Leading and Lagging Safety Performance Indicators

Most companies, especially those at Level 3 or below in the safety maturity model, tend to focus their safety programs strictly on lagging safety performance indicators. They are based on historical data. They do, and should, track accidents, incidents, safety problems, and corrective actions and make sure that they are implemented appropriately or that the corrective actions or controls are still valid. This is all very important and must be done and not dropped. However, it is not enough. 

System Safety Engineering and Risk Assessment A Practical Approach 

like the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2008), look at safety performance indicators from two perspectives  

Outcome indicators Assess whether safety-related actions (pohcies, procedures, and practices) achieve their desired resnlts and whether they lead to less likelihood of an accident. They are reactive or lagging (based on historical data). Typically, they measnre change in safety performance over time or failures, such as number of shps, trips, and falls. 

Activities indicators Assess whether an organization is taking actions proactively to lower safety risks. OECD gives an example of measuring performance against a tolerance level that shows deviations from safety expectations. When tolerances are snrpassed, actions should be taken. 

---