of concerns is realized by defining the overall component functionality by separated protocol behaviors. One of the main challenges of applying separation of concerns is the later automatic composition of the separated, maybe interdependent concerns which is not supported by current component-based approaches. Moreover, the complexity of real-time distributed embedded systems requires to consider safety requirements for the composition of the separated concerns. We present an approach which addresses these problems by a well-defined automatic composition of protocol behaviors with respect to interdependent concerns. The composition is performed by taking a proper refinement relation into accoimt so that the analysis results of the separated concerns are preserved which is essential for safety critical systems. 

Additionally, the developer of the observer automaton has to instrument the protocol behaviors to enable the observation. This is not intended, however, as this may cause malfunctions originating from mistakes of the developer. Altogether the observer based approach is not well suited for safety critical systems. 

Williams, J. H. and Geller, E. S., Behavior-based intervention for occupational safety critical impact of social comparison feedback, /. Saf. Res., 31(30), 135, 2000. 

As I have emphasized throughout this text and have written in other articles (Geller, 1994,1995,1999,2000), a behavior-based approach to safety treats safety as an achievement-oriented (rather than failure-oriented) process (not outcome) that is fact finding (not fault finding) and proactive (rather than reactive). This chapter illustrates coaching techniques that meet these criteria and demonstrates the critical value of safety coaching for achieving a Total Safety Culture. 

Safety coaching is a critically important intervention approach, but keep in mind the many other ways you can contribute to the health and safety of a work culture, hi other words, safety coaching is one type of intervention for the "1" stage of the DO IT process. Any variety of activator and consequence strategies explained in Chapters 10 and 11, respectively, can be used as a behavior-based intervention. These steps require people to go beyond their normal routine to help another person. The next chapter shows how we can support and, thereby, improve safety with everyday interpersonal conversations and informal coaching. 

---