Using Near Miss Reporting to Enhance Safety Performance Moderator: Panel: Roger Smith Glen Clement, Alicia Weber, Wes Rimes, Brandon Shell, Brian McKay, John Holliday, and Eric Marks 2014 CII Annual Conference July 21–23 • Indianapolis, Indiana Research Team 301, Using Near Miss Reporting to Enhance Safety Performance Patricia Anthony, DTE Energy Steve Holland, GE Energy David Clark, SAIC Constructors, LLC John Holliday, Georgia-Pacific Corporation Glen Clement, ConocoPhillips Eric Marks, Georgia Tech Bryon Creech, CH2M HILL Brian McKay, Bechtel/Fairweather Dennis Cobb, Phillips 66 Anthony Miller, Parsons Bill Drust, Praxair Wes Rimes, Yates Construction Bob Fitzgerald, Southern Company Jeff Ruebesam, Fluor Corporation Jason Fulton, Dresser-Rand Company Brandon Shell, ExxonMobil Larry Green, BP Sixto Mendez, SKEC USA, Inc. Carroll Higdon, The Robins & Morton Group Roger Smith, Zurich Services Corporation Jimmie Hinze, University of Florida Alicia Weber, Jacobs Dr. Jimmie Hinze Agenda 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Mission Statement/Charter/Objective Literature Review and Motivation Research Methodology and Results Near Miss Reporting Program Simulated Near Miss Findings and Conclusions Questions RT 301 Mission Statement/Charter Research Team 301 explored: 1) … “how near miss reporting can enhance safety in construction” … 2) … “near miss reporting programs of organizations in industries other than construction”… 3) … “benefits and limitations of implementing and maintaining a near miss reporting program within a construction company and on individual construction sites”… Essential Question: How can near miss reporting programs be implemented to significantly enhance safety performance? Objective: Identify best practices associated with near miss reporting programs including effective methods for collecting and assessing near miss information Only Marginal Safety Improvements RT 301: Building on Existing CII Safety Research Near Miss Reporting (RT 301) Pro-Active Safety Safety Management Foundation for Safety Design for Safety (RT 101) 1995 Hazard Recognition (RT 293) 2003 Targeted Safety Programs (RT 216) 2006 Managing Subcontractor Safety (RT 13) 1990 Implementing Active Leading Indicators (RT 284) 2012 Real-time ProActive Safety in Construction (RT 269) 2010 Safety Plus: Making Zero Accidents a Reality (RT 160) 2002 Improved Workers’ Compensation Management (RT 45) 1995 Owner’s Role in Construction Worker Safety (RT 190) 2003 Zero Injury Techniques (RT 32) 1993 Organizational Commitment to Safety Lagging vs. Leading Indicators Fatality TRIR Injury/Illness Lagging Indicators First Aid Cost and Severity Near Miss (including hazardous conditions) At Risk Behavior Heinrich’s Safety Pyramid Leading Indicators Research Methodology 9 Near Miss Reporting in Other Industries Initial Interview Phase 1. 2. 3. Company Information: Safety record (OSHA TRIR), annual revenue, number of employees) Project Information: Total cost, percent complete, safety record, cumulative work hours, first aid incidents, number of safety personnel, and supervisors Near Miss Reporting Program: Initiating party, near miss definition, flow of information, investigation strategy, number of reported near misses U.S. International Region Number Country Number Northeast 2 Canada 7 Northwest 6 Singapore 2 Southwest 12 Norway 1 Southeast 17 Initial Interview Findings Key finding: Misunderstanding that an increase in reported near misses negatively reflects safety performance Projects 50% or more completeness are included Stepwise Regression of Dependent Variables Dependent Variable OSHA Recordable Incident Rate Bottom Line: Near Misses Investigated Weight (-) 42.21% 11.42% As the number of Number of Safety Personnel near 9.87% misses reported increases; Number of First AidTRIR Incidentsdecreases 9.65% the OSHA Regression Metrics Number of Supervisors 8.38% Number of Craft Workers 5.23% Safety Manager Time on Project 4.25% 95% confidence interval P-value: Less than 0.001 Adjusted R-Square: of 0.89 Standard Error: 17.46 Near Miss Reporting Process Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • • • • • • Management commitment Elements of a near miss program Specific definition of a near miss Expectations for reporting Procedures for reporting Management action/reaction What is a Near Miss? • Program Objectives: – Motivate and empower the workforce to be a partner in safety – Recognize and communicate unsafe conditions and close-calls – Take action to reduce risk and prevent adverse outcomes • Near Miss Definition: – An unplanned event or unsafe condition that has the potential for injury or illness to people, or damage to property, or the environment Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • Demonstrated commitment by leadership • Dedicated resources • Program “champion” • Develop training material • Conduct craft and leadership training Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • Who reports? • Determine collection method – Verbal (report to supervisor) – Paper (drop box) – Electronic • Near miss observation – Required information – Stop work authority – Mitigate immediate hazards • Language barriers Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • Evaluate available information • Determine potential consequence • Determine and conduct fit for purpose investigation • Determine contributing factors • Trend data • Determine cause • Timely Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • • • • Address causes Develop implementation plan Improve training Establish new or enhance existing procedures • Commit to corrective action plan by leadership Near Miss Reporting Database Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • Communicate results with workforce – Daily toolbox safety talks – Weekly safety meetings – Printed investigation reports – Post on project website • Provide direct feedback to near miss reporter (if known) • Must be clear and concise • Address language barriers Define Encourage Roll Out Communicate Corrective Actions Collect Analyze • Leadership engagement – Recognize employees/groups – Celebrate successes • Continually emphasize program goals – Fact finding, not fault finding – Promote active learning – Drive continuous improvement Near Miss Reporting Information Flowchart 27 Findings: Barriers and Enablers Barriers Enablers • Fear of retaliation • Communication • Fear that reporting reflects poorly on performance • Leadership and motivation • Absence of a trusting environment • Near miss reporting training • Lack of training • Guidance and resources • Reward strategy • No follow-up “If you see it, you own it” – Interviewed Safety Manager Findings and Conclusions • A comprehensive safety program is a prerequisite to implement a near miss reporting program (CII RT 284) • How to measure success of the program? Quality not quantity • Increased near miss reporting enables identification of hazards before an injury/illness/fatality occurs • Fear of retaliation among workers is strong: Needs to be overcome • Near miss reporting is an important tool of a comprehensive safety program • Safety leading indicators (i.e. near misses) can break the plateau Dr. Jimmie Hinze Thank you for your attention! Discussion/Questions/Comments