Steven R. Woodbury DOE Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Policy Leading Indicators for ES&H Performance: Measuring How Well Our Management System Is Performing ISM Best Practices Workshop September 12, 2006
“When safety is good and injury and loss rates are low, then [outcome] measurements are not sufficient to provide adequate feedback for managing safety.
For operations where there may be potential for severe accidents, the likelihood of such events must be extremely low. This means that the absence of very unlikely events is not, of itself, a sufficient indicator of good safety management. ”
“Health and safety differs from many areas measured by managers because success results in the absence of an outcome (injuries or ill health) rather than a presence. But a low injury or ill-health rate, even over a period of years, is no guarantee that risks are being controlled and will not lead to injuries or ill health in the future. This is particularly true in organizations where there is a low probability of accidents but where major hazards are present. ”
– A Guide to Measuring Health & Safety Performance Health & Safety Executive (UK), p 5
Some Best Practices in “Next Level” Performance Measurement
Guide to Measuring Health & Safety Performance (British Health and Safety Executive)
Total Quality Environmental Management Matrix (Grace Wever, Council of Great Lakes Industries)
Positive Performance Indicators (Australia, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations)
General Electric Company
ProSmart software (Chemical Process Safety Council)
“ The primary purpose of measuring H&S performance is to provide information on the progress and current status of the strategies, processes and activities used by an organization to control risks to health and safety”
– A Guide to Measuring Health & Safety Performance Health & Safety Executive (UK), p 7
PPIs are not limited to Occupational Health and Safety – completely applicable to management across ES&H
PPIs focus on identifying key elements of the ES&H management system, and measuring how well these key elements are functioning
PPIs are non-prescriptive and open-ended: approach provides great flexibility at the facility and site level
Most PPIs are qualitative, based on assessments, record reviews, surveys, or audits
The Guidance document assumes a fairly basic management system. DOE sites generally have more sophisticated ES&H management systems in place, with the opportunity to develop more sophisticated measures.
General Electric – Health and Safety Framework
At the April ISM meeting in Albuquerque, Kurt Krueger described GE’s corporate-wide Health and Safety program
“ One standard, one program, one set of metrics for every GE facility around the world – No exceptions!”
GE’s Health and Safety Framework includes a mix of 21
ES&H Evaluations of 17 DOE Sites 2002-2004 15 2 Feedback and Improvement 5 12 Work within Controls 1 11 5 Develop and Implement Controls 7 10 Analyze the Hazards Significant Weakness Needs Improvement Effective Performance Management System Area
There is a common thread of best practice, across many different organizations: to move beyond outcome (lagging) indicators, we need to start systematically measuring how well key elements of our management system are performing.
This is not as easy as counting occurrences (injuries, enforcement actions): it must involve walk-throughs, audits, surveys, and other varied approaches.
This ‘next level’ of leading performance measurement complements, and does not replace, outcome (lagging) measures.
Approaches developed for process safety, worker safety, environment, can be applied across ES&H. We need to be eclectic and ecumenical in our thinking.
Nobody has a turnkey system that’s right for DOE. We need to identify and build on the best of these various approaches.
Grace Wever, 1996, Strategic Environmental Management: Using TQEM and ISO 14000 for Competitive Advantage , John Wiley and Sons, NY
European Process Safety Centre (Jacques van Steen, ed.), 1996, Safety Performance Measurement , Institution of Chemical Engineers, Rugby (UK) (distr by Gulf publishing Co., PO Box 2608, Houston, TX 77252-2608)
Health and Safety Executive (United Kingdom), 2001, A Guide to Measuring Health & Safety Performance http:// www.hse.gov.uk/opsunit/perfmeas.pdf
Commonwealth of Australia (Department of Employment and Workplace Relations), 2005, Guidance on the Use of Positive Performance Indicators to Improve Workplace Health and Safety http://www.nohsc.gov.au/PDF/Standards/GuidanceNotes/ASCCPPIGuidanceBooklet.pdf
Kurt Krueger, “Creating a Culture of Safety Excellence: The Journey and the Prize,” talk at DOE ISM Champions Workshop, Albuquerque NM, April 2006 http://www.eh.doe.gov/ism/workshops/Creating_a_Culture_of_Safety_Excellence.pdf
George Eckes, The Six Sigma Revolution: How GE and Others Turned Process into Profits , New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2000.
Center for Chemical Process Safety, ProSmart software http://www.aiche.org/CCPS/Publications/Software/ProSmart/index.aspx