SIF prevention: A discussion

Page 2 of 2

How much did the COVID-19 pandemic interrupt any progress?

Walia: It might be argued that the pandemic increased the velocity of progress when it comes to SIF pre-vention. What we’ve observed is that the pandemic allowed organizations to make significant advances in thought leadership. It forced leaders to develop creative and varied approaches and delivery methodology, especially with respect to remote collaboration.

The Krause Bell Group: In one sense, progress in SIF prevention was severely stalled by COVID-19 when production stalled (or went into overdrive). Generally speaking, significant attention and resources were directed toward business continuity and implementing new safeguards to protect workers from the disease.

In another sense, great progress was made. During the pandemic, organizations discovered the capability they have to address complex health and safety issues. Relationships were strengthened between safety pros and organizational leaders. Above all, leaders experienced firsthand how their workforce responds when they lead with care and concern for worker well-being.

Wilson: Because things were already moving in the wrong direction, it would be difficult to say COVID-19 could “interrupt any progress.” What the pandemic did was shine a spotlight on safety and health issues as 24/7 problems that require the use of influence strategies instead of relying solely on control strategies. Safety pros learned quickly that keeping COVID-19 out of their facilities required them to influence employees to adjust their lifestyle and use tools and techniques to avoid the virus everywhere. The same strategy applies to SIFs, which are a 24/7 problem.

For organizations interested in SIF prevention or improvements, where or how should they begin their efforts?

Walia: Historical data analysis and a clear understanding of the organization’s SIF exposure profile is a good place to start (but only the start). A data-based approach to action and mitigation efforts yields quicker and stronger results.

The Krause Bell Group: Start with a definition of SIF so that everyone is on the same page. Next, start classifying events as either having SIF potential or not.

As for how, find an executive sponsor who’s passionate about SIF prevention and can help engage the rest of the executive team to lead the changes that need to take place. We see too many safety functions working in the safety silo without the support and understanding of their colleagues and leaders. Safety leaders invest a great deal of time and effort before running into the brick wall of resistance to change.

How do you engage leaders? The best place to start is to work with them to answer the “why” question. Why should anyone do anything different than they’re doing today? Why is it worth it to engage the organization in this change? Yes, lives are at stake. And so much more. If done right, they can transform the business. Done wrong, they add layers of bureaucracy to a bureaucratic system and everything becomes harder.

Find ways to help senior leaders make the connection between their decisions and SIF potential.

For smaller organizations that may not have as many resources, incidents or data, etc., what can they do for SIF prevention?

Dony: For smaller organizations, the key aspect of SIF prevention is increased understanding of and attention to risk. Not all work is created equal – and the same goes for all work-related incidents. Smaller organizations would be well served to start with reviewing their higher-risk work (examples: at height, con-fined spaces and lockout/tagout-related), as well as better understanding the key controls in place and their adequacy/effectiveness. A close next step would be reviewing and modifying pre-job assessments and post-incident investigations to include concepts related to risk and (natural) human error.

Wilson: Preventing SIFs doesn’t require a massive budget or Herculean effort. Even tiny companies can offer employees and their families safety awareness training based on a 24/7 human factors approach.

Alternately, because the greatest SIF danger most employees face is their daily commute, offering to pay those employees to attend a free defensive driving course would be another great first step. Including family members in this training has also shown incredible results.

And bringing in outside expertise doesn’t have to be limited to large, mature organizations, and can lead to long-term savings when you factor in the cost of injuries or the internal costs associated with trying to create solutions in-house. Most training programs are priced in scale with the number of employees, so smaller companies should be able to access training and consultants who will aid them in reducing SIFs and managing human factors.

What are some of the possible future innovations in SIF prevention?

Dony: Technology continues to play an interesting role as a disruptive/innovative force in SIF prevention. In particular, artificial intelligence and algorithmic analysis offer exciting opportunities for organizations to un-derstand and react to increased risk or operating disruptions in real time or in a proactive manner rather than after the fact.

Walia: 1) Further development of the role of exposure reduction teams. 2) The application of exposure reduction plans focused on a single or limited element of the organization’s exposure profile. 3) Exploration of the role of AI in data analysis.

Wilson: Most attempts to reduce SIFs focus on improving the workplace environment or getting people to make better decisions. Both of these approaches have serious limitations, as most injuries happen away from work, which is outside the purview of the safety manager and often aren’t the direct result of conscious decisions.

Instead, safety pros should direct their efforts toward developing how people subconsciously recognize and respond to hazards. Virtual reality offers some interesting opportunities. It allows people to participate in an immersive experience that can condition them to respond to real dangers in a variety of simulated situations. Think of it as sending workers to the school of hard knocks, but without the hard knocks. This can help rewire people’s real-time responses to stimuli and, in turn, lead to the development of stronger safety habits.

Other technology improvements, such as wearables that can monitor proximity to hazards, worker location, physical fatigue and other factors, can also help. But nothing will ever compete with the universal human capabilities associated with managing human factors in any situation, especially when you consider the amount of risk people face outside of their working environments.

Return to page 1