Behaviour-based safety

Heinrich, at the time, was an insurarKe investigator, who based his research on examining accident reports completed by company supervisors prior to 1931. He concluded from his research that approximate 90% of all accidents were caused by the unsafe acts of workers. It would be interesting to know if those compare supervisors had adequate skills and knowledge of the work system to identify the true accident causation factors, or if they simply adopted a blame mentahty when accidents occurred. 

Through the evolution of time, coupled with Heimich s accident causation theory, behaviour-based safety programmes emerged as the key to harness the imwanted outcomes or accidents. Behaviour-based safety is esserrtialfy about identifying and eliminating unsafe worker behaviours, often referred to as risk behaviours, and promoting conformity and the practice of safe work behaviorrrs or critical behaviours. 

When implementing a behaviour-based programme, tlie methodology varies between woricplaces however, there are some eommon elements  

Job tasks are reviewed by the work team and a list of eritioal behaviours or safe woik behaviours are doeumented. 

Woik behaviours are observed to determine if they have met the standards set in the critical behaviour standards or if risk behaviours are occurring. The observation is carried out 1 supervisors and employee colleagues. 

Staff at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST) have extensive experience in the application of behaviour-based safety systems to the construction industry. In the United States, the work of Dr Thomas Krause and his colleagues at Behavioral Science Technology Inc, California, is particularly well known. It has shown that a behaviour-based approach to health and safety management can be an effective tool for increasing safety on construction sites and elsewhere, despite some practical problems of implementation. 

Employers investing in these techniques say they have found that the involvement of workers in the measuring process generates interest and improved commitment to the employer s safety objectives. The results are said to be significant in that the techniques lead to a reduction in loss-producing incidents as well as to the improved assessment of performance by the positive step of measuring workers safe actions. 

For the purpose of this chapter, it is noted that the attraction is that the system offers a method of measuring the potential for harm, independent of the accident record. Disadvantages may include the need to achieve an altered safety climate for both management and workforce to adopt the techniques, and employee suspicion of hidden motives for the observations. 

---

Frederick, J. and Lessin, N. (2000) Blame the worker - the rise of behavioural based safety programmes. Multinational Monitor, 21(11), 10-17. 

See Engen (Chapter 13, Section 13.3) in this volume and Lind0e, P. H. and Engen, O. A. (2007) Behaviour based safety and the nordic model , in T. Aven and J. E. Vinnem (eds.) Risk, Reliability and Societal Safety. Taylor Francis London, p. 1705. 

Engen, O.A. and Lindpe, P.H. (2008) Atferdsbasert sikkerhet tilpasset norske forhold [Behaviour-Based Safety Adapted to Norwegian Conditions], in R.K. Tinmannsvik (ed.) Robust arheidspraksis. Hvorfor skjer det ikke flere ulykker pd sokkelen Tapir Trondheim, pp. 199-211. 

The introduction of behaviour-based safety (BBS) in some of its manifestations threatens to disturb that balance in the same direction by laying the responsibility for accidents too one-sidedly on the workforce. That is an issue of implementation, because BBS is in principle just as applicable to the behaviour of managers as to that of the shop floor workers and could be extended from occupational safety to cover process safety, which would focus on design as well as operations and maintenance. Hopkins (2012) recommends just such an extension in his book on the Deepwater Horizon accident. 

Kathirgamanathan, T., Wong, T.K. 2005. Behaviour Based Safety - Implementation, learnings and results of loss prevention system in ExxonMobil Malaysia . Proc. SPE Asia Pacific Health, Safety and Environment Conference and Exhibition. Malaysia. 19—20 Sep. 2005. 

Dagdeviren, M. Yuksel, I. 2008. Developing a fiizzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behaviour-based safety management. Information Sciences 178 1717-1733... 

Pro Act Safely undated. Lean Behaviour-based Safety. Available at http //www. proactsafely.com/leanbbs (last accessed on 1 Jrme 2014). 

As we enter a new millennium, behaviour and accident causation models from the 1930s remain with us. Age does not necessarily destroy their value. Some organizations, including Dupont, embrace these concepts and apply behaviour-based safety . Krause and Hidley in California (see Fmther Reading) have also strongfy espoused them. Others shun the idea based on evidence suggesting failure, and a growth in alienation between workers, employers and imions. 

Based on this, we could then suggest that the application of behaviour-based safety as a stand alone practice in safety management can only fail, as we have evolved from the 1930s and the needs and functions within the workplace have signifieantly altered. 

Behaviour-based safety does have some value where the risks in other aspects of the woik system have been dealt with through the comprehensive approach suggested above. 

Krause, T.R. (2000). The Role of Behaviour-based Safety in the Workplace. Proceedings of Minesafe International Conference, pp. 475-82. Perth, Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia (Inc). 

Putting all these elements together, a composite model is suggested as shown in Figure 2.4. The lines indicate what effects the elements have on other parts of the model. We will return to this model later, when we consider the effects of introducing a behaviourally based safety scheme. 

In this chapter the complete process of setting up and managing such a behaviourally based safety intervention will be described. The sequence of the first two or three stages may vary according to the circumstances of the intervention, but it is important for a successful outcome they are all dealt with at some time. 

December 2011 issue of Professional Safety. Geller has been among the most prominent in behaviour-based safety for over 30 years. Dr Geller wrote that Behavior is an outcome and not a causal factor. He also said that ... 

Krause, T.R., Hidley, J.H. and Hodsen, S.J., The Behaviour-Bases Safety Process. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1990)... 

However, CCSM, in the described formulation, is not adequate for the continuous monitoring of the extern situation and of the performance of the workers in a Behaviour-Based Safety perspective. The main limitation is that the model does not provide an estimation of the risk related to the non-conforming behaviours. The method distinguishes between conforming and non-conforming behaviours, without any further clarification on the criticality or on the expected consequences of the behaviours themselves. In fact, different at-risk behaviours are characterized by different criticalities. 

The contribution of behaviour-based safety management as a technique that fosters employee involvement has been mentioned in the previous chapter. The technique is not without its critics, the more sensible of whom have pointed out the danger that physical hazards may be overlooked amid the enthusiasm to spot workers doing something wrong . 

CAW-TCA, Canada. Fact sheet Behaviour-based safety programs. www.caw.ca/whatwedo/health safety/factsheet/hsfsissuenoM.asp, 2003. 

Walker, C. Behaviour based safety programs, or if it s rat psychology, who is Pied Piper and who are the rats Canadian Auto Workers, lAPA/WHSC session, Myth of the careless worker, AprU, 2003. 

Lingard, H., Rowlinson, S. (1997). Behaviour-based safety management in Hong Kong s construction management. Journal of Safety Research, 4, 243—256. 

---