A good question, even if it has been discussed before on these forums. A reduction of reported incidents does not necessarily equate to an increase in EHS performance. There have been many organisations who believed otherwise, only to have a rude awakening when a serious incident unfolded which subsequently showed that their systems were not as good as they thought - or hoped! The setting of targets for incident reporting (I presume that includes near misses) is problematical in itself. This can lead to a number of artificial interventions, such as incentives for reporting incidents. Encouraging staff at ALL levels within the organisations to report unsafe acts and conditions is the way forward, regardless the of actual numbers of incidents reported. Trends should be identified as they are indicators, but only indicators, hence they should not be relied on too heavily. Again, some organisations foolishly set targets for incident reporting believing that the more incidents reported the safer they will become. However, it is not just a numbers game, but the quality of those reports and the potential impact should be properly assessed - which takes time and effort. For example, many incidents are caused by poor planning, supervision, training, etc. Yet, very few incidents, including near misses, ever report those type of issues because they tend to involve local management and they have a tendency to be 'forgotten' in the context of accident causation.

If you do want an incident reporting measure why not repeat near misses. It shows you didn't (or somebody didn't) do enough following your first one to eliminate the second.

An interesting thread. We currently publish accident stats for each of our regions, as a inter-company benchmarking excercies on a monthly basis. Could anyone point out a research report that has reviewed the use incidents reported as a measure of health and safety performance and how this could drive reporting underground? Would help me sell the idea of altering the way we report H&S information.

I'd give reporting a very wide berth as an objective or target, and focus instead on reducing the leading indicators that contribute to the accidents themselves. Perhaps improving the time frames for rectifying defects, or reducing the number of missed routine inspections. Reducing the number of accident reports is a bit vague, and in some ways, slightly reactive.

Thanks Peter, found a literature review that fits the bill nicely as well as your direct link :)

Just consider what Einstein once said: "Not everything that can be measured counts, and not everything that counts can be measured." Chris

....very valid quotation. My emphasis at the moment is trying to capture and measure 'culture' - a different mindset is required when comparing this to simple, rear-facing accident stats.