Audits tell us whether employees are following safety procedures, right? Not necessarily.
I’ve seen situations where companies have an admirable history of safety practice yet still experience fatalities—and in one case, two-thirds of the deaths occurred in high-risk areas.
How is this happening when their audits looked so good?
I have observed workers saying what the auditors wanted to hear, parroting what they heard in training—because they feared for their jobs and were “fibbing” to avoid trouble. But on the job, workers were not following the safety protocol, not behaving safely. This seemed mystifying, because the safety protocol exists for their benefit, after all. So what was going on?
What do I mean by verify + validate? Here are my definitions:
Further, validation applies to both leaders and workers:
V & V Verification and validation procedures are used together to confirm that a product, service, or system meets spec and its intended purpose. Both are critical components of a quality management system such as ISO 9000. Verification assures that requirements, controls, or specs are met. Audits often consist solely of verification against requirements. Validation assures that field application is really preventing incidents. |
Instead of safety checklists, leaders should use a behavior-based safety protocol to evaluate true safety performance. In every setting in every industry, there are a “critical few” safety behaviors that can save lives. To discover if these critical-few safety behaviors are happening, engage people in dialogue.
Try these simple steps:
With trust and understanding in place, you can ask the questions about the critical-few safety behaviors—and expect to hear candid answers: I’m seeing some people not following our hard-hat rule, or our equipment-testing procedure. This is dangerous. Why do you think this is?
I have worked with leaders to transform their audit program into a Coaching Program for Verification+Validation of Safety Behaviors. Supervisors attend working sessions to learn how to listen and how to ask open-ended questions to encourage dialogue. Using these new skills, supervisors quickly gain new rapport with the workforce.
Structuring your safety program questions using ALULA’s DCOM® Model for high performance* is another tool to consider:
Direction: Does everyone clearly understand our safety goal, procedures, and the critical-few safety behaviors?
Competence: Does everyone have the safety knowledge, skills, and capability they need?
Opportunity: Does everyone feel free to follow safety protocols and watch each other’s backs?
Motivation: Does everyone want to perform safely?
When I’ve applied the DCOM method for preparing and asking safety questions, responses received have given leaders real actionable information, helping them realize the safety problem is about more than individuals—it is about the organization’s diligence in creating a genuine “culture of safety.”
Safety, competence, verification, and validation typically have been the responsibility of safety or environmental groups and separated from the business context. But today, organizations are more safety-conscious, and safety is now a focus for general managers and senior leaders. Today, safety metrics are often seen as equal in importance to other business metrics.
Take a tip from my own experience: your best safety metrics will come from engaging in candid dialogue with employees.
*DCOM® is a registered servicemark of CLG (dba ALULA).
If you found this post interesting, you might also like "Beyond “How To.”