Morning all, At the end of the year I collate and analyse the safety observation, near miss and incident data, compare with previous years to look for trends etc. pretty standard activities. I like to feedback the findings of this data, so the individuals who take time to input the data; don't feel it is lost in a black hole. Demonstrating the cost of an accident and the "iceberg" model is easy. But here is the challenge, How do you promote safety when very little has happen which has had a negative impact. How can you demonstrate the activities carried out throughout the year have reduced risk and saved time and money? For example; In the past I have attributed a time and cost saving to safe observations based on; if the incident had not been avoided. Does anyone have any other examples of demonstrating how proactive activities have made a difference? Thanks

Bennett 31384 Your 'simple' question raises questions addressed by what has become known as 'evolutionary psychology', scientific study of communications used by people in the Stone Age. Nigel Nicholson, a professor at London Business School, has written a very readable guide to the issues called 'Managing the Human Animal', Texere, 2000, which is available on Amazon.co.uk If you'd like a copy of an article I've written recently on smart communications that address essentials of communications strategy for people familiar with Information Technology and still using Stone Age brains, PM me with your email address

quote=Bennett31384] For example; In the past I have attributed a time and cost saving to safe observations based on; if the incident had not been avoided. Thanks

Bennett31384 You are limiting your own options by assuming that you need to promote safety when by 'demonstrating' that the activities carried out throughout the year have reduced risk and saved time and money. Working in a corporate setting with highly educated managers, there is a lot to be said for communicating in a style that shows they are more sophisticated than an average GCSE student or perhaps even than a 'pleb' who needs such a demonstration. By using a couple of case studies, you can highlight the ingenuity of some of their peers (in your company and in others, even in other sectors) who have made complex safety management decisions under pressure, thanks to the system you have devised (with them). James Reason's recent books on complex safety leadership raise the bar on safety communications, with gentle edge - that capture the attention and imagination of busy managers, and prompt them to think and talk about their challenges. Not very long ago, I attended a meeting addressed by a hardy engineer who had been a very successful CEO of a global oil company. His talk was very entertaining to the point that he had the audience in the palm of his hand. He impressed me much more in his response when I observed that he hadn't spoken about safety in his success story; his reply was spot on and very credible. He was equally impressive talking informally in a small group afterwards, where his familiarity with dilemmas of operational managers whom he expected to practise safety as a priority came across in low-key yet very convincing tones. Now that he manages investment funds, he puts the same doctrine to work.

This thread seems to have largely left out the 'health' aspect of health and safety. I suggest that with health there is often a potential to demonstrate the benefits of having appropriate controls in place. By implementing an effective health surveillance system (lung function testing, audiometry, skin condition measurement) you can detect where your exposure management is not working as it should before the clinical damage occurs. By showing the results of the various interventions/monitoring activities you can show how the early detection has resulted in improvements in controls and thus in reduction of the risk of occupational ill health. Think of health surveillance as your quality controls system on the adequacy of your exposure controls. Chris

Bennett, what you do each year my main customer (and I) do every month. The 'metric' we use is each month we score departments in topics like Accidents, Toolbox Talks, inspections conducted, safety/engineering jobs to do, safety ideas generated etc Each month each department GETS 10 points for each topic, but LOSE some of those points for accidents and incidents (depending on severity), they lose points if they didn't do toolbox talks, they lose points if safety/engineering jobs are not completed. For safety ideas they get additional points. So in the chart the team running with the highest points has the best Team Performance, through having less accidents and keeping on top of safety training and safety-related engineering jobs. And there's an award at the end of the year. Currently the best team this year has accumulated about 400 points, closely followed by another team on 390. The poorest team is down at 200 points. It's not perfect; the team on 200 is the largest and most complex department, 50 men and a continuous process with chemicals, conveyors, fork lift traffic etc so they are more likely to have incidents and engineering problems, maybe unfair on them :o)