Percent safe score

Trying to convey an optimistic picture of safety in their area in the use of percent safe scores that do not reflect the reality of the workplace. 

I told Krista her "percent safe" score and proceeded to show her the list of safe checkmarks, while covering the checks in the At-Risk column. Obviously, I wanted to make this a positive experience, and to do this, it was necessary to emphasize the behaviors I saw her do correctly. To my surprise, she did not seem impressed with her 85 percent safe score and... 

The formula at the bottom of the CBC in Figure 8.12 can be used to calculate an overall percent safe score. We have found it very effective to post this global score weekly for different work teams. Such social comparison information presumably motivated performance improvement through friendly intergroup competition (Williams and Geller, 2000). Chapter 12 also includes addition information on e design of CBCs for one-on-one behavior observation. 

The checks in the safe and at-risk columns of a CBC can be readily summarized in a "percent safe score." As I discussed in the previous chapter, an overall global score can be calculated by dividing the total number of behavioral observations (i.e., all checks on all CBCs) into the total number of safe observations (i.e., all checks in the safe columns of all CBCs). This provides an overall estimate of the safety of the workforce with regard to the critical behaviors targeted in the observation step of DO IT. 

The global "percent safe score" does not provide direction regarding which particular behaviors need improvement, but it can provide motivation to a workforce that wants to improve (Williams and Geller, 2000). It is an achievement-oriented index that holds employees accountable for things they can control. This assumes, of course, that the workers know the safe operating procedures for every work task. 

If some employees are not sure of the safe way to perform a certain job, behavioral direction is needed. A global "percent safe score" is not sufficient. When the CBC is reviewed during a one-on-one coaching session, behavioral direction is provided. The worker sees what critical behaviors were observed as "safe" and "at-risk." A constructive conversation with the coach provides support for safe behavior and corrective feedback for behavior that could be safer. Often this includes suggestions for making the safe behavior more convenient, comfortable, and easier to remember. It might also include tire removal of barriers (physical and social) that inhibit safe behavior. 

Groups can receive support and direction for specific behavior if a "percent safe score" is derived per behavior. That is, instead of adding safe and at-risk checks across behaviors, calculate separate percentages for each behavior. Then the group can see which critical behaviors are safe and which need improvement. The results can be posted in a prominent location, as depicted in Figure 9.1, and discussed in team meetings. 

Because global feedback was just as effective as specific feedback when social comparison feedback was included, we presumed most of the 97 employees of the soft-drink bottling facility did not need an instructional intervention. They knew how to perform their jobs safely but needed some extrinsic motivation to follow the nine safety policies implied by the nine target behaviors. This was provided by a global percent safe score from a similar work group. 

Coaching was presented as a rather formal step-by-step process whereby a critical behavior checklist (CBC) is developed and used to observe and analyze the safe vs. at-risk behaviors occurring in a particular work procedure. Then, as illustrated in Figure 13.1, the CBC is used to present directive and/or motivational feedback in a one-to-one interpersonal conversation. Also, percent safe scores are derived from a variety of CBCs and presented on a group feedback chart. Comments written on the CBCs are discussed in group meetings to analyze areas of concern and to find ways to make safe behavior more likely to occur. 

As to posting the data, many of a company s considerations with peer observation data pertain also to the self-observation process. The data should be posted in the respective group s or crew s work area for review only and updated weekly. The applicable safety representative incorporates discussion of trends in the current data, analyzes specific behaviors that are getting many no s, and helps determine when changes or new behavior items should be incorporated on the index. If the scores begin to achieve 90 to 100 percent safe for five or six samplings, this usually indicates that the behaviors listed have started to get to a high and steady rate. It would make sense at this point to develop a new index with safety behaviors that help address new concerns that arise in the increased awareness stimulated by the... 

If you can answer 80 percent or more of the review questions correctly for a given chapter, you can probably feel safe moving on to the next chapter. If you re unable to answer that many correctly, reread the chapter and try the questions again. Your score should improve. 

Lotteries are likewise effective in conjunction with token systems in which observers dispense tokens to employees as part of the observation process. Typically the token is a thank-you for being safe card that is also a lottery ticket. Such tickets are handed out, for example, when an area scores 100 percent... 

---