Abstract
This
paper includes an original organizational cases and field observations prepared during BBS training interventions in a
period of fifteen years between 1997 and 2011 across multi-national organizations
(such as petroleum, engineering, automobile cement, power, chemical, pharmaceutical etc.) as a part of an on-going
national action research survey of behavior
based safety (BBS) in India including 1751 executives and 713 workers in 64 organizations. During BBS
training interventions, the trained participants used a checklist of
critical unsafe / safe behaviours to collect observation data from their
respective workplaces with the help of behaviour observation and feedback
process (BOFP) which is based on cognitive behavior
modification approach. It is
assumed that the information gathered from this longitudinal nature of
the research and the robust sample size shall be considerably useful for human
resource / safety professionals while they would be implementing the concept
and process of BBS for reduction of accidents and promoting safe behaviors for
developing injury-free culture in their organizations. The findings this survey
would hopefully enrich the theoretical and pragmatic foundations of behavioral
safety approach.
Introduction
BBS is all about involving people across departments in an
organization as a bottom-up approach. Research and
experience1-18 indicate that the 90% or more of the accidents are
due to unsafe human acts or behaviors; 50% of the unsafe behaviors are
identified or noticeable at any plant at any given point of time; 25-30% of
safety awareness is lacking among employees which gets reflected in their
unsafe behaviors; Unsafe behaviors are at the core of any near misses, injury,
accidents. If we control unsafe behaviors, we may not even have near misses.
In BBS, workers are involved as well as accountable for safety in the
organization.
Unsafe behaviors are at the core of any near misses, injury,
fatalities (figure 1). If we control unsafe behaviors, we may not even have
near misses). “Safety should be there in
the behaviour of human beings which is lacking”- The Unit Head said.
It is empirically established that intervening unsafe behaviours will reduce injury/fatality. The organizations need to target zero unsafe behaviour in order to achieve zero accidents or injuries.
Through BBS approach/training,
organizations empower their workforce to routinely check unsafe behaviours of
their employees before they get injured or damage the equipment/product, etc.
The unsafe behaviors at workplace
take place due to lack of the following:
1. Use of
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) by workmen e.g. eye glasses, hearing
protection, gloves, hard hat;
2. Work area
maintained appropriately, e.g. trash and scrap picked up, no spills, walkways
unobstructed, materials and tools organized;
3. Using
correct tools for the job, using tools properly, and tool in good condition;
4. Positioning
/ protecting body parts, e.g. avoiding line of fire, avoiding pinch points;
5. Material
handling e.g. body mechanics while lifting, pushing and pulling, use of assist-
devices;
6. Verbal and
non-verbal interactions that affects safety;
7. Following
safety procedures e.g. obtaining, complying with permits, following Safe
Operating Procedures, lockout, tag-out procedures; and
8. Visual
focusing (attentiveness).
To reduce accidents, the managements have taken safety interventions
such as risk assessment, suggestion scheme, training, safety committee,
auditing, motivational programmes (quiz, award, incentives), SOPs, plant
inspection, work permit system etc. Most of these safety management systems
have aimed at controlling unsafe conditions, whereas 80-95% of accidents are triggered
by unsafe acts or behaviors.
Method
The main objective of this national action survey and this longitudinal nature of
research is to gather information which shall be
considerably useful for human resource / safety professionals while they would
be implementing the concept and process of Behavior Based Safety for reduction
of accidents and promoting safe behaviors for developing injury-free culture in
their organizations.
Number of trainees of different organizations coming to
intervention program is:
|
No.
of Organization & type
|
Number of employees
Staff
Workers
|
|
12
Chemicals
|
321
130
|
|
05
Power / Energy
|
110
90
|
|
09
Gas / Petroleum
|
270
53
|
|
16
Heavy Engineering
|
260
63
|
|
02
Cement
|
90
102
|
|
03 Shipping
|
121
48
|
|
03
Automobile
|
72
36
|
|
05
Pharmaceutical
|
190
87
|
|
09
Others (Construction, Nuclear, Paper, Electrical)
|
317
104
|
|
Total:
64
|
1751
713
|
The Survey Results:
Organization case 1: Interactions with engineers of Cement Company
in the Maharashtra State of India brought out the following issues on BBS interventions:
Three groups of 88 engineers observed 239 unsafe behaviours of the
workers during three days of training on BBS. On an average, 3 unsafe behaviours
per worker were identified which means a total workforce of 710 shop-floor
employees possess 2030 unsafe behaviours which is a serious concern of safety
for an organization. A manager said,
“Though we are aware of the magnitude of unsafe behaviours in our organization
we did not know how to control them”.
Organization case 2: In the Gujarat State of India, 23
senior and middle management employees of a chemical manufacturing company (who
had work experience between 10 to 30 years) participated in a one-day BBS
workshop and raised and discussed the following concerns on behavioral safety
in their organization:
On an average 2.5 unsafe behaviours were observed at the shopfloor
which means about 1125 unsafe behaviours
existed in the organization at present (450 employees x 2.5 unsafe behaviours =
1125).
There are two kinds of employees as far as safety consciousness is
concerned. One kind of employees who has internal locus of control for safety
meaning they are internally conscious. The other kind of employees who are
externally conscious meaning they require external stimulus to alert them
regularly.
Whether fear factor is necessary for creating safety culture? No,
because fear or punishment will not give sustainable result in changing unsafe
to safe behaviours.
How much time BBS would take to give results? What changes can be
acquired through BBS? Surprisingly, BBS starts giving results quickly. More the
observers, more the observations, more the safe behaviours. The outcomes or
changes are the reduced unsafe behaviours, safe working conditions, building
safe culture etc.
Is BBS a new approach which would be out soon like Quality Circle?
Not really, because BBS is a data driven approach. What gets measured gets
done. As long as it gives results in terms of reduced unsafe behaviours, it is
most likely that BBS would stay in the organization. It prevents accidents and
accident-related costs.
Organization case 3: 186 employees including workers
and executives of a pharmaceutical
organization in Gujarat State of India were trained on BBS. They came out with the following aspects on
BBS during discussions in six days of their training interventions.
During observation tours, the observers calculated 3.5
unsafe behaviors on an average per worker being practiced at their workplace on
daily basis. They also found 34 unsafe conditions and corrected 30 on the spot.
Though 20% of BBS observers are selected per department in an organization, 70%
of them must also observe contract workers as 70% of accidents happen to them. In
this organization, a lady officer from quality department was found to be the
only BBS observer in India.
Conclusions
According to a general manager (safety), behavioral-based safety is
all about changing the basic organizational culture to inculcate positive
safety at the workplace.
The body of behavioral research literature created through
behavioural safety interventions has made us realize the value of
macro-ergonomics aspects. It is important to underline that people behave
unsafe or take risks even in well designed work stations. People tend to take
risks in safe environments and be very alert in unsafe environments. People
speed-up their vehicles on highways and tend to be very alert in crowded
streets. The engineering systems, the process or task design provided at
workplaces are the hardware part; and the software part is the behaviours of
people who tend to behave safe or unsafe at times. The organizational behaviour
theory believes that both the hardware and the software are equally important
for implementing any new approach or system in the organization.
Despite well designed work stations, the workmen/operators tend to
engage in at-risk behaviours (such as not using PPE, work area not maintained
appropriately, not using correct tools for the job or tools not in good
condition, inappropriate body mechanics while lifting, pushing and pulling
material, not complying with work permits or following Safe Operating
Procedures (SOP), and using mobile while working) that may trigger injury or
accident. Also we have come across several case studies in organizations
revealing that each of these at-risk behaviours has been fatal to workmen,
engineers, and managers.
Designing work stations, the process or task is the ergonomics
level; handing over those work stations/tools to the employees is another level
of macro-ergonomics when people begin to use or behave with the ergonomically
designed work stations. Employees sit on the best designed chair with different
postures. Application of behavioral
safety in organizations provides us an experience of macro-ergonomics.
It is significant to recognize that the behaviour observation and
feedback process (BOFP) is used by the BBS trained observers for behavioural
change (from at-risk behaviours to safe behaviours) of co-workers on daily
basis in organizations for continuous assessment and recordkeeping to measure
BBS progress on month-by-month.
The behavioural safety approach has been practiced in Indian
organizations for change of at-risk behaviours to safe behaviours among
co-workers in following steps:
a.
An awareness
programme on BBS for management staff at all levels.
b.
One day awareness
training of employees across the plant;
c.
Selecting (20%)
observers from BBS trained employees; and forming steering committee of 8-10
people from BBS trained employees.
d.
Two days in-plant
practical training of BBS observers and steering committee members on how to
set up the observation process, how to develop the measure, making accuracy and
consistency checks, steering committee functioning etc.
e.
At this stage BBS
observers and steering committee members are fully prepared to implement BBS at
workplace.
The above exercises have been have successfully tried in Indian
organizations (including petroleum,
engineering, automobile, cement, power, chemical, pharmaceutical etc.).
It is
significant to mark that behavioral safety is a data-driven approach. It’s an
organization development (OD) intervention and a change management process
which is achieved through the trained internal change agents called as
observers within the organization who actually drive / implement BBS and create
behavioral safety data month-on-month basis across the plants and units.
It is
vital to address organizational behaviour issues while applying behavioral
based safety such as management commitment and leadership to safety, safety
education & training, compliance of safety regulations. Most of the
organizational safety systems are top-driven whereas BBS is a bottom-up
approach
Today the
organizations are not only targeting zero accident/injury but also zeroing
at-risk-behaviours through behavioral based safety approaches for creating safe
environments for its employees. Behavioral safety is getting well accepted in India and
elsewhere and showing good results in terms of improved safety records, building positive SHE culture, promoting safe behaviours
and reduced at-risk behaviours at workplaces. Behavioral-based safety programs improve
worker safety. In India, behavioral based safety is referred to as: become brothers of
safety (BBS) to save lives at workplace.
It is
true that India, as predicted by many, is to become the world’s third largest
economy by adopting the best work systems such as behavioural safety.
Finally
we need to explore how BBS can be correlated with economics, HR and IR of an
organization in terms of saving expenditures on accidents/injury related costs,
promoting better HR/IR relations in an enterprise level through regular
observer-observee interactions across work areas.
The lessons learnt from the present survey
research:
a.
The hundreds/thousands unsafe behaviours are noticeable at
any workplace on daily basis depending upon size of an organization. Hence the
potential for accidents exist in every organization unless unsafe behaviours
are tapped and controlled daily. It would not come as a surprise any time if
there is a fire or major accident as thousands of unsafe behaviours are
observable at any workplace.
b.
Showing zero accidents record and international
certifications do not really ensure safe organization unless we target zero
unsafe behaviors at workplaces;
c.
Organizational case studies revealed that a single unsafe
behaviour can prove to be fatal.
d.
Lack of or partial safety enforcement reinforces unsafe
behaviours at the workplace.
e.
Preventing unsafe behaviours can bring down costs related to
injury/near miss/accidents.
f.
BBS interventions have demonstrated fall in unsafe
behaviours and rise in safe behaviours. BBS training also assist in reducing
the number of unsafe conditions in the organization;
g.
The managements have started believing that engineering
and administrative controls alone do not provide adequate safe workplace unless
behavioral safety is practiced and unsafe behaviors controlled in order to ensure total
safety at workplaces;
h.
Though OHSAS 18001:2007 has included three
clauses that emphasize behavioral aspects of safety, the organizations have yet
not followed it exactly as the OHSAS 18001:2007 does not provide any guidelines
on how to implement these clauses;
i.
The Indian multi-national organizations have begun to
consider the human behavior aspects of workplace safety more as compared to
yester years.
j.
In Indian
organizations, BBS is referred as to Become Brothers of Safety to save lives of
people at the work place. Employees
observe & correct unsafe behaviour of each other.
k. Unsafe behaviour can happen to anyone regardless of
position, education, experience and age. A Vice-President went up on the fourth
floor to inspect a construction project, he received a call on his mobile and
started talking, got so engrossed that he just put his step forward and fell
down from the 4th floor and died on the spot. An engineer on the shop floor thought of
crossing a conveyor belt while it was stopped, as he crossed, it started
working, he got crushed and died. A
Deputy General Manager got a serious eye injury when he was observing a workman
without wearing safety goggles and an object flew from the machine and hit him.
So accident/injury spares no one, even managers.
“If you observe anybody behaving unsafe, you
need to save him immediately, beyond which you may not get time to save him. I
failed to alert one person as I was about to tell him, before that he turned
and fell”, a plant head.
Bibliography
1.
Algera, J.
(1990). Feedback Systems in Organizations, International Review of Industrial
and Organisational Psychology, 5, John Wiley and Sons, London.
2.
Pettinger Chuck B. (2001). People-Based Safety: The Optimal Approach to
Behavior-Based Safety. Safety Performance Solutions, Inc.
3.
Kaila HL. (2010), Industrial Safety and Human Behaviour. AITBS
Publishers, New Delhi.
4.
Kaila HL. (2006).
Behaviour based safety in organizations. Indian J Occup Environ Med; 10:102-106.
5.
Kaila HL. (2006).
Behaviour Based Safety in Organizations, Industrial Safety Chronicle, Vol 37,
Oct-Dec, 83-89.
6.
Kaila HL. (2007).
Behaviour Based Safety in Organizations. Business Manager, Vol 10, No. 4, Oct.,
7-11.
7.
Kaila HL. (2008).
Behaviour Based Safety in Organizations. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 45, April, 35-44.
8.
Kaila HL. (2008).
Behaviour Based Safety in Organizations. The Urban World, April-June, Vol. I,
No. 5, P. 40-48.
9.
Kaila HL. (2008).
Behaviour based safety in organizations. New Delhi, IK International Publishing
House Pvt Ltd.
10.
Krause, T. R. (1995).
Employee Driven Systems for Safe Behaviour, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
11.
Krause, T.R. (1990).
The Behavioral-Based Safety Process, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
12.
Locke, E. et al. (1981).
Goal-Setting and Task Performance, Psychological Bulletin, 90:125-152.
13.
Marsh, T. et al. (1998).
The Role of Management Commitment in Determining the Success of a Behavioral
Intervention, Journal of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, 2
(4).
14.
Mosteller, W.G. (1989).
Usability Analysis of Messages from a Security System, in Proceedings of the
Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting, 399-403.
15.
Reason, J. (1990).
Human Error, Cambridge University Press, London.
16.
Reason, J. (1997).
Managing the Risks of Organisational Accidents, Ashgate Publishing.
17.
Skinner, B. (1974).
About Behaviorism, Jonathan Cape, London.
18.
Stewart, M.G. (1991).
Dependence of Human Error Probabilities, in Ergonomics and Human Environments.
Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Ergonomics Society of Australia,
Coolum, Australia, 207-14.
No comments:
Post a Comment