Professional Safety - August 2020

Alternative Methods to

LOCKOUT/TAGOUT

Leading & Lagging
Indicators

Wearables for Safety

Smart PPE to
Prevent Heat Stress

ASSP.ORG AUGJUUNSET 2020

MGC Simple +

Where Simplicity
Meets Longevity.

• Three-year continuous run time
• Recharging not necessary
• Recalibration not necessary
• One-button operation
• Failure alert function
• Functional in inert atmospheres
• Data logs in one-second intervals

(from point-of-detection)
• LEL sensor immune to poisoning
• Detects LEL gases, H2S, CO & O2

gascliptech.com +1.972.775.5777 1.877.525.0808

Contact us today for information about the
MGC Simple+ and other Gas Clip products.

EARN A SAFETY

CERTIFICATE

For more than 100 years, the American Society of
Safety Professionals (ASSP) has delivered top-quality
safety education and training that can immediately
be put into practice. Whether you're just starting
the journey or a seasoned veteran, our certificates
are your guide to greater success. ASSP certificates
include:

Safety Management Leadership in Safety Global Safety
Certificate Management Certificate Management Certificate

Build professional credibility in Secure your leadership position Gain knowledge and skills to
your role with foundational and using contemporary safety implement the most effective
fundamental knowledge to feel methods and the power of techniques in global safety and
confident at your organization. influence. health management.

Required Courses (5.6 CEUs) Required Courses (3.5 CEUs) Required Courses (2.8 CEUs)
▪ Safety Management I ▪ Advanced Safety ▪ Managing Safety and Health
▪ Safety Management II ▪ Implementing a Safety and
▪ Corporate Safety Management Management Methods
Health Management System
▪ Influential Leadership Skills
▪ International Standards

and Legal Requirements for
Safety Management

Why Earn a ▪ Establish credibility as a leader and signify your commitment to the safety profession
Professional ▪ Gain a competitive advantage and maximize your earning potential
Certificate ▪ Become an indispensable asset and valuable resource to your workers and organization
from ASSP? ▪ Grow your professional network by learning alongside other safety professionals
▪ Understand and integrate best practices from leading organizations

Questions? Email [email protected]
or visit assp.org/certificates

CONTENTS
Features

Peer-Reviewed

24 29 36

Using Machine Safety THE ROLE OF SAFETY & ENTROPY
Risk Assessment for LEADING & LAGGING A Leadership Issue
Alternative Methods to INDICATORS
LOCKOUT/TAGOUT in OSH Performance By Rodney Grieve and Tania
Management Van der Stap
By Gary J. Garrahan
By Pam Walaski Building on the entropy model,
This article discusses OSHA’s re- The role of performance in- there are two types of risk: re-
cent request for information relat- dicators (typically known as sidual and entropic. The latter is
ed to updating the lockout/tagout lagging and leading indicators) caused by degradation of systems
standard, specifically regarding has been the focus of much dis- and, as explained in this article,
two areas of the standard: control cussion in the OSH community also by degradation of human
circuit type devices and robot- recently. OSH professionals behavior and organizational fac-
ics. In both areas, the issue is should educate themselves on tors. To manage risk effectively,
whether technology has reached a the historical use of these in- leaders must understand why
point where alternative methods dicators as well as the pros and degradation occurs in human
to lockout can be used without cons of their current use. This behavior and how to support peo-
diminishing the level of safety re- article provides a case for mov- ple to minimize entropic safety
quired for the worker. The article ing away from the typical use risk. Leaders must understand
describes a risk assessment meth- of these indicators and moving the entropic risk associated with
odology that can be used in situ- toward a process that is based organizational factors such as
ations where alternative methods on an organization’s strategic leadership, competencies, man-
to lockout are used to protect business objectives. agement systems and resilience.
workers from hazardous energy. These are also subject to degrada-
tion unless managed proactively.

AUGUST 2020 ABOUT PROFESSIONAL SAFETY
VOL. 65, NO. 8
Professional Safety is a blind peer-reviewed journal published monthly by
COVER the American Society of Safety Professionals, the oldest professional safety
society. Professional Safety keeps the professional OSH specialist informed on
If the lockout/ developments in the research and technology of incident prevention, industry
tagout standard is best practices and safety management techniques.
updated to allow for
the use of alternative Judgments made or opinions expressed in Professional Safety feature articles,
methods, it offers news sections, letters to the editor, meeting reports or related journal content
do not necessarily reflect the views of the editor, nor should they be considered
the possibility of an expression of official policy by ASSP. They are published for the purpose of
improved safety stimulating independent thought on matters of concern to the OSH profession
and cost reduction. and its practitioners.

Photo Morsa Correspondence should be addressed to the editor. Professional Safety
Images/E+/Getty reserves the right to edit all journal content to improve clarity and grammar, to
adhere to journal style, and for length as needed. Final editorial decisions are at
Images the discretion of the ASSP editorial team.

2 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

NEW Virtual
Education
Event Series

ASSP is where occupational safety and
health (OSH) professionals find a vibrant
community—one that helps you grow
professionally through immersive, tailored,
and engaging education. The SafetyFOCUS
event series is a learning experience that is
unparalleled in the safety industry.

Join these curated experiences
focused on:

Construction Risk Assessment and $599 Member:
August 26-27, 2020 Management
October 20-21, 2020 Register and receive a
Safety Management free membership to the
Systems Industrial Hygiene Construction Practice
September 16-17, 2020 October 22, 2020 Specialty

Group Rates: Save up

to 10% when you register
your Team of 5 or more

IMMERSIVE. TAILORED. ENGAGING.

Fulfill your CEU Learn from industry Connect with like-
requirements and experts with relatable minded peers for robust
apply what you learn real-world experiences virtual networking
immediately on the job opportunities

To learn more, visit

SafetyFOCUS.assp.org

CONTENTS
Departments

6 President’s Message 20 Business Class EDITORIAL STAFF
Staying the course for public health Leading organizational improvement Tina Angley, Editor
with one management system (847) 768-3438;
7 ASSP Connection [email protected]
Virtual safety education series, Safe 42 Math Toolbox
+ Sound Week activities Applying STEM principles to Sarah Astra, Associate Editor
everyday safety issues (847) 768-3414;
8 Safety Matters [email protected]
Safety standard for COVID-19, ladder 48 Checkpoints
safety, construction worker health, The interdependency of design Griffin White, Assistant Editor
hurricane season incident prevention safety and ergonomics (847) 768-3468;
[email protected]
12 Worth Reading 50 Vantage Point
Book review of Leaders Eat Last Social systems and psychological Publication Design Inc.
safety add meaning to safety culture Design Consultants
13 Reader Forum
Feedback on our January 2020 issue 52 Product Pulse EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD
The latest safety innovations Frank G. D’Orsi, CSP, ARM,
14 PSJ Asks CHCM, Chair
Smart PPE: Q&A with Heidi Lehmann 54 Continuing Education
Online and virtual events during Salvatore Caccavale, CPEA
16 Best Practices August, September and October
Safety wearables: Worker acceptance, David A. Dodge, P.E., CSP
union buy-in and data security 55 Vantage Point
The dichotomy of safety vs. production Cari M. Elofson, CHST
18 Leading Thoughts
Creating your leadership legacy 56 By the Way E. Andrew Kapp, Ph.D., CSP,
Stop and smell the roses CHMM
Professional Safety copyright
©2020 by American Society of Professional Safety is available Steve Minshall, CSP, CIH
Safety Professionals. All rights free online to ASSP members at
reserved. No copyright is claimed in www.assp.org/publications/ Justin J. Molocznik, CSP, CHST
any works of the U.S. government professional-safety. Articles are
that may be published herein. also available via microform Matthew D. Reyes, Ph.D.
For information on reprinting or and/or electronic databases
reproducing articles published in from ProQuest, P.O. Box 1346, SOCIETY OFFICERS
Professional Safety, visit www.assp Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 USA; Deborah R. Roy, M.P.H., R.N., CSP,
.org/publications/professional-safety. phone +1 (800) 521-0600. For COHN-S, CIT, FASSP, FAAOHN
specific format details, visit www.proquest President
PSJ (ISSN 0099 0027) is published .com.
monthly by the American Society of Safety Bradley D. Giles, P.E., CSP, STS,
Professionals, 520 N. Northwest Highway, POSTMASTER: Send address changes FASSP, GIOSH
Park Ridge, IL 60068-2538 USA; phone (847) to Change of Address Dept., ASSP, 520 N. President-Elect
699-2929; [email protected]. Northwest Highway, Park Ridge, IL 60068-
Periodicals postage paid at Park Ridge, IL, 2538 USA. Christine M. Sullivan, CSP, ARM
and at additional mailing offices. Senior Vice President

Linda M. Tapp, CSP
Vice President, Finance

Todd William Loushine, Ph.D.,
P.E., CSP, CIH
Vice President,
Professional Development

Jennifer M. McNelly
Chief Executive Officer

ADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVE
Michael Sanders
(847) 232-2038;
[email protected]

4 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

PLAN FOR THE UNEXPECTED –
KEEP YOUR WORKERS SAFE

Organizations that implement safety management systems go beyond
compliance to identify and eliminate safety and health risks.

The ANSI/ASSP Z10.0-2019 is the U.S. Occupational Health For the latest Z10 news
and Safety Management Systems Consensus Standard.
Listen to our podcasts
NEW Instuctor-led Online Course: Implementing an
ANSI/ASSP Z10 Management System Based on Systems Read our blogs
Thinking Download our free
guidance manual
▪ Earn 3.0 CEUs in an interactive learning environment.
▪ Apply the new-view concepts, a systems-thinking

approach to safety and health.
▪ Improve your organization’s occupational safety and

health performance.
▪ Customize the standard to meet your individual needs

and risk level.

Learn more about Z10 at

assp.us/sms

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

STAY THE COURSE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

Deb Roy As I write this message in late wise decisions in public health
June, cases of COVID-19 are climbing matters, then the answer does
Connect With Deb across many U.S. states. As we slowly not lie in the direction of in-
return to “normal” activities, it has been creased authoritarianism on
Join Deb on LinkedIn or comment troubling to see many people disregard- our part. It lies rather in the
on her message at www.assp.org/ ing the measures enacted the past few direction of developing better
news/presidents-message. months to prevent transmission of this [techniques] for getting our
deadly virus. While we certainly can ideas across and a more wide-
As OSH understand the feeling of “being over spread acceptance, on our part,
professionals, it,” we also must recognize that this of the importance of the social
we have a unique pandemic is far from being over. As An- science approach to communi-
opportunity to thony Fauci said on June 18, 2020, “We ty public health problems.
significantly impact are still in the first wave of coronavirus.”
the community And while some drug trials look prom- As OSH professionals, we have a
of workers under ising, a vaccine is likely many months unique opportunity to significantly im-
away. Even when one is available, we pact the community of workers under
our care. will need to vaccinate a large portion of our care. We may be tired of the pan-
the world’s population to prevent out- demic and the restrictions it has creat-
breaks as international travel resumes. ed. And we may be frustrated by those
disregarding the scientific evidence or
When looking at the global data on not following guidance on various pro-
the pandemic, it is noteworthy that tective measures.
some countries not only flattened the
epidemiologic curve of COVID-19 That is why it is even more important
cases, but also mitigated the spread of that we accept the challenge to come up
the virus. Residents in these countries with a new strategy so that we can help
embraced the need to protect each our workers, organizations and commu-
other by adhering to physical distanc- nities understand the value of protecting
ing measures, wearing face coverings public health. For example, try using a
and using hygiene protocols for long technique such as the five whys to explore
enough to reduce cases to a small num- the reasons people are not practicing
ber. This enabled their countries to fol- physical distancing or to learn more about
low the proven containment strategy of the barriers to wearing a face covering.
testing, contact tracing and isolation to Talk with your employees to determine
limit further outbreaks. This approach what kind of training would resonate
also prevented a surge in new cases as better. Identify ways you can provide
their economies reopened. additional support to workers who might
not have necessary access to healthcare or
The experience in the U.S. has been a home environment that allows for quar-
mixed, largely depending on measures antining from sick family members.
enacted at the local and state level. Na-
tionwide, we hit a peak, then flattened This pandemic will end. Until then,
the curve at a high level, yet as of this let’s do our best to continue to help
writing have the highest peak of cases manage this risk, just as we would any
since the pandemic started. other. That requires the due diligence to
maintain the proven public health strat-
People’s response to this public health egies of containment and mitigation.
crisis brings to mind a study Julius Stay the course and be well! PSJ
Prince conducted for the New York
State Department of Health in the late Deborah R. Roy, M.P.H., R.N.,
1950s (https://assp.us/publichealth). In CSP, COHN-S, CIT, FASSP,
his 1958 article, “A Public Philosophy in FAAOHN
Public Health,” Prince wrote:

If the citizens of our commu-
nities are incapable of making

6 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

ASSP CONNECTION

FIZKES/IS TOCK /GE T T Y IMAGES PLUS ASSP Introduces

VIRTUAL SAFETY EDUCATION SERIES

OSH professionals facing the challenges of restricted travel and physical distanc-
ing can stay current on best practices through a new series of virtual education events
from ASSP. These events, offshoots of the Society’s annual SafetyFOCUS education
event, will connect safety professionals with industry experts who will share the latest
knowledge and strategies through a convenient digital platform.

Construction has one of the highest injury and fatality rates of any industry sector.
ASSP launches its virtual safety education series Aug. 26-27 with SafetyFOCUS: Con-
struction, giving participants focused education on topics such as fall protection, silica
standards, crisis management, contractor prequalification and job hazard analysis.

The virtual education series will deliver relevant safety and health information that
attendees can immediately put into practice. The event also provides networking breaks
between sessions and an interactive virtual expo featuring the latest product innova-
tions. Participants will earn CEUs to help maintain their professional certifications.

In the coming months, the SafetyFOCUS virtual education series will feature
events on safety management systems (Sept. 16-17), risk assessment and manage-
ment (Oct. 20-21), industrial hygiene (Oct. 22), business skills and leadership (Nov.
17), human and organizational performance (Nov. 18-19), standards (Jan. 26, 2021),
ergonomics (Mar. 9, 2021), and training and education (Mar. 10-11, 2021).

Learn more at https://safetyfocus.assp.org.

How Are You Participating in Reader Forum

Safe + Sound Week? Have you ever read an
article in Professional Safety
The Safe + Sound Week campaign safety programs can identify and and wanted to take the con-
versation further? Share your
(www.osha.gov/safeandsound) is a manage workplace hazards before in- thoughts with other readers.
PSJ encourages readers to
nationwide event to raise awareness cidents occur, improving an organi- write to Reader Forum in
response to specific articles,
of the value of safety and health pro- zation’s efficiency and sustainability. editorials, letters, columns
and news reports.
grams, and improve understanding Did your company participate
Submit your comments on
about the core elements of those in this year’s Safe + Sound Week, stories and features to PSJ’s
Reader Forum at profession
programs: management leadership, Aug. 10-16? How did you or your [email protected].

worker participation and a system- company show your commitment

atic approach to finding and fixing to safety? Submit your event photos

hazards in the workplace. and stories to professionalsafety

The campaign aims to improve @assp.org, and they could be fea-

awareness that safe workplaces are tured in Professional Safety or Soci-

sound business, and that successful ety Update.

DKOSIG/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS ASSP Introduces the Find new ways to
Global Operations Practice Specialty get involved with
your community.
As part of its efforts to reimagine the International Practice
Specialty, effective July 1, 2020, ASSP introduced a new name
for the community: Global Operations Practice Specialty. The
change is designed to help the practice specialty refocus its ef-
forts to better serve ASSP members with global responsibilities,
regardless of location.

The change is aimed at addressing the misperception that
the community is only for ASSP members who live outside of
the U.S., whereas it serves OSH professionals who have global
responsibilities or who have an interest in global safety opera-
tions, wherever they live.

The Global Operations Practice Specialty provides its mem-
bers with an accessible, virtual network of peers focused on
developing and sharing technical and professional information
that can be applied to solve common challenges to becoming
better safety professionals.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 7

SAFETY MATTERS

Virginia Passes First-In-Nation Safety Standard for COVID-19

The Virginia Safety and Health Codes •assess risk levels of employers and Council of Higher Education in Virginia

Board has passed the country’s first suppliers before entry and public-school divisions that submit

standard to address COVID-19 in work- •notify the Virginia Department of reopening plans to the Virginia Depart-

places. Virginia is a state-plan state that Health of positive COVID-19 tests ment of Education, Malveaux says, but

operates its own OSH program, and the •notify VOSH of three or more positive provides no such exemptions to private

new standard covers most private em- COVID-19 tests within a 2-week period elementary and secondary schools.

ployers in Virginia, as well as all state •assess hazard levels of all job tasks The standard also contains provisions

and local employees. •provide COVID-19 training for all that echo CDC and OSHA guidance, which

“Virginia Occupational Safety and employees within 30 days (except for Malveaux notes includes requirements to:

Health (VOSH), the state’s version of low-hazard places of employment) •place requirements on workplaces

OSHA, will now enforce a standard •prepare infectious disease prepared- based on hazard levels (i.e., “very high,”

that mandates, and in some instanc- ness and response plans within 60 days “high,” “medium” and “low”)

es exceeds, guidance issued by CDC •post or present agency-prepared •screen employees prior to entry to work

and OSHA,” says Courtney Malveaux, COVID-19 information to all employees •establish requirements for employees

a member of the Virginia Safety and •maintain air handling systems in with COVID-19 positive tests and symp-

Health Codes Board and attorney accordance with manufacturers’ instruc- toms before returning to work

with Jackson Lewis in Richmond, VA.  tions and ANSI and American Society of •require social distancing or, when

In addition to CDC and OSHA guide- Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Condi- social distancing is not possible, respira-

lines, Malveaux, who is also government tioning Engineers standards tory protection

affairs chair for ASSP’s Colonial Virginia “The standard also protects employees •clean and disinfect commonly used

Chapter, explains that provisions in the who raise reasonable concerns about infec- areas and equipment

Virginia emergency standard require tion control to print, online, social or other The emergency standard took effect

employers to: media,” Malveaux adds. “It also requires upon publication in late July and is set to

•provide flexible sick leave policies, building and facility owners to report posi- expire within 6 months or upon expira-

telework and staggered shifts when tive COVID-19 tests to employer tenants.” tion of the governor’s state of emergency

feasible The standard exempts private and pub- declaration or the enactment of a perma-

•provide both handwashing stations lic institutions of higher education with nent standard.

and hand sanitizer when feasible reopening plans certified by the State Learn more at https://bit.ly/30Qtk1w.

ASSP Update Guidance Aims to Protect

ASSP, AIHA Ladder Users During Pandemic
COLLABORATE
The Ladder Association recently social distancing. According to
to Improve Worker
Safety & Health published a web page with guid- the site, employers should review
ance on keeping ladder users safe rescue plans and perform risk as-
ASSP recently signed a 3-year memorandum
of understanding (MOU) with longtime industry during the COVID-19 pandemic. sessments to ensure that addition-
ally American Industrial Hygiene Association Citing an April 2020 study from al risk from COVID-19 is being
(AIHA) that outlines how the organizations will New England Journal of Medicine, considered.
collaborate to advance workplace safety and health the page provides tips on hygiene
while strengthening the OSH profession. The two and cleaning, social distancing, For more information, visit
associations have worked together to improve work https://bit.ly/2Dd09NK.
environments and advance the profession for more
than 20 years. communication, breaks and wel-

According to the MOU, the cooperation between fare facilities, rescue planning
ASSP and AIHA over the next year includes shar-
ing COVID-19 content and best practices; leading and risk assessment in relation to
initiatives through Center for Safety and Health
Sustainability; determining criteria for academic ladder use during a pandemic. The
program accreditation related to environment,
health and safety; coordinating government affairs cited study explains that the virus
activities; developing training and continuing
education programs; revising voluntary national can stay on shiny, hard surfaces
consensus standards; and exploring regulatory and
legislative issues of common interest. The organiza- such as plastic and stainless steel
tions will develop new action plans in each subse-
quent year under the agreement. for up to 72 hours, increasing the

Learn more at https://assp.us/39EkfwD. risk of transference if the ladder is

not properly cleaned after use.

The site recommends that work-

ers avoid touching their face while

using the ladder and wash their RYERSONCLARK/E+/GETTY IMAGES

hands immediately after use, even

if wearing gloves. Workers should

also stay 6 ft apart to adhere to

social distancing guidelines, es-

pecially when stabilizing or rais-

ing a ladder. Graphics show how

to raise a ladder while properly

8 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

DIMA_SIDELNIKOV/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS NIOSH Studies Health
Risk Behaviors Among
Construction Workers

Research from NIOSH suggests that several behaviors that
contribute to higher health risks are more prevalent among
construction workers than workers in other industries. The
study was published in Journal of Occupational and Environ-
mental Medicine.

Construction workers are in physically demanding jobs and
exposed to many chemical and physical workplace hazards,
with falls remaining the leading cause of work-related deaths
in construction, accounting for about one-third of the total
number of fatalities in the industry. According to NIOSH, pre-
vious studies suggested that construction workers who exhibit
certain health risk behaviors may be more likely to experience
work-related injuries. NIOSH researchers sought to explore
how common health risk behaviors are among this workforce.

The study examined six health risk behaviors among con-
struction workers compared to workers in other industries. The
main findings:

•Smoking, smokeless tobacco use, binge drinking, no lei-
sure-time physical activity, and not always using a seat belt
were significantly more prevalent among construction workers
than in the general workforce.

•A sixth health risk behavior, getting less than 7 hours of
sleep a day, was significantly less prevalent among construction
workers as compared to the general workforce.

•Construction managers had elevated prevalence for smok-
ing, smokeless tobacco use, binge drinking and not always
using a seat belt.

•Because of their important leadership roles, behavior chang-
es among construction managers could have positive effects on
the safety and health culture in the construction industry.

•Carpenters, construction laborers and roofers all had sig-
nificantly elevated prevalence for five of the six behaviors (all
except short sleep).

•Roofers, as well as electrical power-line installers and repair-
ers, had significantly elevated prevalence for binge drinking.

•Operating engineers, who operate and maintain heavy earth-
moving equipment, had very high rates for smokeless tobacco use.

The survey covered 38 different construction occupations,
including laborers, project managers, those in construction
trades and contractors, and was conducted by telephone across
32 states, from 2013 to 2016.

Due to the high prevalence of some health risk behaviors, re-
searchers emphasize that construction workers may benefit from
targeted interventions and health programs specific to their oc-
cupation to reduce these behaviors, particularly because they are
also potentially exposed to workplace-specific hazards.

Read the study at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3240
4834. Learn more about NIOSH research in construction at
www.cdc.gov/niosh/construction/default.html.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 9

SAFETY MATTERS

Video Provides Safety Tips for

Workers Who May Encounter Birds of Prey on Towers

NATE, The Communications Infra- •work in teams of two so that one the tower so that the bird will have less of

structure Contractors Association, has worker can watch for birds while the oth- a chance to harm the worker

produced a safety video for workers er performs the work Restani also discusses legislation such

who may encounter birds of prey when •take shelter where available on the as the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection

ascending telecommunication towers. tower in the event of a bird attack Act (which states that workers cannot as-

According to the video, more than 7,500 •bring something taller than the work- cend a tower that is home to an eagle nest

towers across the U.S. are home to nests er (e.g., an umbrella or a large stick) onto without proper permits), the Migratory

of birds such as eagles, ospreys, ravens Bird Treaty Act (which states that work-

and crows. ers can ascend towers that are home to

The video includes an interview with nests if they do not intentionally disturb

Marco Restani, a raptor scientist who the young, nest or eggs) and various state

provides tips for workers who must as- laws. Lastly, if workers or employers do

cend towers. According to Restani, work- not know how to approach a tower with

ers should avoid climbing towers that are a nest on it, they should consult an avian

home to great-horned owls, as they are biologist, who can provide site-specific

the most dangerous bird to climbers. He information and a plan for approaching

recommends that workers: the situation.

•stay 100% tied off to prevent a fall in Watch the video at https://youtu.be/

the event of a bird attack 2SZokllIQAM.

LOUISE WIGHTMAN/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS

NFPA Video Outlines Fire Safety NIOSH Creates Online
MCWP Inspection Tool
Considerations for Hand Sanitizer
As with any type of equipment used to accomplish
With the increase of hand sanitizer While CDC has stated that hand work at height, safety hazards may be present when
using mast climbing work platforms (MCWPs).
use, National Fire Protection Associa- sanitizer is safe to use since the NIOSH has developed a free walkthrough tool to
help workers who use MCWPs identify common
tion (NFPA) has released a video that solution evaporates quickly, storing hazards associated with mast climbers.

addresses fire safety considerations for large quantities can pose a signifi- The tool explores more than 15 areas of MCWPs
that should be checked during a preshift daily
the use and storage of hand sanitizer. cant fire risk and any amount more inspection. Users click on various sections of the
equipment to learn about potential risk factors such
The video features an interview than 5 gallons would fall under as inclement weather, overhead power lines, proper
barriers for construction and pedestrian traffic,
with NFPA’s Guy Colonna in which NFPA 30, Flammable Combustible structure stability and guardrails.

he discusses how a solution like Liquids Code. The video discusses Access the tool at www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/
falls/mastclimb.html.
hand sanitizer that is typically about NFPA 30 and highlights import-

70% ethanol or isopropanol normal- ant aspects such as storing larger

ly has a flash point of roughly 63 °F, quantities of hand sanitizer in a

or about room temperature. At this flammable liquids cabinet or in an

temperature, the solution starts to area protected by an automatic fire

give off potentially flammable va- sprinkler system.

pors, which could ignite if exposed Watch the video at https://youtu

to an ignition source. .be/1P3GjIBKwI8.

OSHwiki Article Provides Employers With

Tips on Promoting Moving & Exercise at Work

An OSHwiki entry titled “Promoting exercising such as improved blood flow

Moving and Exercise at Work to Avoid Pro- and taking away static load.

longed Standing and Sitting” from Europe- The page explains ways employers can

an Agency for Safety and Health at Work promote movement in the workplace.

(EU-OSHA) provides employers with tips Examples include:

on how to promote and facilitate healthier •creating an environment and work-

working. According to the web page, 13% place culture that supports physical ANDREYPOPOV/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS

of physical activity takes place at work and activity through workspace design, sup-

employers are in a position to raise aware- porting open conversation about health,

ness and empower workers to be more ac- and other means

tive in the workplace. •motivating and encouraging work-

Focused on musculoskeletal disorder pre- ers by suggesting walks during breaks,

vention through exercise, the page offers ex- other modes of transportation involving

ample exercises such as stretching, sitting or physical activity, and encouraging se-

standing exercises, and different approaches nior staff to lead by example

to exercising. It also explains the benefits of View the page at https://bit.ly/2OXLTLF.

10 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

WORK ACCESS LIFTS

SAFER & MORE
EFFICIENT

THAN LADDERS

NASA OR SCAFFOLDING

CSB Issues Guidance for •
# &( %! (# &$$( '$(
Preventing Chemical Incidents & & #'&( %! &!$ ( #'&! # $
During Hurricane Season '%% $ '%( % & & '( %! ( & '$

CSB has issued a video and safety alert titled “2020 Hurri- #'(' &( $ (% (#( ''%

cane Season: Guidance for Chemical Plants During Extreme
Weather Events.” The alert outlines specific procedures to en- OPTIONS ARE UNLIMITED
sure safe restarts following a severe weather event.


CSB’s safety alert recommends that facilities follow estab-
lished start-up procedures and checklists, and recognize that
human performance may be compromised due to crisis condi-
tions. Additional safety protocols include checking bulk storage



tanks for evidence of floating displacement or damage, and
examining insulation systems, sewers, drains, furnace systems, "( " ( "( ( "( " ( ( "
electric motors and other equipment such as warning systems
to make sure they are fully functional. 1-800-843-3625

Read the guidance at https://bit.ly/3g6kUtg. Watch the vid-
eo safety message at https://youtu.be/YKaXDUUWYaQ.

Railway Safety Video

Released for Cement, Dump

& Garbage Truck Drivers

According to Operation The video addresses three

Lifesaver, an organization points: what to do when

focused on rail safety edu- drivers approach a railway

cation, a person or vehicle is crossing (e.g., eliminate dis-

hit by a train every 3 hours tractions, ensure that there

in the U.S. In the case of is enough room on sides of

large vehicles such as cement, vehicle, refrain from trying

dump and garbage trucks, to beat the train), under-

such a collision could derail standing signs and signals at

a train due to the weight crossings (e.g., painted stop

of these vehicles. To raise lines, multiple track signs,

awareness and educate driv- crossbuck signs), and what

ers, the organization has pro- to do if the vehicle stalls on

duced a video that shows the tracks (e.g., exit the vehi-

cement, dump and cle even if the train is

garbage truck not in view, locate

drivers how to Emergency Noti-

safely navi- ANDYQWE/ISTOCK/GETTY IM fication System

gate railroad sign, call phone
crossings number on the

along their sign to report

routes to problem).

avoid poten- AGES PLUS Watch the
tial hazards or video at https://
crashes. bit.ly/2DeBI2M.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 11

WORTH READING

Book Review

LEADERS EAT LAST
Why Some Teams Pull Together & Others Don’t

By Simon Sinek, 2017, Portfolio Penguin Random House

A review by Janna S. Hudson

Leaders Eat Last outlines a philoso- Sinek discusses the challenges companies Leaders Eat Last is a great book for
phy and strategy for building trust and face when managers focus purely on profit safety professionals because it provides
inspiring people to take care of and sup- margins and think of people merely as real-world examples and solutions to
port each other. Written by Simon Sinek, numbers on a spreadsheet. Too many busi- problems that will improve safety culture
this book is a “must read” for OSH pro- nesses lack empathy, humanity and an in- within any organization. Although, at
fessionals who want to know the secrets formal relationship with their employees. times, lessons on leadership are weighed
to building a “circle of safety” within This creates outliers in the circle of safety. down by historical and anthropological
their organization. When people work in a bad safety cul- insights, the main takeaways are easy to
ture, more people are exposed to outside digest. For example, there are legitimate,
First, Sinek explains the biological dangers. They become like the weakened biological explanations for our feelings.
need people have to feel safe, even in the gazelle pushed to the edge of the herd: Sinek discusses the five bodily chemicals
workplace. Because most organizations anxious and threatened. Great leaders that affect our feelings. Understanding
have some form of hierarchy, leaders must minimize these negative emotions these chemical processes is key to under-
must recognize their responsibility to while promoting competency and confi- standing people and their motivations,
lead and protect the people within that dence. Reciprocal trust and commitment which is essential when trying to lead
organization. Safety management sys- between management and employees will people, not the numbers. Sinek insists
tems must be purpose-built to create a create optimal performance. that providing autonomy will teach lead-
strong culture in which every employee ership, not just compliance, confidence
looks out for one another. Sinek also addresses problems with and loyalty.
generational gaps and offers simple solu-
Real leaders sacrifice time, energy and tions to better understand and connect Building mutual trust is about build-
occasionally money to ensure that others with people who have different skills and ing relationships. It is a best practice to
feel safe. This book explains how having motivations. He discusses ways to lead have people in your circle or safety cul-
the courage to do the right thing will give baby boomers, millennials and even that ture who are committed to shared inter-
people a sense of belonging, purpose and often forgotten generation in between ests and values.
corporate values. Sinek says that “inside (Generation X). Ultimately, spending
a circle of safety, we feel like we belong.” time and energy getting to know people Leaders Eat Last is like a self-help book
This sense of belonging will help estab- on an individual level will help build for OSH professionals in any industry
lish a strong safety culture that cares trust and loyalty. Empathy is one of the because it teaches managers and super-
about people. greatest assets a leader can have. While visors how to build up, train and protect
some people may view empathy as a weak employees in such a way that allows them
A strong safety culture cares about character trait, it will actually create a to command and control any situation
the product or service, about standards, stronger safety culture. People will start themselves. It inspires managers and
and about exceeding expectations with doing the right thing instead of “the supervisors to lead and command a circle
reasonable concern for the health and thing that’s right for me” when tempted of safety by putting people first. PSJ
well-being of others. Corporate leaders to make decisions counter to best prac-
must create these environments in which tices in safety. When empathy is lacking,
competent people have the autonomy to aggression, fear and other destructive
make good decisions for the benefit of feelings dominate, which leads to less
the company and fellow employees. The trust and accountability when things go
leader’s goal is to generate courage, inspi- wrong. Enemies fight, but friends co-
ration, foresight, creativity and empathy. operate. Cooperation is essential when
The leader does this by putting other trying to establish and build a positive
people first; hence, leaders eat last. circle of safety.

A leader must balance the needs of the
company with the needs of the employee.

Shift Workers at Risk for Metabolic Syndrome

By Kshma Kulkarni, Mari Schow and Jay Shubrook, 2020, Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, 120, 107-110

According to the article “Shift Workers at Risk for Metabolic in shift workers. They also provide clinical recommendations to
Syndrome,” sleep disorders are more common today, and shift improve circadian rhythm in shift workers.
workers are at increased risk for sleep disorders and metabol- Read more at https://jaoa.org/article.aspx?articleid=2760100.
ic syndrome. Based on a literature review of animal model
studies, observational studies and clinical trials, the authors Review a Book for PSJ
describe the connection between circadian discordance, hor-
monal imbalance and the development of metabolic syndrome What safety or business book are you currently reading? Review it for PSJ.
Send an e-mail to [email protected].

12 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

READER FORUM

Professional Safety encourages readers to write to Reader Forum in response to specific articles, editorials,
letters, columns and news reports published in the journal. The editors reserve the right to select which letters
will appear and to edit letters for brevity and clarity. Start the dialogue today by sending your comments to
the PSJ Reader Forum, [email protected].

Driver Training vs. Education Especially important is the exposure to the anti-skid/traction
control systems and response; these are rarely activated (are not
The Reader Forum (PSJ January 2020, p. 8) regarding under- used unless in an emergency) and provide unexpected aural and
standing the difference between driver education and training physical feedback that should be experienced in a controlled
is especially relevant to my own experience as a flight instructor
and reinforces my earlier article regarding safe habit patterns environment. The operational evaluation should
(“Be Like a Hornet Pilot,” PSJ April 2019, pp. include a skid-pad demo as a minimum.
42-43). I agree totally with the analysis and
suggestions included in that letter and offer All habits begin with conscious thought; recog-
rationale for consideration. nizing and undoing bad habits also requires con-
scious thought. Those habits need to be identified,
All areas of aviation recognize the impor- so a new-hire procedure should include a preop-
tance of systems training and regular per- erational checklist and evaluation ride in the type
formance evaluations, even for private pilots. of vehicle(s) being operated (if a significant dif-
Every pilot must be reevaluated in-flight by a ference exists between them), along with a review
certificated flight instructor every 2 years to of driver performance in the actual environment
maintain a legal pilot-in-command qualifica- they will operate in. After the first evaluation ride,
tion; military and commercial aviation have subsequent review requirements certainly involve
even more stringent requirements. Perfor- driving performance history, and possibly even
mance evaluations for drivers would incentiv- might include another check ride, to discover pos-
ize developing good habit patterns for the next sible issues that would need to be addressed.
evaluation and would identify potential prob-
lems before an incident occurs. Richard Powell, CSP, CHST, ATP, CFII, MEI

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 13

PSJ ASKS

SMART PPE TO PREVENT HEAT STRESS

Q&A With Heidi Lehmann, Kenzen

Smart PPE can be used to provide real-time information to OSH professionals and
employers to protect against many workplace hazards. PSJ spoke with Heidi Lehmann,
cofounder of Kenzen, a smart PPE manufacturer, about how this technology can be used to
help prevent heat-related injuries and fatalities.

Heidi E. PSJ: Please give readers a brief overview of how for them for core body temperature, they would get
Lehmann smart PPE works. an alert to stop working and sit down. Then they’d
Heidi: Traditional PPE might be a helmet so a falling get another alert when it is safe to go back to work. So
Heidi E. Lehmann rock doesn’t hurt your head when you’re doing con- this prevents a heat injury on site. Heat injuries are
is chief commercial struction, gloves so you can handle hot objects or a preventable, but they are very difficult to detect until
officer and cofounder smock so chemicals don’t spill on you. If you add to it’s too late. In our case, the sensors are measuring
of Kenzen, a smart PPE that sensors, cloud connectivity and the delivery of the physiology, and they would help the worker see in
innovator focused on real-time safety information, then it becomes smart advance that they are at risk for a heat injury and that
physiological moni- PPE. It’s internet-enabled with sensors that pick up they should stop working.
toring and the preven- different signals, either from the environment or
tion of heat injury and from the person. The information is transmitted to A worker who is in the middle of a job or doesn’t
death among workers. the cloud, then delivered back to the individual or a want to sit down at the moment might dismiss the
Lehmann is a mobile safety manager who can act on that information. alert or might not even see it. But the safety manag-
technology entrepre- er, in our case, would have the web-based tablet and
neur in the connected PSJ: Describe how this technology might be would see the entire workforce. The safety manager
devices/wearable implemented on a work site. How is this different would understand that a worker was at risk for a
products, mobile plat- from traditional PPE? heat-related injury, and could intervene. And later
forms and distributed Heidi: Typically, smart PPE is used as part of a on, the employer would see the trends from different
media arena. broader category called the Industrial Internet of physiological sensors and could look retrospectively.
Things, which can also include machines, grids and They could see, for example, that many workers were
efficiencies in the work site. But smart PPE, relates suffering heat injuries at a particular time of day on
specifically to the worker. One could argue that the a particular site, and could determine what to do to
most prized component of any work site is the hu- make the site more safe.
man factor, so it’s keeping the worker safe. Examples
of smart PPE might be augmented-reality glasses, PSJ: So it’s not just intervening in the moment, but
which can, for example, help you see the inside of a also collecting data that tells you a bit more about
mine so you could understand what logistics might when incidents are more likely to occur or not.
be or what your next step is, or it could just help you Heidi: That’s exactly right. We have an entire plat-
see the whole environment in a different way for form that is all about physiological monitoring. The
safety. Another example might be an exoskeleton front end of that platform is like a patch worn on the
suit, which would ensure that a worker is maintain- upper arm. That data collection piece is sampling,
ing a safe posture at all times. There is smart PPE through sensors, the worker’s physiology every 5
that relates to slips, trips and falls, which can tell seconds, gathering about 1.3 million data points
through motion if a worker is doing something that per day per worker. Then it sends that information,
could lead to a fall. What Kenzen does is physiologi- either to the worker’s phone and then to the cloud in
cal monitoring, which indicates small nuances with- 0.05 seconds. We then have machine learning and
in the individual physiology that can tell if a worker insights that are created within the cloud, and it de-
is about to experience some kind of an injury such livers the information to the worker, and the safety
as heat illness, fatigue or even fever. manager and then later for corporate EHS. It quickly
can gather data based on sensing the physiology or
PSJ: What differences might workers, the environment or whatever the sensors are pick-
supervisors, and managers experience with and ing up, and make that information an insight that
without the use of smart PPE during an incident? someone can act on. A lot of the magic is not just
Heidi: Standard PPE is all about keeping people safer the sensors, but the algorithms created from all that
if an incident happens. Smart PPE has focused the information to provide an actionable step that the
attention more from incidents to near hits. The tech- worker can take.
nology is able to detect things so you can avoid them
before they happen. In our case, we are looking at What we found is that the safety manager has
core body temperature. What we do is we understand become key in the intervention part of it. We have
what the baseline core body temperature is for a spe- found a couple of things with workers: they often
cific individual. If we see that they’re calibrating in a will get an alert but they want to keep on working
direction that is going beyond what is a normal range because they want to get the job done. Another
thing is, especially if they’re working construction
or in a warehouse where they’re part of a team,

14 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

it’s difficult for a worker say, “Hey, guys, I just got PSJ: What trends might we see in the
an alert. I’m going to sit down and be in the shade development of smart PPE in the future?
and have a cold drink while you’re working.” That’s Heidi: Today we’re looking at core body temperature,
hard to do. The safety manager really plays a key both exertional heat and fever. Eventually, we will be
role. They can then step in and say, “Hey, why don’t looking at fatigue and cold and many other things.
you take five.” They will also know from the sen- Someone’s working on a fall detection device. Can
sors when the core body temperature has normal- they get more precise before someone is climbing,
ized so that individual can rejoin the team and go do they have to be at a slightly different angle to
back to work. avoid a fall? I think there’s going to be a lot more
precision to optimize. I think you’re going to see
PSJ: What factors are driving the use of smart more connected platforms where there will be a feed
PPE in workplaces? of our information. Then you name the other smart
Heidi: There are three: safety, productivity and cost PPE data sources, gas detection, sound detection,
to the company. The first is just safety, keeping the fall detection. Safety managers will have one place to
workers and work site safe. It started in the con- look at everything. PSJ
sumer space with fitness trackers with sensors that
detect heart rate and steps. This technology got SMART PPE EXAMPLE
a lot of individuals thinking about being able to
quantify their health, keeping healthy by detecting Smart PPE is worn by workers at the
things before they happen. On work sites there are jobsite to provide real-time insight into
other things using sensors, such as gas detection, physiological status. These wearables
physiological monitoring or noise detection. Keep- may collect data, adjust to conditions
ing the worker safe and healthy is the number one and warn of hazards. Algorithms cre-
thing. The second thing is productivity. If a worker ated from that information provide
is healthier, in our case, taking the proper breaks an actional step for workers to take
and making sure you’re staying safe from heat and and allows an OSH professional to
other things, you’re going to be a more productive intervene when an injury or incident
worker. You’re going to do the job better and more may occur.
efficiently, and even ideally faster if you’re safer and
healthier. The third thing is cost to the company.
If a worker is more fit for duty, and there are fewer
days away from work and less hospitalization, that’s
going to drive down all sorts of health-related costs
that can be experienced through injury and illness.
Anything to get that in line a little bit more, and
make the workers optimize for health if possible, I
think everybody benefits.

PSJ: How are companies leveraging new A dashboard may provide information to both the OSH
technologies to build better smart PPE? professional and to the worker, often on a phone or tab-
Heidi: First, form factors are getting better and let. In this case, an app provides information about heat
smaller. The miniaturization of components is going risk to workers, including the temperature, humidity and
to allow that the form factor itself is a little bit more real-feel temperature.
elegant and a little bit less obtrusive to the worker.
As Kenzen is performing its pilots across work sites, The smart PPE provides an
one of the first measurements is whether a worker alert to workers to stop work
will accept this form factor. Because if they don’t when core temperature is
like it, if it’s uncomfortable or if they feel that it in- too high. It recommends
trudes on their workday, they’re not going to want to finding shade or air con-
wear it. They’re still going to have traditional PPE. ditioning, remove extra
Anything additional has to be imperceptible. It has clothing, sit down and drink
to go on easily within 5 seconds. Also battery life water. It advises when to
is getting longer. Most smart PPE has to charge; it’s return to work based on
not going to run indefinitely. The processing speed physiological factors.
has gotten faster. All the things that are happening The app details the symp-
with computers, the internet and the cloud, includ- toms of life-threatening
ing the form factor, that’s all gotten more efficient. issues such as heat stroke so
And there is more data that we are taking advantage that workers can self-assess
of. The more data we have, the better our algorithms their health status.
can become. We can predict and prevent injury with
more precision. The more data we get, the more we assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 15
learn and the more everyone benefits.

BEST PRACTICES

WEARABLES FOR SAFETY

Worker Acceptance, Union Buy-In & Data Security Measures

By Toni-Louise Gianatti

The broad adoption of wearables in the workplace is largely dependent on overcoming certain barriers. A
study published in Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society notes that these barriers include
worker acceptance, and privacy and confidentiality of data (Schall et al., 2018).

When deciding to take on any form of 1. Know the product well before ap- quick, and appointing a “champion” or
safety technology, it is paramount to be proaching the employees and prepare worker who can help anyone with tech-
equipped with the right arguments about workers mentally. This can be done by nical issues.
worker acceptance, have extensive knowl- presenting past successes of the device
edge of what is being collected, decide on or program, particularly in related in- The way technology is presented to
what data is most important to collect, dustries; proving the suitability of the employees can significantly affect its
and have up-to-date information ready to wearable to the organization; showcasing adoption and whether safety goals and
deal with any union acceptance setbacks. the benefits and what it will mean for the benefits are achieved.
individual; and ensuring the quality and
Three concerns typically arise when reliability of the technology. Union Buy-In
deploying technology in the workplace: Worker productivity has been mea-
worker acceptance, union buy-in and 2. Involve workers in the decision pro-
data security measures. cess by addressing all concerns and aver- sured for quite some time. It dates back
sions around deployment. This can be to the 1900s when Frederick Taylor
Worker Acceptance done by encouraging open nonjudgmen- and Frank and Lillian Gilbreth studied
According to Schall et al. (2018), ap- tal communication around acceptance work being completed to bring about
and implementation, and stimulating changes and improvements to work
proximately 80% of OSH professionals discussion among employees before pre- processes. Their scientific management
would consider using wearable technology senting the technology. theory had an underlying promise of
to help track and monitor risk factors at increased productivity and is still used
work. Worker acceptance is paramount to 3. Diminish fear by being educat- in businesses today with systems such
whether the technology achieves its goals ed in data security and privacy, and as organizational charts, performance
to keep people safe on the job. The study communicate this clearly and openly management and production goals. The
identifies several worker concerns about to workers. When presenting this tech- modern version of their work is some-
acceptance of wearable technology: nology, provide proof that data security times referred to as “digital Taylorism,”
measures have been implemented and whereby machines can provide the
•privacy or confidentiality of collect- that provider credibility has been re- scientific management of the workers.
ed data searched. In addition, openly discuss The changes Taylor and the Gilbreths
the data collection, how it is being used brought to businesses might suggest that
•employee compliance, workers con- and whether it will be aggregated or they were not the worker’s friend, but it
cerned with not being able to follow and anonymized rather than individualized. is clear that their methods have great-
use technology as per organizational Clearly set out exactly what data will be ly impacted the business world today
guidelines collected and why, and record data only (Schumpeter, 2015).
during working hours.
•sensor durability in industries such as With advances in safety technology,
construction and manufacturing 4. Address employee compliance is- it is understandable that unions are
sues by providing workers with clearly skeptical about the suggested use of
•safety of the devices in industries outlined instruction sheets, keeping these products. One primary concern is
such as energy, and oil and gas the implementation process simple and that organizations could use the devices

Taking these concerns into consider-
ation, implementing any safety technolo-
gy involves several key elements:

METAMORWORKS/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS As Industry 4.0 and related laws
are continually evolving, when
deciding to deploy any safety
technology, it is important for the
discussion to include everyone in
the organization (e.g., safety and
health teams, human resources,
legal groups, innovation teams,
operational management).

16 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

to spy on workers in terms of perfor- risk than others of hacking threats (e.g., with the General Data Protection
mance or use geolocation data as proof identity theft); however, devices used Regulation (GDPR). This legislation
against employees. Another concern is for safety are generally deemed to pose came into force across the EU in May
the issue of data collection security and fairly low risk because they usually do 2018 (GDPR.eu, 2020). It was brought
privacy. It is simply a balance: do the not store financial details or passwords about to protect consumers, and or-
benefits of the technology outweigh the that would be required for identity theft ganizations collecting data must do
associated risks? (Shahmiri, 2016). This technology may so under strict legal conditions. Data
hold movement and biometric data, is anything that can be processed to
Following are several ways to gain and, while the user would not like this uniquely identify an individual, in-
union buy-in: information revealed, the threat of iden- cluding name, address, photos, genetic
tity or financial theft is lower. However, or biometric data.
•Know the product well before ap- hacking is a particular concern with
proaching the union and communicate the performance of safety devices. For If the product is from the U.S., there
openly and clearly about the benefits, example, a hacker can disable any of is no federal data privacy law. Ask which
proving that the technology is not aimed the technology’s functions, which could state laws the company adheres to and
at providing new methods for digital have negative safety consequences. how it defines personal data, as this dif-
Taylorism or performance management, fers between states. Each state has its own
but that its purpose is safety and safety When engaging any third-party service form of data security measures that must
management. or purchasing any product in general, it is be followed.
important to research the company. The
•Involve the union in the decision- same is true for data security. If some ar- Conclusion
making process and be receptive to any eas fall outside of the OSH professional’s When adopting any new technology
concerns. scope, it is not unreasonable to consult
in-house information technology special- or system into an organization, first
•Be aware of and understand exactly ists or simply ask for proof or information gain proof to help with acceptance.
what data is being collected by the tech- based on the following: Review industry-specific case studies
nology provider and ensure that only and past successes, and ensure qual-
relevant data is collected. •Ensure that the product has been de- ity, reliability and, most importantly,
signed and manufactured by engineers suitability of the technology. Use clear
•Work with the technology provider and not by a traditional consumer-goods and open communication with unions
to come up with ways to mitigate the producer. and users, and make sure the benefits
risks as much as possible (e.g., disengage that the wearable technology provides
GPS or geolocation if employee location •Question and ask for detailed proof can easily break through the barriers
is not absolutely necessary; allow only that the engineers are trained in data se- involved. Executing proper assessment
aggregated or anonymized data to be curity and have addressed security con- of wearables by involving all stake-
available to management; allow workers cerns with the principle of reasonable holders in the decision-making helps
to see all of their own data and have ac- security in terms of the technical, physi- eliminate fear and facilitates positive
cess to it regularly). cal and administrative requirements. outcomes. PSJ

As Industry 4.0 and related laws are •Check that encryption measures have References
continually evolving, when deciding been included so that the technology is
to deploy any safety technology, it is less vulnerable to hacking. GDPR.eu. (2020). What is GDPR, the
important for the discussion to include EU’s new data protection law? https://gdpr
everyone in the organization (e.g., •Be aware of unsophisticated devices .eu/what-is-gdpr
safety and health teams, human re- that do not necessarily have the space to
sources, legal groups, innovation teams, add the processing power required by Schall, M., Sesek, R. & Cavuoto, L.
operational management). Once these security measures and can sometimes (2018). Barriers to the adoption of wearable
discussions have taken place, involve lack robust data security. sensors in the workplace: A survey of oc-
workers in the decision and seek their cupational safety and health professionals.
feedback. This will bring to light all •Check that there is the possibility of Human Factors, 60(3), 351-362.
possible setbacks before engaging, from regular updates and that they are con-
data collection issues to worker accep- ducted to ensure security against any Schumpeter. (2015, Sept. 10). Digital Tay-
tance, and help to address any gaps or possible threats. lorism. The Economist. www.economist
worker concerns that management may .com/business/2015/09/10/digital-taylorism
have missed. •Ask for a copy of the vendor’s data
privacy policy. Check whether the ven- Shahmiri, S. (2016). Wearing your data
Data Security Measures dor has clear information available that on your sleeves: Wearables, the FTC and
In 2010, Eric Schmidt, former Google covers its legal obligations, explains the privacy implications of this new tech-
exactly what the company deems per- nology. Texas Review of Entertainment and
CEO said, “Mankind generates as much sonal information, how it secures that Sports Law, 18(1), 25.
information now in 2 days as it did from information, and that the information is
the dawn of civilization up to the year written in lay terms. Siegler, M.G. (2010, Aug. 4). Eric Schmidt:
2003” (Sielger, 2010). Every 2 days we create as much information
If using the product in Europe, en- as we did up to 2003. TechCrunch. https://
When using any kind of smart tech- sure that the company is compliant techcrunch.com/2010/08/04/schmidt-data
nology, there is always a slight fear
about its ability to collect data and the Toni-Louise Gianatti is content manager for Soter Analytics, a global safety science company pro-
opportunity for vendors to share it for ducing artificial-intelligence-supported wearable solutions that reduce the risk of ergonomic injuries.
commercial or other purposes. Certain Gianatti has more than 20 years of coaching experience, with a focus on reprogramming body maps to
products have a significantly higher break faulty movement habits and reduce injury risk.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 17

LEADING THOUGHTS

CREATING YOUR LEADERSHIP TREE

By Wyatt Bradbury

In Superbowl LIV, the San Francisco 49ers and Kansas City Chiefs squared up on the
gridiron. During the week leading up to the big game, “coaching trees” that have produced
head coaches competing in this game were discussed as much as the matchup itself.

Wyatt The 49ers’ coach, Kyle Shanahan, is part of a sudden, perpetual leadership becomes the fo-
Bradbury the Jon Gruden coaching tree (Kilgore, 2018). cus of mentoring, teaching and training safety
This tree is one of the newer ones to emerge, professionals. Of course, they are still developing
Wyatt Bradbury, CSP, with the tenure being less than 5 years right and fulfilling the fundamental functions of the
ASP, CHST, CIT, serves now (Kilgore, 2018). Both Jon Gruden (coach of role, but now doing so with purpose. There is
as an HSE advisor for the Las Vegas Raiders) and Andy Reid (coach now an intentionality about the development
Hitachi Rail. He has of the Kansas City Chiefs) are part of the Mike of emerging professionals just as for assistant
experience in aquatic Holmgren coaching tree, which is a branch of coaches in football.
and recreation risk the Bill Walsh tree (Associated Press, 2019; Kil-
management, elec- gore, 2018). The Holmgren branch of the Walsh Legacies would be defined and carried forward
trical construction, tree is one of the most successful in history (As- by the impact of successors, not ending with the
powerline safety, sociated Press, 2019). predecessors. The success of a person’s leadership
rail safety and safety tree determines the resiliency and successfulness
consulting. Bradbury What is the point of all of this? In football, the of the safety system. This approach to perpetual
is pursuing a Master legacy or tree from which a head coach emerges leadership also brings immense value to the safe-
of Engineering in helps to set the coach’s reputation. Conversely, ty profession.
Advanced Safety as the head of a tree, the leader’s legacy is deter-
Engineering and mined by how well those coaches who developed Two strategies can be used to start building
Management from under that leader perform on their own. In fact, one’s leadership tree: provide context, and craft a
University of Alabama Holmgren and Walsh are relevant in the Super- personal and professional development plan.
Birmingham. He is a bowl LIV conversation largely because of the suc-
professional member cess of their coaching “offspring.” The coaching Provide Context
and Past-President of tree discussion has surrounded the combined One key complaint about emerging profession-
ASSP’s National Cap- records, playoff appearances and Superbowl wins
ital Chapter, and is a across the various trees, and many articles rank als is that they do not have enough experience.
member of the Emerg- their success against each other. Experience is based on observations or participa-
ing Professionals Com- tion in events that lead to knowledge or through
mon Interest Group. In Guts and Genius, Bob Glauber documents the duration of such participation. Emerging pro-
Bradbury serves as Walsh’s dedication in helping those under him fessionals are often judged based on age or years
Assistant Vice Presi- succeed. They learned that they needed to give of experience. Their cognitive abilities are not
dent for Region VI, and back to other coaches and in turn help them suc- evaluated to create a baseline of knowledge-based
on ASSP’s Education ceed. Walsh in particular made it his mission to experience, thus relegating experience to solely a
and Training Commit- mentor those coaching under him (Associated time-oriented construct. Therefore, trying to help
tee under the Council Press, 2019). a professional gain experience is rarely a useful
on Region Affairs. exercise, as there are too many biases preventing
In some ways, leading the safety function is adequate evaluation.
similar to head coaching in football. The job
is to support, advise and engage professionals Instead, work to provide context. Context is
from diverse backgrounds to be successful at defined as the condition, environment or settings
achieving some sort of production goal, wheth- in which a particular situation occurs. Context
er it be points or widgets. Often, there is an is the soft-skill and knowledge component of ex-
“assistant coach” advisor, specialist or profes- perience. How someone interprets and navigates
sional dutifully working under the supervision context can be evaluated without the same biases
of the “head coach” director, manager or vice associated with experience.
president. Eventually, the assistant receives an
opportunity to become the head coach. As the Take emerging professionals into the board-
assistant becomes the leader, much of their ap- room. Take them to meetings with stakeholders
proach, specializations and beliefs surrounding at different organizational levels. Teach them how
safety will probably carry over into their new to communicate across the diverse methods and
leadership role from the work they performed as mediums used by safety professionals. Help them
the subordinate. understand budgeting, how the company makes
money and the key values of the organization.
What if the attitude toward this transition and Does any of this help them in their current role?
the definition of legacy in safety leadership more Professionals who understand the larger context
closely mirrored what we see in football? All of of their organization and the values of the stake-
holders may be in a better position to serve. How-

18 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

SORBETTO/DIGITALVISION VECTORS/GETTY IMAGES ever, the goal is not simply to make people good What if the attitude
at their current job; perpetual leadership through
developing one’s leadership tree is about prepar- toward this transition and
ing professionals for what comes next. It is about
helping people be more valuable to the organiza- the definition of legacy
tion, transcending specific roles and responsibil-
ities. It does not need to happen all at once, but it in safety leadership more
must be intentional.
closely mirrored what
Craft a Personal &
Professional Development Plan we see in football? All

Early in my career, Jerry Riviera, a key mentor, of a sudden, perpetual
helped me craft a personal and professional de-
velopment plan. I was new to safety and had be- leadership becomes
gun working full-time before graduating college.
I was a product of the millennial generation, the focus of mentoring,
taught to strive for accomplishment, award and
accolade to demonstrate success and move on. I teaching and training
was getting sucked into a black hole of certifica-
tion and training. safety professionals.

Jerry helped me to outline where I wanted to support that growth. Growth will happen one
go in my career. We mapped the specific profes- way or another; eventually, these professionals
sional steps that must be obtained and a reason- will get the training from somewhere. And, I
able timeline to achieve those steps, taking into have heard of more professionals moving on from
account prerequisites, expense and capacity. We organizations because they lacked support for
also discussed the value of each step, prioritizing their development than those who left for a high-
accomplishments that provide the most value to er paycheck. Like Jerry did with me, start to craft
the employee, an employer or me, as applicable. a growth plan that sets employees up for success,
We also outlined the specific personal skills that considering whatever constraints and limitations
I would need to develop. When we are young, we exist in the organization. Where possible, spon-
are all raw and rough in some way. Jerry helped sor them in any sense of the word so that they
me see where I needed to grow as a person so that can overcome the barriers they will undoubtedly
I could become an effective leader. There have face. Helping these emerging professionals over-
been many more influences on this plan from come barriers also drives the development of
both the professional and personal sides along the context. Remember, emerging professionals are
way, but by and large this plan has stuck. hungry for growth, they simply need direction.
This plan can help provide that direction as well
The key is that as emerging professionals work as an accountability tool.
to develop, a specific plan must be in place to
No matter what the industry, professionals do
not want to work in vain. It is human nature to
strive to leave some sort of legacy. Safety profes-
sionals should take a page out of the football play-
book and work to create a leadership tree.

Bill Walsh never imagined how many Super-
bowl victories he would impact after he retired.
So too, as professionals work intentionally to
perpetually develop leaders from those who come
after them, the profession’s influence will become
magnified in unimaginable ways. PSJ

References

Associated Press (AP). (2019, Jan. 5). All 12 playoff
coaches are tied to Bill Walsh or Parcells. USA Today. www
.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2019/01/05/all-12-playoff
-coaches-are-tied-to-bill-walsh-or-parcells/38846949

Kilgore, A. (2018, Oct. 12). Branching out: Mapping the
roots, influences and origins of every active head coach.
Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/
sports/nfl-coaching-trees-connecting-every-active-coach

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 19

BUSINESS CLASS

Leading Organizational Improvement With

ONE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

By Peter T. Susca

Many organizations are certified to various management system standards.
Typically, these systems are operated and maintained by their respective
functional groups (e.g., safety, environment, quality).

Peter T. Susca Although these systems may function in con- opportunities created in merging common system
formity with the same core principles, they often elements. OSH professionals with a solid under-
Peter T. Susca, M.S., operate autonomously within the organization. standing of system and process effectiveness (Susca,
is a principal at OpX 2018; 2019) can use safety to blaze a trail toward the
Safety and has 35 years Having spent most of my career involved in man- unification of functional management system ele-
of environment, health agement systems, it is clear to me that deploying ments. If effectively implemented, these efforts can
and safety, business management systems separately for quality, safety, show measurable operational improvement from the
leadership and process environment, energy and more does not make good executive team to the frontline workforce.
improvement expertise. business sense. Many businesses that follow the
He has served in vari- traditional organizational architecture of distinct Multiple System Inefficiency
ous EHS technical and separation between operational and functional staff All management systems are built on the same
senior management responsibilities, objectives, performance measures
positions in large multi- and data, and accountabilities often suffer some foundational elements that function within a contin-
national corporations. degree of inefficiency and dysfunction. Separate and ual improvement cycle (e.g., plan-do-check-act). This
He has developed EHS redundant systems increase the distance between cycle of improvement follows the same core steps in
management sys- values, data and people that are often focused inde- the same order in every management system (Susca,
tems, rating systems, pendently on the success of the organization. 2019). The main difference between the systems is the
auditing and auditor value that they drive and the specific attributes that
certification programs, Consider the following from Trevor (2018): are required to achieve value actualization.
risk assessment pro-
cesses, educational Multiple different individuals and groups Many organizations are running separate systems
management systems, are responsible for different components of as a result of the inherent separation of functional
executive EHS develop- the value chain that makes up their com- edicts, responsibilities and accountabilities. Sys-
ment programs, qual- pany’s design, and they are often not as tem-creating edicts are often driven by stakeholder
ity and EHS systems joined up as they should be. All too often, (e.g., corporate, supply chain, customer) expecta-
integration, incident individual leaders seek—indeed are incen- tions. Independent of what triggers an organization
investigation and high- tivized—to protect and optimize their own to implement a management system or a group of
risk industry fatality domains, and find themselves locked in en- them, a systemic approach to managing any value
prevention programs ergy-sapping internal turf wars, rather than (e.g., safety, environment, quality) carries significant
for a wide variety of cli- working with peers to align and improve functional and organizational advantages.
ents. Susca is a member across the entire enterprise.
of ASSP’s Connecticut When an organization is viewed holistically, it
Valley Chapter. Reach Organizations and their leaders should be fos- becomes apparent that separate functions operating
him at opxsafety@cox tering a more unifying and streamlined approach separate systems with little meaningful interface is
.net, www.opxsafety to their organizational design. This future state of problematic. For example, imagine if steering an au-
.com or connect with organizational design should be supported by an tomobile required four individuals each controlling
him on LinkedIn. organizational management system (OMS): essen- one of the car’s wheels—essentially four drivers with
tially, one system connecting all functional and op- four steering wheels. Even if the drivers were all
erational expectations that drives balanced decisions headed to the same destination following the same
and sustainable value realization. directions, how difficult would it be to keep the car
operating efficiently and on course? The car in this
This article represents knowledge learned from example is analogous to an organization and the
our work in the area of organizational health and drivers are separate leaders each driving their func-
management system improvement. It offers insight tional systems. While they may appear effective,
into the challenges of operating separate systems, based on their ultimately reaching the same destina-
advantages of an OMS and incremental success tion, the struggle and waste required to get there is
the result of a poorly designed car.
Business Class Article Series
Following are some of the major waste-creating
This article series chronicles the principles and techniques that readers can apply to attributes associated with operating separate systems:
transition safety and the safety profession closer to the core of what organizational
leaders value. The foundational philosophy is that safety challenges stem from larger •risks and benefits evaluated, prioritized and ac-
organizational issues. By understanding the core business values, OSH professionals tioned separately
can begin to work from the inside out to engage business leaders, rather than the typi-
cal outside-in approach to integrating safety with business. If leaders can tap into this •a multitude of disparate procedures and instructions
information, they can use it to improve the organization as a whole, and move safety •separate system knowledge, training and specialists
from a purely moral imperative to an indicator and facilitator of organizational health. •resources required to attain and maintain sepa-
rate certifications

20 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

FIGURE 1

ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Many of an organization’s separate disciplines (green column) each require a sustainable management approach. Since the core elements of a manage-
ment system all work to facilitate a strategic continual improvement methodology, they are valid separately and universally for each of the disciplines.
The OMS (blue column) represents examples of the common elements across all management systems. Instead of running an organization with separate
discipline-specific management systems, one system integrating the needs and requirements of all disciplines is deployed. When one integrated system
(an OMS) is in place, it facilitates value-balancing and integration down through the work process level (orange column), thereby creating a more uni-
fied and operationally friendly approach. The performance of this approach can then be evaluated by integrated indicators and metrics.

Functional/operational Organizational Integrated Integrated Indicators and
disciplines management system processes and performance metrics

Human resources Leadership/ownership programs Desired outcomes
Financial
Policy, values and strategy Performance Meets Exceeds
Operations and facilities expectation expectations expectations
Quality Stakeholder involvement
Risk/ Unwanted outcomes
Safety and health Roles, responsibility performance
Environment and accountabiliity assessment Nonconformity, Incidents/
Supply chain close calls failure
Performance, impact/risk Standard
Legal and ethics assessment management and work
Business development
management of change Monitoring/
Security controls
Information technology Planning/corrective actions
Training and
Engineering Standards/procedures/controls qualification
Process improvement
Measures and metrics Data
Communications management
Document and record
management Inspection/
audit
Education, training
and qualification

Communications

Monitoring, assessments
and audits

Nonconformity/incident
investigation and
causal analysis

Management system
assessment/review

•frequent auditing for different standards and ny, I visited their operations to get a feel for the shop
preaudits to prepare for audits floor dynamic. While on the tour, the supervisor of
one area took great pride in showing me his worker
•separate teams and meetings input board. On the board were four separate sheets
•workers taken off task by a multitude of separate labeled “quality,” “safety,” “schedule” and “cost con-
requirements, training and inspections trol,” each listing problems that were identified by
•separate data, metrics and records workers. The supervisor was pleased that the work-
•separate unwanted outcomes, investigations and ers were comfortable communicating the issues and
corrective actions happy that management was responding to their
Quite often, we find functional groups such as concerns. While the management team also seemed
safety and quality working separately to address to be happy to have a healthy find-and-fix process, I
symptoms of functional problems that have com- was concerned that no one was looking at the bigger
mon organizational reasons and solutions. Typically, picture that was painted by this data.
these groups do not see the ultimate reason because
they are not comparing and understanding the re- As part of the leadership training, I asked the
lationships between their data. They are essentially management team to help me understand the com-
traveling on separate paths with their heads down. mon reasons for the diverse set of issues identified
This organizational wheel-spinning could be turned by the workers. This turned into a great learning
into traction with a unified process for defining and experience for the team and me. They had never
investigating all nonconformity. When a common been asked to look horizontally at this vertical data
definition for nonconformity is created that includes before. The exercise helped me understand how their
quality, safety, health, ethics and more, the process systems were performing and how much they really
to find the reasons and the solution can become understood about their systems’ functionality. This
unified and more business friendly. This is just one example highlights the opportunity to build a sys-
of many possible examples of the synergy and effi- tem that views leaks in separate systems as common,
ciency that can be created by the establishment of rather than being unique to safety, quality or other
unified systems criteria and ultimately an OMS. areas. These issues then become organizational
Prior to conducting leadership training for the se- health symptoms rather than discrete problems that
nior management team of a manufacturing compa- are routinely found and fixed independently.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 21

BUSINESS CLASS

To be The OMS & System Element Integration •Indicators are wired together or consolidated.
effective, the An OMS is a single system that an organization The organization understands the relationship be-
OMS strategy tween functionally diverse data and indicators, and
uses to control all of its processes and facilitate its creates relationships and new interrelated measures,
should decision-making for all operational and functional for example, one nonconformity indicator rather
create more areas. This system should ultimately manage all than multiple indicators.
organizational of an organization’s disciplines, even those that
horsepower, do not have published management systems stan- •The frontline supervisor and worker situation
dards (e.g., ethics or integrity, human resources, is improved. One of the best litmus tests of added
not just a legal). The OMS is also referred to as integrated, value from system integration is taken at the front
consolidation business and operational systems. Published guid- line of the organization. For example, an integration
of documents. ance to combine separate management systems effort can save costs (e.g., reduced third-party audit
into one integrated approach includes BSI PAS fees), but does it have a positive, neutral or negative
99:2012 and the ISO (2018a) publication, The Inte- impact at the front line of the organization? ANAWAT_S/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS
grated Use of Management System Standards. The
foundation of the OMS represents the elements Added Value of System Integration
that are common in all management systems. The following describes the added value of system
The system blends common system expectations
together to create an integrated process to collect, integration, adapted from ISO (2018a).
analyze and make decisions across all organiza- •Elimination of redundancies: An integrated
tional data (Figure 1, p. 21).
approach to implementing multiple management
An OMS or single integrated system should not system standards can result in common or single
stop at creating matrices of common requirements, management system components, such as policies
combining and organizing like system elements and objectives, processes and resources. An example
and requirements or creating a single system that is one training management approach that encom-
meets all applicable standards. Although this passes every qualification and educational need in
should get an organization off to a great start creat- the organization.
ing efficiency, it does not guarantee that the single
integrated system will be more effective than oper- •Value reconciliation: An integrated system facil-
ating separate systems. The true measure of OMS itates a reconciliation between values that are often
effectiveness is the improved capacity to predict deployed in parallel (or in competition with each
opportunity and harm, make value-balanced deci- other). For example, values such as profitability and
sions and create solutions that holistically improve safety that are often in conflict should be aligned
the business. If an organization’s strategy expects and balanced up front in the system rather than at
the OMS to create more effective and balanced every decision point.
decision-making, then the OMS must be designed
with that principle in mind. To be effective, the •Establishing consistency: Using an integrated
OMS strategy should create more organizational approach facilitates the consistency of the manage-
horsepower, not just a consolidation of documents. ment system. This improves communication, under-
standing and focus on achieving an interrelated set
System Integration Effectiveness Indicators of organizational objectives and goals.
The following indicators can be used to judge
•Driving cross-functional synergy: System inte-
the effectiveness of management system (or ele- gration breaks down vertical silos and barriers, and
mental) integration: drives cross-functional responsibility, analysis and
decision-making (e.g., connecting the gauges on the
•The organization is system-thinking and the organizational dashboard).
system becomes the definitive language and design
standard for the organization. When an organi- •Strengthening accountability: Integrating man-
zation is system-thinking it expects more from the agement systems should create team-based objec-
system. When successes and unwanted outcomes tives, processes and resources where interdependent
are identified, they are assessed and verified as prod- accountability can be fostered.
ucts of the system.
•Reduction of costs: Reducing maintenance,
•Functional leaders and their staff team up to consolidation of audits and assessments, as well as
create synergy across disciplines, for example, the optimization of processes and resources can
building a multidisciplinary team to assess and contribute to reducing costs. This removes non-val-
investigate cross-functional nonconformities and ue-added redundancy.
incidents.
•Optimization of processes and resources:
•System elements and their relationships are Blending processes should add value at all levels
more effective together than apart. For example, of the organization. For example, the creation of
the use of a unified risk assessment approach such integrated task-based training and skill evaluation
as enterprise risk management should improve deci- versus separate training by functional need.
sion-making where diverse risks, typically assessed
by separate systems or value-based mechanisms, •Facilitating sustainability: The universality of
must be weighed against each other. the approach fosters greater shared understanding
and accountability, and decreases the opportunity
that change will negatively impact the organization.

•Consolidation of audits and assessments: In-
tegrating standards and systems decreases the cost

22 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

and organizational impact of frequent and indepen- Causal Analysis
dent assessments and audits. It offers a more holistic •Create a common approach to recognizing and
assessment of the overall process rather than a disci-
pline-specific evaluation. evaluating the reasons for success and failure.
•Build a cross-functional evaluation team to iden-
•Facilitating decision-making: Beyond the con-
solidation and integration of management system tify organizational, rather than functional, reasons
elements, the single-system approach should facili- and solutions.
tate the balancing of decision-making across values
at every level in the organization. Conformance Validation
•Develop cross-functional inspection, observation
•Improving performance: Integrated use of man-
agement system standards can have a positive im- and other processes.
pact on value-based performance by creating more •Assess (with the causal analysis team) and com-
operationally balanced and sustainable approaches.
municate common organizational reasons for these
Evolving Toward an OMS findings to senior management.
Clearly, many benefits can be derived from the
Conclusion
integration of multiple systems into an OMS. While Because organizations and functions fall in
most organizations with management systems are
operating them independently or have combined various places on the business evolution spec-
what they have, some organizations are actively us- trum, it may take a while for the OMS or system
ing an OMS approach. integration principle to gain popularity. The fu-
ture driver in the U.S. will likely be supply chain
Organizations with a single business system or customer expectations. Organizational leaders
typically evolve to this state through a compelling in companies at the top of the supply chain have
leadership vision. If an organization lacks this vi- a significant influence on the system that creates
sion there are ways to create integration value, one and perpetuates separate standards and systems.
element at a time. OSH professionals can use the Leaders in these organizations will likely become
organizational reasons for safety symptoms (see the more cognizant of the waste created by operating
other articles in this series) to compare common separate systems and insist on a more holistic
reasons with functional (e.g., quality, environment, system approach from their organization, the
reliability) peers. As system integration evolves, supply chain and the standards-setting and cer-
more opportunity will likely exist for system/pro- tification community.
cess experts at the strategic level of the organization.
OSH professionals with strong system and process This should not delay OSH professionals’ op-
knowledge coupled with operational savvy can portunity to foster these principles to add business
rightfully become trusted executive advisors. value in their organization. The best way to evolve
toward a unified approach is to show value and
Leaders interested in integration should start with build momentum. Grow your understanding of
system elements that have recognized commonality system and process health and how it applies to your
or are perceived as organizationally valuable. The organization. Team with peer functional leaders
following elemental cross-system unification actions such as quality to assess efficiencies between system
can yield significant organizational value. elements that add value to the management team
and the frontline workforce. Celebrate and build on
Risk Assessment & Management incremental success. PSJ
•Integrate risk and risk assessment into one
References
common process across all business areas [e.g.,
COSO (2017) Enterprise Risk Management and ISO British Standards Institution (BSI). (2012). Specification
31000:2018]. of common management system requirements as a frame-
work for integration (BSI PAS 99:2012).
•Create a mechanism to equate all risk to a com-
mon prioritization hierarchy. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Tread-
way Commission (COSO). (2017). Enterprise risk manage-
•Credit the risk reduction taken for similar con- ment: Integrating with strategy and performance.
trol levels equally across all enterprise risks.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
•Align all risks around process health and sus- (2018a). The integrated use of management system standards
tainability. (IUMSS; 2nd ed.; 2018-11).

•Create one management of change process that ISO. (2018b). Risk management—Guidelines (ISO
encompasses all potential impacts of change. 31000:2018).

Education, Training & Qualification Susca, P.T. (2018, Aug.). Using processes to prevent and
•Create one education management approach predict risk. Professional Safety, 63(8), 18-21.

to include needs assessment, learning objectives, Susca, P.T. (2019, Feb.). The value of effective manage-
course design and more. ment systems. Professional Safety, 64(2), 18-21.

•Design task- and job-specific knowledge, skill Trevor, J. (2018, Jan. 12). Is anyone in your company pay-
building and evaluation that is cross-functional, ing attention to strategic alignment? Harvard Business Re-
rather than by risk or compliance requirement. view. https://hbr.org/2018/01/is-anyone-in-your-company
-paying-attention-to-strategic-alignment

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 23

HAZARD CONTROL
Peer-Reviewed

Using Machine Safety
Risk Assessment for
Alternative Methods to

LOCKOUT/TAGOUT

By Gary J. Garrahan

MORSA IMAGES/E+/GETTY IMAGES

24 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

IIN THE FEDERAL REGISTER dated May 20, 2019, OSHA made Improved Safety
a request for information (RFI) regarding two areas (control Lockout is an administrative control; that is, it requires affir-
circuit type devices and robotics) where modernizing the
lockout/tagout standard (29 CFR 1910.147) might better pro- mative actions by people to be effective. For that reason, lockout
mote worker safety. is subject to human error. Consider, for example, a complex
machine that requires seven points of lockout. Despite proper
History of the Lockout Standard training and the use of machine-specific procedures, the fact
The current lockout/tagout standard came into being in remains that a person may inadvertently fail to lockout one of
the points, thus presenting a risk of injury. Now consider the
1989 and was based on ANSI Z244.1-1982, American National following scenario:
Standard for Personal Protection—Lockout/Tagout of Energy
Sources—Minimum Safety Requirements. As stated in the RFI, A machine is being designed with a hinged access door. In
OSHA (2019) now recognizes that: the event of a jam, the door would need to be opened to access
and clear the jam. The designer considers two options:
Technological advances since the standard was issued
in 1989 suggest that, at least in some circumstances, 1. Keep the door locked during normal operation. If a jam
control circuit type devices may be at least as safe as occurs, require that the machine operator use lockout/tagout
[energy isolating devices]. OSHA requests information, before unlocking the door.
data and comments that would assist the agency in
determining under what conditions control circuit type 2. Control access to the machine via a door interlock sys-
devices could safely be used for the control of hazard- tem, so that in the event of a jam, as soon as the machine
ous energy. OSHA may also consider changes to the operator opens the door, all hazardous motion stops and all
lockout/tagout standard that address hazardous ener- hazardous energy is relieved. Design the interlock system in
gy control for new robotics technologies. accordance with ISO 13849-1:2015, Safety of Machinery—
Safety-Related Parts of Control Systems—Part 1: General
The latest version of the ANSI standard is ANSI/ASSP Principles for Design. Once the jam is cleared, the door would
Z244.1-2016, The Control of Hazardous Energy—Lockout, need to be closed and the machine reset before normal opera-
Tagout and Alternative Methods, and it provides guidance tion could commence.
for when alternative methods may be used in lieu of lockout.
Alternative methods are defined in ANSI/ASSP Z244.1-2016 as In the first option, the safety of the machine operator depends
“A means of controlling hazardous energy (other than energy upon the worker’s consistent and proper implementation of lock-
isolation) to reduce risk to an acceptable level.” ANSI/ASSP out/tagout. Suppose the machine jams once per day, 5 days per
Z244.1-2016 lists the following examples of tasks that could be week, 50 weeks per year, for 10 years. This would require that the
accomplished using alternative methods: machine operator lock the machine out (correctly) no fewer than
2,500 times.
•die changing
•cleaning In the second option, the interlock system would be designed to
•jam clearing be control reliable. This would mean that, at a minimum (accord-
•adjustments ing to ISO 13849-1:2015), the safety function must meet Perfor-
•make-ready mance Level d, Category 3, which requires an average probability
•set-up of dangerous failure per hour (PFHd) of ≥ 10-7 to < 10-6; that is, the
•lubrication interlock can fail dangerously no more than once every 114 years.
•inspection
•tool changes Cost Reduction
•taking measurements As long as the alternative method is at least as effective as
•roll polishing
•taking samples lockout, it may provide a faster way to accomplish the task (e.g.,
It would appear that OSHA’s RFI related to control circuit type die changing, cleaning, jam clearing, adjustments), thus reduc-
devices and robotics means that OSHA may be willing to consid- ing, for example, machine downtime. While safety is necessar-
er the use of what ANSI/ASSP defines as alternative methods. ily the first and most important consideration, OSHA requests
comments related to cost in the RFI.
Benefits of Updating OSHA’s Lockout/Tagout Standard
If the lockout/tagout standard is updated to allow for the use Requirements for Using Alternative Methods
If OSHA updates the lockout/tagout standard to allow for al-
of alternative methods, it offers the possibility of at least two
benefits: improved safety and cost reduction. ternative methods, the following (as stated in ANSI/ASSP Z244.1-
2016, clause 6.1) will likely be required to justify such methods:
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Before alternative methods are used, the following
•This article discusses OSHA’s recent request for information relat- shall be completed:

ed to updating the lockout/tagout standard, specifically regarding •a practicability/justification analysis as per clause
two areas of the standard: control circuit type devices and robotics. 8.2.1
In both areas, the issue is whether technology has reached a point
where alternative methods to lockout can be used without diminish- •a risk assessment as per clause 8.2.2
ing the level of safety required for the worker. •other applicable evaluations as described in claus-
es 8.2.3-8.2.12
•The article describes a risk assessment methodology that can be
While this article focuses on the risk assessment require-
used in situations where alternative methods to lockout are used to ment, it is important to note the requirements for a practica-
protect workers from hazardous energy. bility/justification analysis (clause 8.2.1) and other applicable
evaluations (clauses 8.2.3 to 8.2.12), as no proper attempt at
using alternative measures can be made unless the following
requirements are also addressed:

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 25

A documented practicability/justification analysis requires Risk is the combination of the probability of occurrence of

the user to evaluate the following: harm and the severity of that harm. In RIA TR R15.306-2016,

•impacts of conventional lockout/tagout risk is determined by three criteria:

•options for avoiding using power or minimizing the use 1. Injury severity, which is a function of the degree of esti-

of energy mated harm due to each hazard while a person is performing a

•obstacles which prevent using the lockout task. Severity has three ratings, which (for the sake of brevity)

•potential methods which may be suitable to the situation are summarized as follows:

Other applicable evaluations include evaluations of: •S3 (serious), such as a nonreversible (i.e., permanent) injury

•industry best practices and methods •S2 (moderate), such as a reversible (i.e., recoverable) injury

•architecture/structure (this is related to reliability of the al- •S1 (minor), such as an injury requiring first aid only

ternative method) 2. Exposure, which is a function of the estimated incidence

•safety-related parts of the control system (well-tried com- of exposure (either frequency or duration) to the hazard. Expo-

ponents, well-tried designs, common cause failure and fault sure has three ratings, which (for the sake of brevity) are sum-

tolerance) marized as follows:

•exclusivity/individual control •E2 (high), such as a daily activity

•tamper resistance •E1 (low), such as a weekly activity

•a program to support the alternative method •E0 (prevented), meaning that there is no exposure (e.g., an

•the procedures in place for the alternative method exposed sprocket may be located so high above the floor that

In addition, whenever using alternative methods, a written the machine operator is effectively not exposed to the hazard)

work permit is required, as stated in ANSI/ASSP Z244.1-2016, 3. Avoidance, which is an assessment of a person’s ability to

clause 6.3: sense and elude a hazardous situation. Avoidance has three rat-

Where the user has a task which is qualified by a ings, which (for the sake of brevity) are summarized as follows:

risk assessment and lockout is not practicable, ei- •A3 (not possible)

ther tagout or an alternative method which permits •A2 (not likely)

de-energization, energization or partial energization •A1 (likely)

shall be permitted and documented on the machine, The combination of severity, exposure and avoidance, de-

equipment or process specific procedure. termined prior to the implementation of any risk reduction

Risk Assessment measures (i.e., determined before any safety features are consid-
Robotic Industries Association (RIA) ered), yields the initial risk level (Figure 1). The resulting initial

publication TR R15.306-2016, Technical FIGURE 1
Report for Industrial Robots and Robot
Systems—Safety Requirements—Task- RISK LEVEL DECISION MATRIX

based Risk Assessment Methodology, is Severity of injury Exposure to the hazard Avoidance of the hazard Risk level
a document written (as explained in the

document’s foreword): E0 - Prevented

. . . with the objective of enhancing A1 - Likely NEGLIGIBLE
the safety of personnel associated
with industrial robot systems, in- S1 - Minor E1 - Low A2/A3 - Not likely/
cluding robots, robot end-effectors not possible

and ancillary equipment, by pre- E2 - High LOW
senting a task-based risk assessment E0 - Prevented
methodology that has been demon-

strated to provide risk reduction S2 - Moderate E1 - Low MEDIUM
guidance for hazards presented by E2 - High HIGH
industrial robot system applications. A1 - Likely

Despite having been written specifi- A2/A3 - Not likely/
cally for industrial robot systems, RIA not possible
TR R15.306-2016 can also be used for

essentially any machine safety risk assess- E0 - Prevented LOW
ment. Using the methodology of RIA TR E1 - Low
R15.306-2016, the user: S3 - Serious HIGH
E2 - High VERY HIGH
a. determines the initial risk of injury A1/A2 - Likely/not likely
due to a potential hazard, A3 - Not possible

b. selects risk reduction measures, and
c. determines the residual risk (risk
remaining after risk reduction measures

are taken).

The methodology requires that appro- Note. Adapted from Table 2 of “Technical Report for Industrial Robots and Robot Systems—
priate risk reduction measures be used Safety Requirements—Task-Based Risk Assessment Methodology (RIA TR R15.306-2016),” by
to reduce the residual risk to an accept- Robotic Industries Association, 2016.

able level.

26 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

risk is either negligible, low, medium, high or very high. Negli- Note that according to RIA TR R15.306-2016, neither com-
gible risk, being the lowest level, is acceptable risk; however, low plementary protective measures nor information for use may be
risk may also be considered acceptable, depending upon cir- used until or unless the risk level is or has been reduced to low
cumstances (in fact, in the case of industrial robot systems, RIA or negligible, which are considered acceptable risk levels.
TR R15.306-2016 states that “a risk level of low or negligible can
be considered sufficient to achieve acceptable risk”). Medium, While each initial risk must be evaluated by reviewing the
high and very high risk levels are considered unacceptable and severity, exposure and avoidance, one of the benefits of the RIA
must be reduced. TR R15.306-2016 methodology is that (although not explicitly
shown in the document) the residual risks are essentially fixed
Once the initial risk is determined, the user selects one or by the combination of initial risks and the risk reduction mea-
more risk reduction measures. As shown in RIA TR R15.306- sures chosen:
2016, Table 3, the hierarchy of risk reduction measures, from
most preferred to least preferred, is: •If elimination is used, then, no matter what the initial risk,
all values for severity, exposure and avoidance are reduced to
•Elimination: Eliminate the hazard. their lowest rating levels, S1 and E0 (note that once exposure is
•Substitution: Substitute the hazard with a less severe hazard. eliminated, avoidance is no longer applicable).
•Limit interaction: Reduce or eliminate interaction between
the hazard and the person. •If substitution is used, then severity is reduced, but exposure
•Safeguarding: Use guards and/or safety-related parts of the and avoidance remain unchanged (note that the 2014 version
control system (SRP/CS) to protect people. of TR R15.306 stated the following: “Exposure to a hazard or
•Complementary protective measures: Although not explic- avoidance of a hazard does not impact the severity of a poten-
itly defined in RIA TR R15.306-2016, these are measures that: tial injury.”). The level of severity reduction depends on the
a) assist in avoiding contact with the hazard (e.g., an enabling substitution, and the substitution must meet the criteria for
device); or b) assist in avoiding further injury from the hazard substitution shown in TR R15.306. For example, suppose you
(e.g., an emergency stop). substitute a concentrated acid (with an initial severity rating of
•Information for use: Warnings and awareness means S3) with a weaker acid. The user need only determine the re-
(e.g., signs or alarms), administrative controls (e.g., training) sulting severity rating (S2 or S1) of the weaker acid.
and/or PPE.
•If limit interaction is used, and human interaction is elimi-
nated, or we automate the tasks, then exposure is reduced to E0

FIGURE 2

RISK REDUCTION USING ELIMINATION,
SUBSTITUTION, LIMIT INTERACTION & SAFEGUARDING

Before any risk Elimination Substitution Substitution Limit Interaction Limit Interaction Safeguarding
reduction measures
(Severity reduced (Severity reduced (Interaction eliminated (Exposure reduced RESIDUAL RISK
INITIAL RISK RESIDUAL RISK to minor) to moderate) or tasks automated) to low) S E A Score
S E A Score 3 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. RESIDUAL RISK RESIDUAL RISK RESIDUAL RISK RESIDUAL RISK 3 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. S E A Score 3 0 – LOW
S E A Score 1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 3 LOW S E A Score S E A Score S E A Score 3 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 2 LOW 3 0 – LOW
3 2 3 V. HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 1 LOW 223 HIGH 30 – LOW 3 1 3 HIGH 3 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 3 LOW 3 0 – LOW
322 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 2 LOW 222 HIGH 30 – LOW 3 1 2 HIGH 2 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL. 2 0 – LOW
321 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. 2 2 1 MEDIUM 3 0 – LOW 3 1 1 HIGH 2 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 3 LOW 2 0 – LOW
313 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 2 LOW 2 1 3 MEDIUM 3 0 – LOW 3 1 3 HIGH 2 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 1 LOW 2 0 – LOW
312 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 3 LOW 2 1 2 MEDIUM 3 0 – LOW 3 1 2 HIGH 2 0 – LOW
1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 2 LOW 1 0 – NEGL.
311 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL. 2 1 1 MEDIUM 3 0 – LOW 3 1 1 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL.
1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL.
30– LOW 1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 3 LOW 20– LOW 3 0 – LOW 3 0 – LOW 1 0 – NEGL.
1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 2 LOW 1 0 – NEGL.
223 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 2 1 LOW 223 HIGH 20 – LOW 2 1 3 MEDIUM 1 0 – NEGL.
1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 3 LOW 1 0 – NEGL.
222 HIGH 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 2 LOW 222 HIGH 20 – LOW 2 1 2 MEDIUM
1 1 1 NEGL.
2 2 1 MEDIUM 1 0 – NEGL. 2 2 1 MEDIUM 2 0 – LOW 2 1 1 MEDIUM

2 1 3 MEDIUM 2 1 3 MEDIUM 2 0 – LOW 2 1 3 MEDIUM

2 1 2 MEDIUM 2 1 2 MEDIUM 2 0 – LOW 2 1 2 MEDIUM

2 1 1 MEDIUM 2 1 1 MEDIUM 2 0 – LOW 2 1 1 MEDIUM

20– LOW 20– LOW 2 0 – LOW 2 0 – LOW

123 LOW 123 LOW 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 3 LOW

122 LOW 122 LOW 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 2 LOW

121 LOW 121 LOW 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL.

113 LOW 113 LOW 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 3 LOW

112 LOW 112 LOW 1 0 – NEGL. 1 1 2 LOW

1 1 1 NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL.

1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 27

Gary J. Garrahan,

CSP, CHMM, CMSE,

is manager of environ-

ment, health and safe-

ty for The Wonderful

Co., a grower, harvest-

FIGURE 3 low). You then employ information for er, bottler, packager
use. The resulting risk is S1, E2, A2, which and marketer of fruits,
RISK REDUCTION USING is still low. nuts, flowers, water,
COMPLEMENTARY PROTECTIVE wines and juices. Prior
MEASURES OR INFORMATION FOR USE
Example to this, he gained more
The following example may help to il- than 30 years’ experi-
ence in environmental,

Results of using complementary protective measures or information lustrate the risk assessment process: health and safety in
for use once the initial risk has been reduced to low or negligible by
elimination, substitution or limit interaction (known collectively in TR An operator works an entire shift stand- plastics manufac-
R15.306 as inherently safe design measures) or safeguarding. turing, compact disc
ing 5 ft (i.e., close enough to get splashed) manufacturing and
After employing Information for use from a 50-gallon open-surface tank of 55% power tool manufac-
inherently safe design Complementary RESIDUAL RISK sulfuric acid. The initial risk is: turing. Garrahan is a
professional member
measures and/or protective measures •severity = serious of ASSP’s Bakersfield
safeguarding •exposure = high Chapter.
•avoidance = not likely
RISK RESIDUAL RISK Therefore, risk = high.

S E A Score S E A Score S E A Score To reduce the risk, the process is redesigned to use 20% acetic

acid. The residual risk is:

30– LOW 3 0 – LOW 3 0 – LOW •severity = moderate

20– LOW 2 0 – LOW 2 0 – LOW •exposure = high

123 LOW 1 2 2 LOW 1 2 2 LOW •avoidance = not likely

122 LOW 1 2 1 LOW 1 2 1 LOW Therefore, risk = high.

After switching to acetic acid, we then limit the operator’s

121 LOW 1 2 1 LOW 1 2 1 LOW interaction by increasing the distance between the operator and

113 LOW 1 1 2 LOW 1 1 2 LOW the tank to 30 ft (where the worker cannot get splashed). The

112 LOW 1 1 1 NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL. new residual risk is:

1 1 1 NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL. 1 1 1 NEGL. •severity = moderate

•exposure = prevented

1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. 1 0 – NEGL. •avoidance = no longer applicable

Therefore, risk = low.

(and, therefore, avoidance is no longer applicable), but severity Conclusion
remains unchanged. OSHA’s RFI regarding revision of the lockout/tagout stan-

•If limit interaction is used, and human interaction is re- dard offers a long-overdue opportunity to bring the standard
duced, then exposure is reduced (as long as it meets the criteria into the 21st century. Revision would provide the regulated
for exposure), but severity and avoidance remain unchanged. community with the ability to achieve enhanced safety and
(although far less important) reduced costs. If the lockout/
•If safeguarding is used, then exposure is reduced to E0 (and, tagout standard is revised, risk assessment will become a criti-
therefore, avoidance is no longer applicable), but severity re- cal component of machine safety design, with the potential for
mains unchanged. improving safety beyond the concerns of lockout/tagout. Safety
professionals should embrace this once-in-a-career chance to
•If complementary protective measures or information make a difference in worker safety by supporting revision of the
for use is used, then avoidance is reduced (as long as it OSHA lockout/tagout standard. PSJ
meets the criteria for avoidance), but severity and exposure
remain unchanged. References

Figure 2 (p. 27) illustrates the use of elimination, substitu- ANSI. (1982). American national standard for personal protection—
tion, limit interaction and safeguarding to reduce risk. Lockout/tagout of energy sources—Minimum safety requirements
(ANSI Z244.1-1982).
Note that if the risk reduction measure chosen does not re-
sult in low or negligible residual risk, the process is repeated. ANSI/ASSP. (2016). The control of hazardous energy—Lockout,
For example, suppose substitution reduces a very high initial tagout and alternative methods (ANSI/ASSP Z244.1-2016).
risk to a high risk. In the next iteration, limiting interaction
might be used to reduce the high risk to low risk. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2015). Safety
of machinery—Safety-related parts of control systems—Part 1: General
As stated, neither complementary protective measures nor principles for design (ISO 13849-1:2015).
information for use may be used until or unless the risk level
is or has been reduced to low or negligible. Figure 3 illustrates OSHA. (2019, May 20). The control of hazardous energy (lockout/
the results of using complementary protective measures or in- tagout) (Docket No. OSHA-2016-0013). www.federalregister.gov/docu
formation for use once the initial risk has been reduced to low ments/2019/05/20/2019-10247/the-control-of-hazardous-energy-lock
or negligible by elimination, substitution or limit interaction outtagout
(known collectively in TR R15.306 as inherently safe design
measures) or safeguarding. Robotic Industries Association (RIA). (2014). Technical report for
industrial robots and robot systems—Safety requirements—Task-based
Note that while the use of complementary protective mea- risk assessment methodology (RIA TR R15.306-2014).
sures and information for use will certainly improve safety,
unfortunately, in most instances, the resulting residual risk lev- RIA. (2016). Technical report for industrial robots and robot sys-
el will not change from low to negligible. For example, suppose, tems—Safety requirements—Task-based risk assessment methodology
after employing safeguarding, the risk is S1, E2, A3 (which is (RIA TR R15.306-2016).

The control of hazardous energy (lockout/tagout), 29 CFR 1910.147
(1989). www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.147

28 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

SAFETY MANAGEMENT
Peer-Reviewed

The Role of

LEADING
& LAGGING
INDICATORS

in OSH Performance
Management

By Pam WalaskiFIZKES/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS In the first paper, “Transforming EHS Performance Mea-
surement Through Leading Indicators,” several interesting
RRECENT DISCUSSIONS IN THE OSH COMMUNITY about leading ver- findings were reported (Sinelnikov et al., 2013). The first was
sus lagging indicators have been lively. Many OSH professionals that OSH professionals expected to see an increase in the use
are thoughtfully considering how they can create indicators that of leading indicators. Of those who participated in the expert
effectively measure their organization’s performance and are panel or responded to the survey, 94% indicated that the use
learning to appreciate that it does not mean throwing out lagging of leading indicators was an important factor in measuring
indicators altogether or that all leading indicators are created OSH performance and 93% responded that their organizations
equal. In addition, while many OSH professionals say they ap- would be increasing the use of leading indicators in the next 5
preciate the value of leading indicators, some confess to not really years. The second finding addressed leading indicator expertise
knowing how to create ones that are meaningful to their organi- of both OSH professionals and their senior leadership; 80% of
zation. This article explores the role of indicators in performance respondents ranked their expertise level on leading indicators
measurement to better understand how to put the pieces together. as “competent,” “proficient” or “expert.” On the other hand,
they reported that the expertise level of nearly half of the se-
Current Status nior leaders in their organizations was at the “beginner” or
In 2012, National Safety Council’s Campbell Institute began “advanced beginner” level and only 7% were ranked as “expert”
(Table 1, p. 30; Sinelnikov et al., 2013).
to explore the issue of leading indicators by conducting a sur-
vey. The first part of the survey included a 3-hour panel discus- The third finding of note from the expert panel and survey par-
sion with 17 industry experts representing various industries ticipants came from answers to questions on the role of leading
and sectors: mining, construction, manufacturing, scientific indicators in both executive compensation and OSH professional
and technical services. The second part was conducted via an accountability; 80% of respondents said executive compensation
email survey to the 30 Campbell Institute charter members, 18 is, for all intents and purposes, not attached to OSH performance,
of whom responded. Since then, five white papers have been as measured by leading indicators. Conversely, respondents indi-
published outlining the work of the expert panel members and cated that they were held accountable for OSH performance by a
the results of the survey. margin of 73% (Table 2, p. 30; Sinelnikov et al., 2013).

KEY TAKEAWAYS Despite some of the incongruencies noted, this white paper
seemed to suggest the OSH profession was on the verge of some
•The role of performance indicators (typically known as lagging major changes in how it considered OSH performance mea-
surement through an increasing use of leading indicators. But 5
and leading indicators) has been the focus of much discussion in the years later, ERM’s Global Safety Survey found that lagging per-
OSH community recently. formance indicators remain dominant and few companies are
using meaningful leading indicators: 70% of respondents use
•OSH professionals should educate themselves on the historical use lagging indicators and only 26% are using any form of a leading

of these indicators as well as the pros and cons of their current use.

•This article provides a case for moving away from the typical use

of these indicators and moving toward a process that is based on an
organization’s strategic business objectives.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 29

TABLE 1

LEADING INDICATOR EXPERTISE

OSH professionals OSH professionals

self-rank rank their executives

Beginner 6.7% Beginner 14.3% and experience, they do not provide a means to measure a pre-
ventive or proactive improvement simply due to the completion
Advanced beginner 13.3% Advanced beginner 28.6% of the activities and, as such, are questionable with regard to
whether they really are indicators of anything.
Competent 26.7% Competent 50.0%
Leading Indicator, Lagging Indicator or Both?
Proficient 40.0% Proficient 0.0% Adding to the confusion and inconsistency, Manuele (2009)

Expert 13.3% Expert 7.1% postulates that some indicators that are traditionally thought of
as lagging, such as incident rates, are leading. Using the example
Note. Data from “Transforming EHS Performance Measurement of an injury or a series of injuries, which are nearly universally
Through Leading Indicators,” by S. Sinelnikov, J. Inouye and S. Kerp- considered lagging indicators because they reflect something that
er, 2013, Campbell Institute, National Safety Council. has already happened, Manuele suggests that the changes made
by an organization in processes and procedures following a re-
TABLE 2 view of incidents should mean that incidents are actually leading
indicators because they are ultimately proactive and preventive.
DO OSH INDICATORS COUNT?
Daily (2008, as cited in Manuele, 2009) says, “if we consider
Executive compensation OSH accountability [injuries/lagging indicators] in terms of the probability of simi-
lar future incidents and use what we learn from them to change
Not at all 40.0% Not at all 13.3% our processes, then we are treating them as ‘leading indica-
tors.’” Manuele (2009) concludes that the term used is not the
Very little 13.3% Very little 13.3% issue at all; what is critical is the process to which the indicators
are attached.
Some 26.7% Some 20.0%
Therefore, although an analysis of the lagging indica-
Quite a bit 13.3% Quite a bit 40.0% tors—trending of incidents and near misses—can be
a leading indicator, the incidents and near misses are
A great deal 6.7% A great deal 13.3% called lagging indicators. At some point, is it not ap-
propriate to suggest that this differentiation becomes
Note. Data from “Transforming EHS Performance Measurement gibberish?” (Manuele, 2009)
Through Leading Indicators,” by S. Sinelnikov, J. Inouye and S. Kerp-
er, 2013, Campbell Institute, National Safety Council. In 2007, Hopkins was unable to identify a distinction be-
tween the use of the terms, saying:
indicator (ERM, 2018). While these two sources do not provide
the only measure of where the profession is regarding OSH per- I have examined the meaning of the terms “leading”
formance measurement, they do represent this author’s experi- and “lagging” in two recent influential publications
ence in working with various clients as well as in conversations and found that they are not used with any consisten-
with colleagues. cy. Nor do I think there is much point in trying to pin
down a precise meaning since in different contexts
Confusion Over Terms & Definitions these terms are used to draw attention to different
In addition to the confusion and disparity, attempting to things. . . . Whether they be described a lead or lag is
ultimately of little consequence.” (Hopkins, 2007)
identify even a consistent name for performance indicators in
published literature is challenging; even more so is the attempt Finally, Busch (2019) agrees, saying:
to discover a common definition. While most sources consulted
for this article use the term “lagging,” also found in multiple What is leading and what is lagging? Are near miss-
sources are the terms “trailing,” “retrospective,” “subjective” es and precursor incidents leading indicators? One
and “passive.” Leading indicators are also called “prospective,” can argue that they are because they enable you to
“predictive,” “preventive,” “upstream,” “feedback,” “positive” take proactive steps before a “real” accident with
and “process.” bad consequences happens. On the other hand one
might argue that they are lagging, because you can
In the literature there is general agreement regarding exam- only report them and act on them after they have
ples of lagging indicators; those most commonly cited include happened. Do not bother too much about putting
traditional incident rates that OSH professionals are familiar stickers on your indicators.
with [e.g., total recordable incident rate (TRIR), lost time rate,
days away restricted and transferred rate] as well as workers’ Indicators & Surrogation
compensation claim costs and experience modification rat- As if the lack of consistency over the terms and examples
ings. Less commonality is found when searching for leading
indicator examples. Many focus on typical proactive activities of each type is not enough to cause confusion among OSH
found in most OSH programs: training, incident reporting, professionals, a recent Harvard Business Review article further
safety-related suggestions, and development or revision of job elaborates on the traditional use of indicators and the often
safety analyses/hazard assessments. However, most striking inevitable process of surrogation, which occurs when achieve-
to this author is that many of the examples do not provide a ment of an indicator becomes the goal, subverting its ability to
method by which the quality of the outcome can be considered. measure success. This often happens when indicators are se-
For example, indicators such as the number of safety sugges- lected in isolation from those who are responsible for achieving
tions submitted, behavior-based safety observations completed, them or are misaligned from the strategy they are designed to
and OSH training as measured by number of hours or number support. It also happens when successfully meeting indicators
of participants were given as examples of leading indicators in is tied to incentives, either individually or as a group. In these
several publications, but they are simply tallies of completed
activities (Inouye, 2015; Sinelnikov et al., 2013; Wachter, 2012).
While these examples represent activities that are often consid-
ered proactive or preventive in nature, in this author’s opinion

30 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

situations, the focus becomes meeting the indicator at all costs many due to the longevity of their usage. Commonly used indi-
and the creativity of those who are being measured becomes cators such as incident rates are easily analyzed and interpreted
unlimited (Harris & Tayler, 2019). due to the use of a standardized method of calculating them,
which further allows for an organization to benchmark itself
The case of Wells Fargo presents a recent and devastating against others in its industry or make year-over-year internal
example. To solidify its relationship with customers and pro- comparisons. Even though the data used to calculate BLS bench-
vide them with high quality services and products, an indicator marks may not be completely accurate as noted, the large data
known as “eight is great” was developed and tracked by the fi- set helps to offset those errors. Lagging indicators can also show
nancial services firm. Eight referred to the total number of Wells progress toward a goal so that an organization feels a sense of ac-
Fargo products and services that each customer would eventually complishment when it is achieved. In a similar vein, Busch (2019)
use after the initial product that drew them to develop a relation- correctly suggests that an incident rate should be considered a
ship with the company in the first place (e.g., mortgage, home “litmus test” potentially signaling something wrong in the OSH
equity line of credit, credit card). Wells Fargo tied incentives to program. Finally, as the end of this article shows, lagging indi-
achieving the indicator to its customer service employees, which cators that are directly associated with an organization’s overall
resulted in pressuring customers to accept products they either business strategy are an effective way to use them.
did not want or did not need and, ultimately, to sign customers
up for products and accounts for which they never gave permis- Are Leading Indicators Better?
sion. The fallout was colossal: fines of more than $185 million The recent concern about the appropriateness of lagging indi-
were levied by various authorities, a class action lawsuit settle-
ment exceeded $142 million, the company’s CEO was fired, and cators appears to have led to the elevation of leading indicators
the difficulties in attracting new customers due to the negative as the solution. This author sees this as unfortunate because,
publicity remains (Harris & Tayler, 2019). While it is hard to as noted, not all leading indicators are truly leading. When
imagine an organization facing this level of loss due to surrogat- OSH professionals attempt to develop leading indicators, they
ing OSH indicators, there have certainly been examples in recent often have difficulty creating ones that are more than a tally of
memory of the problems that occur when incentives are tied to a something that is deemed to be a proactive behavior or activity.
reduction in typical lagging indicators; injuries are not reported These tally indicators should not be used as leading because
and, if they are, creative methods of keeping them off of OSHA they have no quality component, yet many use them.
recordkeeping logs have occurred.
Despite this, several sources can assist. One of the best iden-
The End of Lagging Indicators? tified by the author is the last of five Campbell Institute white
While most of the recent literature on OSH performance papers published in 2019. The document provides not only
multiple pages of suggestions by type (e.g., hazard reports, use
measurement tends to focus on the increased use of leading of PPE, safety suggestions), but also a rubric that can be used by
indicators as a better, or sometimes only, alternative, the con- an organization to develop customized indicators based on two
clusion that lagging indicators should be eliminated is problem- factors: the level of organizational maturity and levels of com-
atic. One understandable downside to lagging indicators is that plexity. For the former, the paper utilizes the DuPont (2018)
business performance indicators are not typically based on the Bradley Curve, although other models exist. For the latter, the
lack of something as they are for OSH lagging indicators (e.g., delineation is low, medium and high based on the time and
lack of injuries, illnesses, near-hits). Business does not normally effort needed to collect the data, the overall risk profile and the
use performance indicators to measure its failures; it would not size of the organization (Inouye, 2019). While this author found
be conventional to see an organization’s financial indicators the process helpful in developing leading indicators, not all of
expressed as “not losing money.” Another unfortunate outcome the examples provided in the paper have a quality component;
of the historical usage of lagging indicators is that it is tradi- many are simply tallies and must be modified to demonstrate
tionally seen as the most reliable performance measurement be- a measure of improvement (see “Leading Indicator Examples”
cause OSH professionals have created that expectation among sidebar on p. 32 for the ways that tallies can be modified to bet-
senior leaders over the years. The reliance on lagging indicators ter measure improvement).
frequently leads to an overreaction to one failure; one injury
is seen as a substantial failure of the entire OSH program, re- A final note on leading versus lagging indicators: a common
quiring substantial resources to identify causes and develop a belief has developed that the path forward is to replace lagging
corrective action plan to ensure that it does not happen again— indicators with leading ones, a belief that this author espoused
until it does and the process repeats itself. and promoted for many years. More recently, discussions about
balancing the use of both indicators have begun to appear; one
Confusion over whether an injury meets the definition of an document that is expected to provide guidance is the soon-to-
OSHA recordable injury can also affect the quality of the data be-published revision to ANSI Z16.2-1995, Information Man-
being used by benchmarking organizations such as Bureau agement for Safety and Health (Note: The 1995 version is not
of Labor Statistics (BLS). It is not uncommon for experienced active), as well as in GRI Standard 403, Occupational Health
OSH professionals to be unable to reach consensus on whether and Safety 2018, discussed next, and in an expected new work
an incident is recordable, in this author’s experience in these initiative from International Standards Organization (ISO)
types of conversations. Finally, there has been no shortage of Technical Committee (TC) 283 to ISO 45001 (Inouye, 2019;
discussion among OSH professionals regarding the fallacy that ISO/TC 283, 2019; OSHA, 2019).
the absence of injuries equals a safe workplace. It can be an
indicator of luck, poor reporting, the randomness of incidents International Perspective
and many other factors (Busch, 2019; GRI, 2018). GRI publishes standards to be used for sustainability reporting

On the other hand, lagging indicators can be effective mea- of environmental, economic and social topics. In 2018, GRI 403
surements because they are concrete numbers, understood by was published to establish the standard for reporting on occu-

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 31

LEADING INDICATOR EXAMPLES
WITH A QUALITY COMPONENT

Instead of . . . Try . . . Along with the ISO standard, ASSP separately published a
Required number of U.S.-based management system standard, ANSI/ASSP Z10.0-
machine safeguarding 90% of machine safeguarding 2019. Although its original publication in 2005 predates ISO
inspections completed for inspections completed in the first 45001, the Z10 committee deliberately revised the standard in
the first quarter. quarter identified fewer than two 2019 to parallel many of the requirements of ISO 45001. And,
Required number of safety corrective actions. like its international counterpart, the Z10 committee has pub-
suggestions submitted per 50% of safety suggestions revealed a lished a companion guidance manual that addresses OSH per-
quarter. previously unknown or uncategorized formance measurement (ANSI/ASSP, 2019a).
Number of new hires that hazard per quarter.
have completed 85% retention score of new hire What Now?
orientation training within training information presented when Of critical importance is to refrain from assuming the
their first week of work for conducting follow-up meetings with
the calendar year. new hires at 30 and 60 days for the solution is to simply stop using lagging indicators in favor of
Required number of hours calendar year. leading. As noted, this was certainly the opinion of this author
of training completed per Number of incident investigations before fully exploring this topic and appreciating other per-
calendar year. where lack of training or lack of spectives among fellow OSH professionals. But Busch (2019)
training retention was identified is reminds us that it is not an either-or choice; he says, “As is often
Attendance at weekly reduced by 50% from previous year. in safety, there is not a binary choice of one or the other—it
safety meeting is above More than 85% of safety meetings are is very much a case of both and each in the right application
90% for the third quarter. led by a senior management and context.” The idea of a balanced scorecard approach is one
90% of risk assessment representative in the third quarter. advocated by many in the literature. This is what is expected to
annual reviews completed During risk assessment annual reviews, be part of a soon-to-be-released revision to the aforementioned
on time. the total number of employees ANSI/ASSP Z16 standard. Originally published in the 1930s
required to use a respirator was and last updated in 1995, the flat, less complex methods of
Quarterly safety reduced by 50%. measuring will be replaced with an approach that validates the
recognition awards The total number of nominees importance of balancing every leading indicator with one that
presented. submitted for quarterly safety award is looks at outcomes as well.
increased by 50% from previous year.
It should also be noted that simply ceasing to use lagging
pational health and safety in external reports or other materials indicators is not a choice for many organizations. Logging
published on or after Jan. 1, 2021 (although earlier adoption was injuries according to the OSHA recordkeeping standard, then
encouraged). In its guidance for Clause 1.2 (reporting on leading reporting them to BLS is mandatory in the U.S. Many organi-
indicators), GRI 403 concurs that leading indicators are those used zations are also required to provide this information when they
to measure an organization’s efforts to prevent work-related inju- undergo the contracting process as part of their business or
ries and ill health. Reporting on both lagging and leading indica- for an organizational review completed for various reasons by
tors is important because the former do not provide a true picture external parties.
because of the latency of ill health and possible underreporting of
injuries. In the guidance for Disclosure 403-9 (work-related inju- Even more detrimental than removing one indicator at the
ries), GRI 403 indicates that, while reporting of occupational in- expense of another is the idea that having any leading indicator
juries is an important part of its sustainability reporting, “data on is better than none. In other words, rather than identifying
work-related injuries are a measure of the extent of harm suffered meaningful leading indicators that have the ability to measure
by workers; they are not a measure of safety” (GRI 2018). the success of something proactive or preventive, the best path
forward is to identify something associated with positive or
Seabrook (2019a) writes about a recent convergence of preventive types of activities, create a tally of those activities,
stakeholder interest in filling the gap on the “lack of proactive, and promote it as a start to the transition process. Then, over
consistent, comparable, measurable, relevant and reportable time, more work would be done to incorporate a quality mea-
OSH metrics/disclosures” that recognize the value of an orga- sure to that indicator.
nization’s human capital. Seabrook believes the most effective
leading indicator is the implementation of a sustainable risk- For those organizations that have less mature OSH programs
based occupational health and safety management system due or are not far along in their development of indicators beyond
to “proactively incorporating repeatable and reliable processes basic incident rates, this is particularly enticing. Data that can be
and standard operating procedures into business operations to used to calculate a tally is not only easy to collect but is probably
effectively measure how well a company is reducing potential already being collected by the organization. However, in the
worker injures and ill health, most importantly serious injuries, author’s opinion, this strategy has a high probability of back-
disease and fatalities” (Seabrook, 2019a). firing for several reasons. First, it fails to correctly educate the
organization, particularly senior leaders, on meaningful OSH
Many in the OSH community closely followed the devel- leading indicators. More so, in organizations where true leading
opment and publication of ISO 45001-2018. Its subsequent indicators are already being used to measure other facets of busi-
implementation and certification in organizations has helped ness performance, senior leaders may rightly call out the error.
to establish a foundation for robust safety and health manage- Second, when these indicators are used incorrectly as a measure
ment systems. At an October 2019 meeting of TC 283, delegates of a proactive or preventive activity, a false sense of achievement
reported that users are seeking guidance to measure the OSH is created if the indicator is reached or a false sense of failure if
performance of their organizations using leading and lagging it is not, both of which are damaging to the organization. Fi-
indicators and that, similar to what was reported in the ERM nally, there are inevitable consequences to the reputation of the
(2018) survey, most organizations focus solely on lagging indica- OSH professional and confusion in the organization when the
tors. A new work item proposal is expected to be available to TC switch to a leading indicator that has a quality measurement is
283 members in 2020 as a prelude to the development of a formal
proposal to develop a standard on this topic (ISO/TC 283, 2019).

32 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

proposed. The OSH professional could rightfully by accused of Required by ISO 45001, supported by Busch (2019) and

a “bait-and-switch” or their expertise in this matter and that of Harris and Tayler (2019), is ensuring that those closest to re-

others related to OSH may be questioned, or both. While it was sponsibility for implementing the activities associated with the

not the only recommendation of the Campbell Institute working indicator are engaged at the outset. Not only will this method

group, this idea was presented, in part, in two of its white papers improve the chance of selecting an indicator that more ac-

(Inouye 2015; 2019). It is far better for OSH professionals educate curately represents the organization’s operations, but it also

themselves first and subsequently their or- provides ownership of the indicators.

ganizations, identify one leading indicator And, as a reminder, tying incentives to

that has a quality component and work to the successful achievement of an indicator

integrate it into the organization’s overall is a recipe for surrogation (Busch, 2019;

performance measurement. Harris & Tayler, 2019).

In addition to considering the preceding, Susca (2019) explores the concept of

several paradigm shifts can be incorporat- integrating indicators into processes and

ed by OSH professionals who want to lead overall performance management when

their organizations in elevating the use of he talks about flipping Stephen Covey’s

multiple types of indicators. One starting principle of beginning with the end in

point is to consider using different terms mind to ending with the beginning in
that more aptly describe the two primary Of critical importance is to mind. This method focuses the organi-
indicator types and their integration into zation on performance through actions
an overall concept of performance manage- refrain from assuming the and activities tied to processes rather

ment. Esposito (2004), Busch (2019), Man- solution is to simply stop than results. Susca advocates making
uele (2009) and Susca (2019) advocate the sure the measurement (the end) is con-

concept of indicators being part of a process using lagging indicators in nected to the strategy (the beginning)
model or a systems view, explored further and the tactics that support both (the
favor of leading.
here and in the examples provided in the middle). Susca’s approach is to begin

“Putting it Back Together” section (p. 34). with the organizational goal related to

In that vein, one way the author has begun to reframe this per- OSH performance and connect it to a strategy. In prepara-

spective is to consider leading indicators as “inputs” to a process tion for implementation, tactical measures are developed and

and lagging indicators as “outcomes” of the process (terms used tracked by a measure of its success. These tactical measures

for the remainder of the article). Regardless of which name is are what would also be considered input indicators. As the

chosen, or even if a different name is to be used, integrating them process develops and is implemented, various effectiveness

into a continuous improvement process model also provides a measures are developed and tracked related to both OSH

system-based method that aligns better with occupational health performance and to the overall organizational effectiveness:

and safety management systems (OHSMS). output indicators (Susca, 2019).

A second shift is thinking about how indicators are viewed, Susca (2019) also reminds OSH professionals that not all in-

tracked and reported on, which, in many organizations, is in dicators are numeric; some measure quality, which can be just

isolation; OSH performance indicators are somehow outside of as important, although much more difficult to develop in a way

typical business operations. Examples are reporting on OSH that works, a concept supported by Busch (2019). Susca uses

performance using safety dashboards, intranets, or internal an example of a client organization that attempted to create a

newsletters and other forms of communication. As detailed leading indicator around supervisor and worker engagement.

next, this shift also supports the indicators as part of a process The indicator was tied to the organization’s support for the

or systems approach. value of OSH leadership. Supervisors were trained on initiating

Organizations that have effectively implemented an OHSMS conversations regarding OSH matters with the workforce for

likely have a better appreciation for integrating performance mea- about 10 minutes approximately twice a week. The success of

surement into the overall system. Both commonly used OHSMS the initiative led the senior leaders to incorrectly assume more

(ISO 45001 and ANSI/ASSP Z10) establish requirements that was better, and so increased the number of expected conver-

must be implemented as part of the overall management system sations, required documentation of them and established an

and not as a separate function of it. Clause 9 in ISO 45001 (perfor- intricate tracking system to measure the results. Ultimately, the

mance evaluation) requires that the organization ensure that its initiative became surrogated when the quantity became more

measurement activities demonstrate progress toward achievement important than the quality, and was stopped (Susca, 2019).

of the OSH objectives by reviewing incident trends, audit results Finally, Busch (2019) explores the idea of a process model by

and consultation with workers, among others. The establishment looking at phases: inputs, throughputs, outputs and outcomes.

of OSH objectives is one of the primary tasks associated with the In his framework, the inputs would be leading indicators and

FIZKES/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS organization in establishing the context of its unique OHSMS are measured by factors such as resource use and organiza-

(ISO 45001-2018). Similarly, Section 9 in ANSI/ASSP Z10 (evalu- tional competence. His model uses the term “throughput”

ation and corrective action) requires monitoring and measuring rather than “process,” but it is similar in that it represents the

through several indicators such as incident investigations and activities being performed by the organization. One area of

audits, and using those results to understand how and whether differentiation from the previous discussion is Busch’s distinc-

the OHSMS is functioning as intended. It further considers vari- tion between outputs and outcomes. In his model, an output

ous types of indicators and considers what are commonly thought is something that an organization has control over and come

of as lagging to be a means to evaluate outcomes and leading to from throughputs. Outputs can be represented by activities

promote improvement (ANSI/ASSP Z10.0-2019). completed or products ready to be sold, among others. An out-

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 33

come is something an organization does not have control over, track two outputs: 1. MOC will be used according to the pro-
typically represented by injuries, illnesses and other types of cess criteria at least 75% of the time the first year and 95% of the
incidents. Indicators used to measure input and output can be time in the second year; and 2. at least 75% of the documents
qualitative or quantitative (Busch, 2019). will be correctly completed during the first year and 95% in the
second year.
As a way of tying all of the preceding discussion together,
two examples presented here approach the use of indicators Note: This process is not tied to a reduction in the organiza-
from a process approach and demonstrate how effective in- tion’s incident rate as an output indicator because there are too
put and output indicators can be developed that measure many variables that could impact any reduction. However, the
quality and are removed from traditional indicators related goal of increasing the correct use of an upstream process like
to incidents. One has a focus primarily on OSH performance MOC can be expected to accomplish that objective.
measurement, while the other looks at how indicators can be
connected to a business goal. Example 2: Indicator Tied to
Organization’s Business Strategic Plan
Putting It Back Together With Examples
Example 1: Indicators Tied Directly An engineering firm provides environmental field services
to Incident Activity & Rates to clients that include wetland delineations, habitat and species
surveys, pipeline surveys, Phase I and II investigations, and ar-
An organization that manufactures pharmaceuticals has cheological surveys. Due to the success of this type of service in
been tracking the causes from incident investigations for many terms of client satisfaction, the senior vice president of the busi-
years. At the end of each year, tabulations are made to evaluate ness unit establishes a goal of a 25% increase in gross revenues
overall OSH performance and identify areas for improvement. year over year as part of the next year’s strategic plan. A possible
After several years, the OSH director notices an increase in hindrance to this goal is that the organization’s TRIR is above
the number of investigations that identify with lack of use of the industry average and above the benchmark set by some of the
management of change (MOC) or failure to use it correctly as current clients as well as potential new clients the sales team will
a cause. The organization undertakes a survey of MOC users, be approaching. The TRIR may impact the business unit’s ability
which indicates a lack of knowledge of MOC among the prima- to reach the goal unless actions being taken to reduce it can be
ry leaders of the process. A recommendation is made to senior demonstrated and current year rates are closer to what is required.
leaders by the OSH director to improve the use of MOC to re-
duce incidents and is approved. On any given day, more than 100 field staff may be involved
in these projects, which often include working in all types of
Input Indicators weather and challenging terrain and are physically demanding.
The MOC process will be improved by: Historically, this has led to numerous slip, trip and fall inju-
•A review and revision of the current process and associated ries, resulting in minor soft-tissue injuries (e.g., twisted ankles,
documents will be completed by a working group that includes bumps on the head or knees) that would not automatically
the OSH director, several key MOC users and one senior leader. require an emergency room visit but are uncomfortable enough
The indicator will be measured by successful completion of the that the field staff are concerned about whether they should be
review and revision process within a specified time frame and seen by a medical professional. Without knowing what to do or
with the participation of identified stakeholders as measured by having anyone they can trust to give medical advice, the staff
their participation in various meetings and a review of the revi- more often err on the side of caution, visit a local urgent care
sions to the process document. center and their minor injury ends up as an OSHA recordable.
•All MOC users will participate in training on the new The OSH department believes some of these minor injuries
MOC process. Verification of retention of the training as an could be treated with self-care recommendations (e.g., ice, ele-
input indicator will be measured by successfully completing a vation, over-the-counter pain relievers, rest). However, the OSH
traditional quiz following the training, as well interviews by department also lacks medical expertise. To solve this problem
the OSH director with trainees at 1, 2 and 4 weeks post train- and support the business unit’s growth goal, the OSH depart-
ing. The interviews will not involve a specific score but will be ment contracts with an external medical triage services vendor.
judged by the OSH director on a qualitative basis.
•Three different communications will be used across the Input Indicators
organization to roll out and launch the new process and docu- •The OSH department will vet up to three medical triage
ments, and will include postings on the organization’s intranet, services vendors based on criteria currently established by
use in the weekly OSH brief and posters in breakrooms. In- the organization for all vendors as well as additional criteria
formal conversations with the OSH director and workers will established for this specific vendor (i.e., available 24/7, phones
track the success of the communications. answered by at least nurse-level medical professional, not affil-
iated with the workers’ compensation carrier) and recommend
Output Indicators one for use. The indicator will be measured by successful com-
Success of the revised MOC process in reducing incidents pletion of the review and contracting process within a specified
will be measured by: time frame.
•MOC being listed as a cause of an incident during the inves- •The OSH department will develop protocols with the ven-
tigation process, because it was either not performed correctly dor and for staff for the use of the vendor. The indicator will
or not performed at all, will be reduced by 75% the first year of be measured by successful completion of the development and
implementation and by 90% the second year. approval process within a specified time frame. The protocols
•The OSH director will convene a working group of stake- will establish an expectation that when there is no obvious need
holders including MOC users and at least one senior leader who for emergency medical care, the field staff will contact the ven-
will review all completed MOC documents. The review will dor first, but will also include a statement providing that field
staff will use their judgement.

34 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

Pamela Walaski,

CSP, has been a dedi-

cated OSH profession-

al for more than 25

years. She is a senior

program director for

•Working with the communications department, the OSH References Specialty Technical
department will develop and deliver training to all staff on the Consultants Inc.,
protocol as well as create other forms of communication that ANSI/ASSP. (2019a). Guidance and imple- a specialized man-
will include wallet cards for field staff and posters for all offices. mentation manual for ANSI/ASSP Z10.0-2019 agement consulting
The indicator will be measured by successful completion of the occupational health and safety management firm. She also serves
training and communication delivery within a specified time systems (ANSI/ASSP Z10.100-2019). as an adjunct faculty
frame. Successful retention of the training will be measured member in the safety
with an output indicator. ANSI/ASSP. (2019b). Occupational health sciences program at
and safety management systems (ANSI/ASSP Indiana University of
Output Indicators Z10.0-2019). Pennsylvania. Walaski
•As soon as the medical triage services vendor is launched, is a professional mem-
the OSH department will begin tracking staff satisfaction with ANSI/ASSP/ISO. (2018). Occupational health ber of ASSP’s Western
the service and correctly following the protocol by contacting and safety management systems—Require- Pennsylvania Chapter,
each user within 48 hours of initial contact with the vendor and ments with guidance for use (ANSI/ASSP/ISO and is serving a 3-year
asking a series of five preplanned questions. The results will be 45001-2018). term as ASSP Direc-
communicated to the business unit and to the field staff on a tor-At-Large. She has a
quarterly basis along with any recommended revisions to the Busch, C. (2019). If you can’t measure it, national reputation as
protocol as a result. maybe you shouldn’t: Reflections on measuring a seminar leader and
•As a measure of the retention of the training and of the safety, indicators and goals. Mind The Risk. conference presenter
communication methods noted, the OSH department will also on multiple OSH
contact any staff person who does not use the vendor as direct- DuPont Sustainable Solutions. (2018, July 6). topics including risk
ed by the protocols within 24 hours of receiving the incident DuPont Bradley Curve. www.consultdss.com/ management, OHSMS
report to better understand the reasons for not using the vendor bradley-curve-infographic and serious injury
as required. The results will be communicated to the business prevention.
unit and to the field staff on a quarterly basis along with any ERM Group Inc. (2018). ERM 2018 global
recommended revisions to the protocol as a result. safety survey report. www.erm.com/global
•The OSH department will continue its standard report to assets/documents/publications/2018/erm-2018
the organization on all reported incidents—near-hits, minor -global-safety-survey-report.pdf
injuries, injuries with medical care—on a quarterly basis. These
reports will include total number of each type of incident as Esposito, P. (2004, May). Leading and pro-
well as 12-month rolling incident rates (including TRIR) and cess metrics. Presentation at AIHce 2004 Con-
will also highlight incidents where usage of the medical triage
service resulted in a recommendation for self-care that was suc- ference, Atlanta, GA.
cessful as reported by the staff person.
•The number of minor soft-tissue injuries that are diverted GRI. (2018). GRI 403: Occupational health and safety 2018. Global
from medical care will decrease by at least 25% in the first year
of vendor use and by 50% after 18 months. (As a result, the Sustainability Standards Board.
TRIR is also expected to decrease, but the organization de-
clined to place a reduction number in place as an indicator. Not Harris, M. & Tayler, B. (2019). Don’t let metrics undermine your busi-
all of the organization’s injuries are soft tissue and it wanted
to keep the focus on injuries where intervention by a medical ness. Harvard Business Review, 97(5).
triage vendor could not only divert care but also recommend
medical care when appropriate.) Hopkins, A. (2007). Thinking about process safety indicators (Working
Note: Successful achievement of the indicators noted will not
only reduce the number of injuries where medical care is sought, paper 53). National Research Center for OHS Regulation. https://fdocu
but also the subsequent reduction in incident rates will support
the business unit’s achievement of its increased sales goal. ments.in/document/hopkins-thinking-about-process-safety-indicators

Conclusion .html
The genesis for this article stems from a request for assistance
Inouye, J. (2015). Practical guide to leading indicators: Metrics, case
in transitioning from lagging to leading indicators as part of
the organization’s OSH measurement. Assuming, incorrectly studies and strategies. Campbell Institute, National Safety Council.
as it turns out, that it would be a simple process, a few hours of
research and reviewing published articles began the journey to www.nsc.org/Portals/0/Documents/CambpellInstituteandAwardDocu
a much different understanding and appreciation for the past,
current and future state. Traditional methods and indicators ments/WP-PracticalGuidetoLI.pdf
for measuring OSH performance need to be reexamined and,
in some cases, repurposed by the OSH professional community. Inouye, J. (2019). An implementation guide to leading indicators.
This article draws on both historical concepts as well as newer
thinking to present a view of OSH performance measurement Campbell Institute, National Safety Council. www.thecampbellinstitute
that is better aligned with business operations and integrated
with a systems approach to OSH. PSJ .org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Campbell-Institute-An-Implementa

tion-Guide-to-Leading-Indicators.pdf

International Standards Organization (ISO) Technical Committee

(TC) 283 to ISO 45001. (2019, Oct.). ISO/TC 283 Communique: 3rd

plenary meeting, Kigali. https://committee.iso.org/files/live/sites/tc283/

files/Documents/Rwanda%202019%20TC283%20communique1.pdf

Manuele, F.A. (2009, Dec.). Leading and lagging indicators: Do they

add value to the practice of safety? Professional Safety, 54(12), 28-33.

OSHA. (2019). Using leading indicators to improve safety and health

outcomes (OSHA Publication No. 3970). www.osha.gov/leadingindica

tors/docs/OSHA_Leading_Indicators.pdf

Seabrook, K. (2019a, Mar. 8). Connecting the dots: Occupation-

al safety and health and business performance. International Labor

Organization. www.ilo.org/global/topics/safety-and-health-at-work/

events-training/events-meetings/world-day-for-safety/33thinkpieces/

WCMS_681587/lang--en/index.htm

Seabrook, K. (2019b). Putting people back into sustainability: A report

of the 4th Human Capital Global Summit, Paris, 03 April 2019. Center

for Safety and Health Sustainability. www.centershs.org/assets/pdf/

CSHS_report_April_2019.pdf

Sinelnikov, S. Inouye, J. & Kerper, S. (2013). Transforming EHS per-

formance measurement through leading indicators. Campbell Institute,

National Safety Council. www.nsc.org/Portals/0/Documents/Cambpell

InstituteandAwardDocuments/WP-Transforming-EHS-through-Lead

ing-Indicators.pdf

Susca, P.T. (2019, June). Measuring up: Evaluating effectiveness rather

than results. Professional Safety, 64(6), 22-24.

Wachter, J.K. (2012, April). Trailing safety indicators: Enhancing

their value through statistics. Professional Safety, 57(4), 48-60.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 35

SAFETY MANAGEMENT
Peer-Reviewed

SAFETY &
ENTROPY

A Leadership Issue

By Rodney Grieve and Tania Van der Stap

CCURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIES and operational prac- occupational risks associated with four factors present in every FG TRADE/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS
tices related to risk management seldom consider the cyclical organization: technology (plant/equipment); human resources
nature of risk and the tendency for systems, organizational fac- (people); physical environment (workplace); and work process.
tors and behaviors to degrade over time. This can occur at the Each factor presents occupational risk, which is minimized
macro level, for example, through cost-cutting on infrastruc- through the implementation of a systems approach. These fac-
ture, plant or equipment maintenance, and workforce compe- tors are initially imagined in a perfect world designed to deliver
tencies, with potential consequences for productivity and safety an ideal level of production, quality and safety.
performance. At the granular level, organizations can fail to
effectively leverage the opportunities for their frontline leaders The model describes two types of risk: residual and entropic.
to build capacity, relying on technical and scheduled interac- Even with perfectly designed systems in each of the factors,
tions to influence behaviors rather than meaningful, enduring residual risk (represented by the green bar in Figure 1) is the
engagement that articulates desired outcomes and builds the ever-present risk that systems are unable to reduce in the short-
risk management culture. term due to technological, financial and knowledge constraints
This article is highly relevant to safety professionals and (Mol, 2003, pp. 21-22).
other disciplines involved in the management of organizational
risk who are seeking to make a step-change from safety-based As systems degrade (shown by the dotted blue line), entropic
to risk-based thinking. It has been written with bookends, hav- risk (red line) starts to rise and move toward a state of chaos.
ing the entropy loss causation model applied to systems at the These risk types (residual and entropic) hinder the organization
front end and to organizational factors at the back end (Part 2, from achieving the ideal state. To counteract entropic risk, the
by Van der Stap). The central piece explains the practical appli- management team normally takes corrective action to regain
cation of the model in relation to building frontline supervisor an optimal level of safety, production and quality. The model
and workforce leadership capacity (Part 1, by Grieve). indicates that a robust preventive maintenance program is the
most effective way to minimize the impacts of degradation and
Part 1, by Rodney Grieve resultant entropic risk. Catching the failure prior to it occur-
The entropy model (Figure 1) as described in Productive ring minimizes losses to production, quality deficiencies and
safety incidents.
Safety Management (Mol, 2003) and “Risk Leadership: A Mul-
tidisciplinary Approach” (Van der Stap, 2018) explores the In each of the four factors, organizations should strive to
design preventive maintenance programs and scheduled cor-
KEY TAKEAWAYS rective actions to mitigate catastrophic failures. To maximize
efficiency and minimize costs, the management team must de-
•Building on the entropy model (Van der Stap, 2018), there are two termine the optimal time for intervention to get most value out
of the system. There is an organizational risk that leaders will
types of risk: residual and entropic. The latter is caused by degrada- accept a level of degradation if the system continues to provide
tion of systems and, as explained in this article, also by degradation performance that is acceptable. The ability to push a piece of
of human behavior and organizational factors. equipment to the edge of failure prior to spending any money
on downtime and preventive maintenance may be considered
•To manage risk effectively, leaders must understand why degrada- optimal. In addition, identical pieces of equipment tend to
act in a predictable manner so they can be managed as a fleet.
tion occurs in human behavior and how to support people to mini- However, when working with people, pushing them to their
mize entropic safety risk on a continual and consistent basis. breaking point is not effective and what works for one does not
work for all. With little or no empirical data to support these
•Leaders can engage employees more effectively through interac- decisions, managers often choose an arbitrary period (e.g.,
weekly, monthly, annually) in which to conduct safety preven-
tions that develop new technical competencies while also building in- tive “maintenance” for employees.
dividual confidence and resilience through recognition and feedback,
which gradually flows on to higher levels of organizational capacity. Mol (2003) addresses some important systems that organi-
zations must establish to give structure and balance to address
•Leaders must understand the entropic risk associated with orga-

nizational factors such as leadership, competencies, management
systems and resilience. These are also subject to degradation unless
managed proactively.

36 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

degradation of the human resources factor. Overarching behav- the initial degradation, which begins almost immediately.

ioral drivers (e.g., vision, mission, core values, defined culture), In Phase 3, there is recovery from degradation to a period of

systems (e.g., technical training, rules/regulations, policies/ optimization (Phase 4) before heading into Phase 5 (cultural

procedures) and decision-making tools that ensure compati- degradation). After Phase 5, the cyclical nature of the process is

bility of production and safety provide a fully integrated, sys- recognized by entering Phase N.

tematic approach to risk management. To maintain the quality In Phase 1, with the implementation of any change, whether

of these systems, management teams try to calendarize their starting new or making changes in an existing situation, the

support with annual training, monthly inspections and weekly initial degradation starts as soon as the change is put into prac-

tailgate talks. The behavioral drivers that lead to optimal hu- tice. This initial degradation is most likely caused by a lack of

man achievement may be eroded by routine communication knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) as well as a lack of confi-

that lacks heartfelt commitment or misses the mark of effective dence or motivation to implement the change as designed. This

engagement. Structure and systems are necessary and set the lack of competence does not imply that the person affected by

framework, but it is important to understand why degradation the change cannot do the work as described, it is that the person

occurs in human behavior and what leaders need to do for their has not successfully completed that work in accordance with the

people to minimize resultant rising entropic risk on a more change. The person may quickly adopt the change and commit;

continual and consistent basis. in such case the initial degradation in Phase 2 will be minimal. If

The entropy model “does not explicitly illustrate the benefits the worker struggles with the new way or does not believe in the

of continuous maintenance FIGURE 1
and monitoring because it
depicts maintenance as oc- THE ENTROPY MODEL

curring in a block of time”

(Mol, 2003). To overcome this,

other versions of the model,

discussed in this article, have

been developed to depict that

entropic risk can be held down

in a low and steady state using

a proactive approach to the

maintenance of system fac-

tors. Specifically, this article

discusses the critical leader-

ship behaviors of continuous

maintenance and monitoring

that will keep entropic risk at

this low and steady state in

the human resources factor.

[Note that the original entropy

model is a high-level, graphical

representation of observable

cycles related to individual

and organizational behaviors/ Note. Adapted from Productive Safety Management (Figure 1.5, p. 13), by T. Mol, 2003, CRC Press.
states and is not intended to be

calibrated on empirical data. It

was used in Productive Safety FIGURE 2
Management (Mol, 2003) to
develop the risk management CAUSATION OF ENTROPIC RISK IN THE PEOPLE FACTOR

system enabling safety and

production to be pursued con-

currently.]

Before looking at the con-

tinuous maintenance and

monitoring of an individual’s

performance, the causes of

degradation must be appre-

ciated. Figure 2 shows the

never-ending cycle of degra-

dation, recovery, optimization,

degradation, recovery, etc., as

phases. Phase 1 is the ideally

designed system: a system

without emotion, history

or interpretation. Phase 2 is

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 37

FIGURE 3

LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS NECESSARY AT EACH PHASE

FIGURE 4Incidents change (i.e., behavior) is self-satisfying such as productivity.
However, when looking at safety performance, where the ben-
TOTAL INCIDENTS BY YEARS OF efit is not as obvious, the level of commitment and motivation
SERVICE FOR INDUSTRIAL SERVICES will eventually wane (Phase 5) as cultural degradation creep
COMPANY, 1995-2000 begins again. The organizational risk is that leaders who believe
their work was done once the employee moves into Phase 4 now
20 see any failure (i.e., an incident) as the employee’s fault, which
leads to discipline and retraining as the corrective actions of
18 choice. Cultural degradation is not because of a lack of KSAs,
but a lack of recognition and feedback to ensure that the KSAs
16 are applied consistently.

14 As a professional observation, most organizational systems
are designed to support frontline leaders with an employee in
12 Phase 1. These employees could be new to the organization or
current employees facing a change in one of the other three fac-
10 tors (work process, technology, physical environment). Figure 3,
Phase 1, illustrates leadership behaviors necessary for the de-
8 velopment of the KSAs and control systems. Frontline leaders
struggle in a couple of areas: Collaborative specific, motivating,
6 attainable, relevant, trackable (SMART) goals and tasks, and a
shared definition of success.
4
Collaborative SMART goals and tasks: A 2015 Gallup arti-
2 cle states, “Based on Gallup’s work with companies worldwide,
only about half of employees strongly agree that they know
0 what is expected of them at work” (Nink, 2015). No matter how
0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 6 6 to 7 7 to 8 8 to 9 9 to 10 SMART is defined, the collaborative piece is often missing.
Employees' years of service Leaders seem to think it is their job to define the goals and
tasks that employees complete. If the thinking is changed to
change or their ability to implement it, then the initial degrada- focus on the results that need to be delivered (e.g., productivity,
tion will be severe as the person begins to revert to old habits. safety, quality) and then engage each employee in a collabora-
tive manner to determine the specific, trackable, and achievable
Phase 3 is where the individual employee has developed the goals and tasks necessary to attain those results, those desired
KSAs and the commitment to successfully complete the task. outcomes will automatically become much more relevant and
This phase may be long lasting or may start to quickly degrade motivating to the employee. Relevance is critical in getting an
again. How long this phase lasts depends on the culture (i.e., employee to commit to the process.
“the way we do things around here”). A culture that strongly
supports that KSA through recognition and feedback maintains Shared definition of success: Too often the definitions of
a low level of entropic risk and prevents further degradation. success are related to a number. In production, it is throughput,

Many frontline leaders, particularly in highly technical en-
vironments, believe that once an employee moves into Phase
4 the leader’s work is done, and the employee will maintain
that level of performance. This can be true in cases where the

38 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

product, batches and uptime. In safety, it is injuries, audits and required changes to produce the desired results. The leader can
violations. In quality, it is defects and customer complaints. do this by acknowledging and reaffirming the employee’s past
When the definition of success is tied to a number, managers success in applying transferable KSAs that will help the person
and supervisors start to chase the number. Unfortunately, this be successful. The leader can also provide perspective so the
leads to conflict between desired results (e.g., be safe but hurry employee does not become frustrated as that individual strug-
up and get it done). Therefore, the definition of success must gles to apply the new skills. For example, if productivity is not
be about the culture created. Reframing current mindsets, this going as planned, a frustrated worker may consider bypassing
culture should be based on collaboration and continuous im- a safety feature to get caught up on production. A leader’s em-
provement centered on effective risk management. To achieve pathy, collaborative problem-solving and redirecting feedback
this, each decision can be passed through the filter: Will this can stop this from happening. Collaborative problem-solving
support the desired culture? This is the rationale behind the allows the employee to continue to build technical competen-
“reasonableness test” in Productive Safety Management, which cies and confidence with the leader’s guidance. This enables
defines the culture as driven by “managing risk to achieve pro- solutions that are consistent with the company’s values and
duction/productivity/schedule, quality work and safety perfor- applicable safety rules.
mance concurrently” (Mol, 2003). The premise is if a culture of
success is the primary modus operandi, the organization will As noted, moving into Phase 4, many leaders think their de-
have the flexibility, trust and resilience to deliver on whatever velopment work is done and now all they must do is manage the
numbers are placed before managers and supervisors. workload. This is an erroneous assumption, as a spike in unde-
sirable results will occur eventually, as indicated by the entropy
In Figure 4, it is during the initial degradation (Phase 2) that model. To minimize the eventual cultural degradation due to
leaders struggle when it comes to maintaining safety perfor- a lack of motivation or complacency, the leader must maintain
mance. From 1995 to 2000, the author tracked safety incidents purposeful contact with the employee. Too often, that contact
for an international industrial services company based on years devolves into two categories: technical topics (the work) and so-
of service for the employees involved (Figure 4). According to cial topics. What is missing is the contact about the person and
Trotto (2016): that individual’s engagement in the work process. This should
include specific positive feedback on the high levels of compe-
Employees in their first month on the job have more tence and autonomy that the employee demonstrates. Carnegie
than three times the risk for a lost-time injury than (1936) advises us to “give a person a fine reputation to live up
workers who have been at their job for more than a to.” This is great advice that is applicable in Phase 4 (Figure 3).
year, according to research from the Toronto-based The leader should recognize the employee as the expert and
Institute for Work and Health. encourage the individual’s innovative input while providing
developing feedback, defined by Grieve and Greenwood (2008)
Further evidence is provided in Figure 4. This chart is a poi- as “positive feedback with an idea or suggestion attached,” in
gnant example on the macro level of employment time, and it creating continuous improvement across all system factors.
can be equally applied to any change in the workplace (e.g., new Employees are thereby praised for their efforts, valued for their
task, new process, new client, new equipment, new manage- abilities and motivation, and allowed to be optimal (within a
ment). This chart can also be explained by the entropy model system perspective) rather than perfect.
and addressed with more effective leadership, as explained by
progressing through Figure 3, Phase 2. Cultural degradation occurs slowly over time as behaviors
inconsistent with the values and the rules start to become part
In Phase 2, the frontline leaders play significant roles as of the culture. The incident trend line for the industrial services
teachers and supporters (Figure 3, Phase 2). The leader’s inter- company, referenced in the Phase 2 discussion, showed another
action with the employee as that person starts to apply their rise in the incident rate when employees reached about 5 years
new KSAs in a new environment must not only be about the of experience. In safety, it sometimes starts with a “be safe”
technical work, but about the employee’s confidence in com- mentality to separate safety results from production results.
pleting that work. The traditional safety measures of OSHA recordable injury rate
and experience modification rate drive leaders and employees
Phase 1 usually occurs in the training room while Phase 2 to adopt the “be safe” mentality. This mentality is demonstrated
occurs in the work environment. The frontline leader’s words by statements such as “as long as everyone goes home with all
and actions must be aligned with what the employee was told their fingers and toes.”
in the training room when it comes to the company’s values
and work process. It is the frontline leader’s opportunity to This culture accepts safety failures if those failures do not
demonstrate the work, listen to concerns, answer questions and result in an injury. When an employee repeatedly works with-
explain why we do what we do. By improving the employee’s out proper PPE or implementing lockout/tagout, those behav-
KSAs and confidence, the operational leader minimizes the iors become ingrained in the culture and are often ignored,
entropic risk presented in this phase. Note that this process is in the author’s opinion, by the leadership until someone gets
not limited to new employees. An experienced employee who is hurt. So, as an employee enters Phase 5, the leader must quickly
asked to take on a new role, to operate a new piece of equipment demonstrate behaviors that minimize the degradation. Unfor-
or perform at a new client’s location goes through the same ini- tunately, consistent with the “be safe” mentality, the frontline
tial degradation due to a lack of KSAs accompanied by lack of leader does not intervene until an injury occurs. With a lack
confidence or motivation. of understanding of cultural degradation and few tools in
their tool belt of leadership skills to address the situation, op-
As the leader works to recognize and minimize the initial erational leaders revert to the same old responses: retrain and
degradation, there are strategies they can employ in Phase 3 discipline. Neither of these so-called corrective actions address
to help the employee move back to that optimal level of per- the underlying issue of cultural degradation and both further
formance, as shown in Figure 3, Phase 3. The focus is building
the confidence and motivation for the employee to adopt the

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 39

impact organizational trust. FIGURE 5

Before getting to the point of CYCLE OF FAILING, MENDING, OPTIMIZING, FAILING

failure, the frontline leader

must listen with purpose, par-

ticularly around engagement.

With the employee, the leader

must acknowledge high levels

of contribution and facilitate

self-reliant problem-solving.

Too often, leaders believe they

know all the answers. This

over-supervision of someone

in Phase 5 can quickly lead to

micromanagement and further

disengagement. As in Phase 3,

here it is also important to ad-

dress unacceptable behaviors

with redirecting feedback and

providing perspective so that

neither the employee nor the

leadership team overreact.

Figure 3 (p. 38) reinforces

that the normal cycle leading to

future degradation (Phase N)

is mitigated by continuing the

leadership behaviors discussed

in Phases 4 and 5 as needed. Note. Adapted from Productive Safety Management (Figure 1.5, p. 13), by T. Mol, 2003, CRC Press.

During safety leadership

development workshops,

frontline leaders often try to dismiss these leadership KSAs zational level. Area 1 shows the nonexistent, perfect world

with the following reasoning: “My team is a great group who where risk is absent. At Area 2, the degradation of systems

have been here a long time and know exactly what they are leads to rising entropic risk and inevitable, evident failure.

doing.” The entropy model warns that every time there is a Area 3 is synonymous with post-incident or loss reaction

change in one of the system factors (e.g., technology/equip- with mending of broken systems through maintenance prac-

ment, work process, work environment) that impacts an em- tices. Where such practices become robust, the organization

ployee, that person starts back at Phase 1. Collectively, if the achieves optimal safety, production and quality in Area 4.

whole team is undergoing the change, the risk to continuity of Complacency over time then results in degradation again as

production, quality of the work and safety performance can shown in Area 5 and so the cycle is repeated (shown in pre-

have serious impacts on the business. vious figures as Phase N).

Unfortunately, many organizations fail to develop these Figure 6 ties the entirety of the discussion into a single

critical leadership KSAs in their operational leaders relying illustration of the cycle of entropic risk as it relates to organi-

instead on technical competencies, rules, regulations and zational capacity, with the primary matters of concern being

hope that it will be enough to keep their employees safe. The leadership, competencies, management systems and resource-
upside is that these leadership KSAs are learnable and that
fulness/resilience. Management systems are included in this
both initial and cultural entropy in the human factor can be
minimized by effective continuous leadership at the frontline suite highlighting the need for alignment of values, goals and
and middle management levels. objectives in the written form, with work as understood in the
verbal form communicated by leaders.

Part 2 by Tania Van der Stap An extensive dissertation could be written on the practi-

cal implications of Figure 6. It is enough for this article to

Thus far, the focus of this article has been the critical role emphasize the need for continuous attention to and mainte-

of the frontline supervisor in providing leadership at the op- nance of leadership capability, of employee competencies and

erational level to address the impact of change on employees. the organization’s modus operandi as driven and captured

This is particularly important because of the potential for by business management systems. In 2003, Van der Stap

degradation of KSAs and the organizational culture. In the coined the term “resourcefulness” to visualize the overflow

big picture, senior managers need to be concerned about two from the organization’s learning potential resulting from

macro-level issues. These are degradation of systems and or- investment in leadership and competency development. This

ganizational capacity. is likened to the contemporary term “resilience.” Resource-

fulness/resilience leads to:

Preventing Leadership & Cultural Degradation •better systems review and therefore management of risk

Figure 5 illustrates the cycle of failing, mending, optimiz- •improved problem-solving and decision-making

ing and recurrent failing using the original entropy model, •effective safety risk leadership at all levels

which aligns to the discussion in Part 1 but at an organi- •system factors raised to optimal safety, production and quality

40 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

FIGURE 6 Rodney Grieve, founder of
BRANTA Worldwide, has worked
THE ENTROPY MODEL, CAPACITY with clients throughout North
& A STRATEGY FOR RESILIENCE America, Europe, Asia and Africa to
help their leadership teams deliver
outstanding safety results. With
more than 25 years of safety and
leadership experience, he provides
a new understanding of the leader’s
role in creating a culture of success
that balances productivity, qual-
ity and safety. Grieve is author of
Defend Your Profits: Safety Tools
for Bottom Line Improvement and
SOAR: A Gate-to-Gate Journey of
Leadership Essentials.

Note. Adapted from Productive Safety Management (Figure 1.5, p. 13), by T. Mol, 2003, CRC Press. Tania Van der Stap, principal
director for ALIGN Risk Manage-
ment, is a thought leader in the
OSH profession, having written
Productive Safety Management
and contributed a chapter to Safety
Leadership and Professional Devel-
opment. Van der Stap has extensive
experience in OSH management in
construction, mining, gas, transpor-
tation and other sectors. Her ex-
pertise in integrated management
systems and culture development
focuses particularly on the impact
of production pressure on work-
place safety.

The ability to leverage resourcefulness depends, however, ing losses in production or productivity, quality deficien-
on the strategy to ensure embedded high-quality manage- cies or safety incidents as a result of degradation. The first
ment systems, competencies and leadership, with the know- step in creating positive change is to recognize this risk at
how to identify, correct, honestly discuss and proactively the operational level.
maintain these inputs. The gap is often that managers and
supervisors are unable to visualize and articulate this vision. The frontline supervisor has a critical role as a risk cham-
An organization’s management team should be concerned if pion, seeking to optimize production, quality and safety, in
the benefits and returns on investment start to degrade. In consultation with and in support of the workforce. Under-
contemporary terms, this relates to erosion of the organiza- standing the nature of risk, not only in terms of physical in-
tion’s resilience and capacity to adapt to change and poten- puts, but also behaviorally and culturally, is a crucial element
tially the business’s sustainability. in building this capability. The opportunity for the safety
profession is to lead a step-change by initiating a transforma-
Some of the major industrial disasters that have occurred tion from safety-based to risk-based thinking whereby safety
over the past 50 years indicate that organizations had not rec- performance, production/productivity and quality work are
ognized their exposure to entropic risk. For example, at BP’s pursued as compatible organizational goals. PSJ
Texas City refinery, which exploded in 2005, CSB explained
that production pressures and cost-cutting programs were the References
cause of the incident. Management had relied on injury data as
evidence of safety performance and were not aware of the poor Carnegie, D. (1936). How to win friends and influence people. Simon
safety culture at the plant (Isiadinso, 2015). In 2014, a DuPont & Schuster.
chemical release killed four workers. The CSB chair indicated,
“What we are seeing here in this incident in LaPorte is definite- Grieve, R. & Greenwood, R. (2008). SOAR: A gate-to-gate journey of
ly a problem of safety culture in the corporation of DuPont” leadership essentials. BRANTA Worldwide Inc.
(Hosier, 2015). In both cases, the entropy model would prompt
an investigation into degraded states (e.g., the presence of criti- Hosier, F. (2015, Feb. 13). CBS chief: DuPont has safety culture prob-
cal levels of entropic risk) within systems and also, importantly, lem. Safety News Alert. www.safetynewsalert.com/csb-chief-dupont
organizational factors (e.g., considering how the organization -has-safety-culture-problem
manages risk not just safety). Clearly, safety can be too easily
pigeonholed into a set of key performance indicators and a silo Isiadinso, C. (2015). BP Texas City refinery disaster—Accident and
rather than being fully integrated into management systems, prevention report. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2317.4569
practices and the true organizational culture.
Mol, T. (2003). Productive safety management. CRC Press.
In these and other cases, senior managers were not aware Nink, M. (2015, Oct. 15). Many employees don’t know what’s expect-
of the degraded state of the business’s systems or organi- ed of them at work. Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/
zational capacity until an inevitable catastrophe occurred. 186164/employees-don-know-expected-work.aspx
Well ahead of such disasters, organizations may be suffer- Trotto, S. (2016, May 22). New workers, higher risk. Safety+Health.
www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com/articles/14053-new-workers
-higher-risk
Van der Stap, T. (2018). Risk leadership: A multidisciplinary ap-
proach. In R. Olawoyin and D.C. Hill (Eds.), Safety leadership and
professional development (pp. 399-413). ASSP.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 41

MATH TOOLBOX

SEEING IS BELIEVING

Helping Workers Understand How Load Angles Affect Sling Tension

By Mitch Ricketts

Math Toolbox is designed to help readers apply STEM principles to everyday safety issues. Many readers may
feel apprehensive about math and science. This series employs various communication strategies to make the
learning process easier and more accessible.

The July 2020 Math Toolbox article the previous article to calculate maxi- practices. This can be especially chal-
(“The Case of the Overloaded Sling,” mum rated loads for rigging angles that lenging for slings and rigging because
PSJ July 2020, pp. 48-52) explored the differ from those listed in manufacturer’s of the complex nature of the geometry.
extreme stresses created in sling legs charts and labels. When difficult concepts are involved,
rigged at certain angles. This article will learners often benefit from hands-on ex-
consider an easy-to-build training device Training Device to Help Workers perimentation with working models (Bu-
to help workers understand how angles Understand Tension in Sling Legs lunuz & Jarrett, 2010). Figure 1 illustrates
affect tension. After examining the train- materials used to build a working model
ing device, the article will discuss two As safety professionals, we are often of a bridle sling to help learners visualize
variations of the equation introduced in called upon to train workers and explain the way forces vary when loading angles
the reasons we observe standard safety change. In the model, spring scales serve
as sling legs. The spring scales simul-
FIGURE 1 taneously display tension as electronic
angle finders display the angle of loading.
DEMONSTRATION SLING: MATERIALS Figures 2 and 3 show the model in use,
while Figure 4 shows the insertion of an
Materials for the training device (not to scale). Top left: two spring scales to be used as sling legs (dig- additional scale to demonstrate how the
ital scales will also work). Bottom left: two electronic angle finders and bands for attachment to the combined tension in the sling legs may
spring scales. Top right: free-standing frame, sized appropriately for the sling and weights. The frame exceed the total weight of the load.
used by the author is made of 2- x 4-in. lumber with 1/4-in. plywood scraps for corner braces. Hardware
at the top consists of 5/16-in. eye bolts, washers, nuts and S-hooks. The S-hooks are closed around the The author began using training models
eye bolts, but the free end of each S-hook remains open to permit easy attachment of spring scales in such as this because workers and students
different configurations. The frame shown is about 41-in. high and 42-in. wide, with two 15-in. stabi- sometimes express confusion about the
lizer boards attached perpendicularly at bottom to resist tipping. The entire frame can be made from effects of loading angles on stresses in
two 8-ft boards and a bit of scrap plywood. Middle right: lifting beam made of 2- x 2-in. lumber (24-in. slings and other materials. The first mod-
long in this example). Lifting-beam hardware consists of 5/16-in. eye bolts, washers, nuts and S-hooks. els were rather crude (e.g., with carpenter
Bottom right: two weights (a pair of 25-lb dumbbells, in this instance) and synthetic rope for suspend- squares instead of digital angle finders).
ing the dumbbells from the lifting beam’s S-hooks. Be sure to select materials that match the size and The models continue to evolve, with a goal
weight of the scales and loads you will use in your training model. to replace the analog tension scales with
modern digital versions when funds allow.
If readers decide to use a model such as
this in their own worker training, the au-
thor recommends beginning by showing
workers how the sling-leg scales can be
moved to vary the angles of loading. Then,
ask learners to try each possible config-
uration of the sling legs to explore how
tension is affected by the angles.

Many readers have their own favorite
ways of using hands-on models in safety
training, and the author welcomes read-
ers to share their experiences. Contact
him at [email protected].

Review of Sling Tension Calculation
The July 2020 Math Toolbox consid-

ered how tension in two-leg bridle slings
varies according to the angle of loading.
This is important because excessive ten-
sion may cause sling legs to break and
drop their loads. To review, the internal
stresses in a sling leg are affected by the
angle of loading (θ, sometimes called the

42 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3

DEMONSTRATION SLING CONFIGURED DEMONSTRATION SLING WITH
WITH TWO VERTICAL LEGS TWO INCLINED LEGS (BRIDLE HITCH)

Demonstration of tension in vertical sling legs consisting of spring Demonstration of tension in sling legs (spring scales) rigged at acute
scales. At a 90° angle of loading, the tension in each sling leg equals angles in a bridle hitch. When the loading angle is less than 90°, the
half the weight of the load, and the sum of tension in both legs equals tension in each sling leg is greater than half the weight of the load, and
the total weight of the load. the sum of tension in both legs exceeds the total weight. Note: The two
unused eyebolts in the lifting beam allow trainees to experiment with a
third configuration having a different angle of loading.

horizontal angle). For loads being lifted FIGURE 4
upward, the angle of loading is the acute
angle between the sling leg and the hori- DEMONSTRATION SLING: COMBINED TENSION IN
zontal plane (Figure 5, p. 44). The sling’s SLING LEGS MAY EXCEED WEIGHT OF LOAD
rated load is the maximum allowable
load printed on the manufacturer’s label By inserting a third spring scale at top, trainees can see that the weight of the suspended load
attached to the sling. Never exceed the remains the same, even as tension varies. This demonstrates that tension does not always equal
rated load, as this may cause the sling weight, and tensile forces in sling legs may differ from tension in crane hooks, lifting beams and
to fail. (The rated load is also known as other components.
the rated capacity or working load limit,
WLL). The rated load varies depending Note: All calculations in this article with more than two legs. Finally, slings
on rigging method and angle of loading, apply to evenly loaded vertical and bridle must be used in accordance with guid-
because these factors affect tension with- slings having no more than two legs, ance published by manufacturers, Amer-
in the sling. Tension is a pulling force with no shock loading. Additional factors ican Society of Mechanical Engineers
within a material. Extreme tension can must be considered to determine sling (ASME, 2018) and OSHA (n.d.).
stretch a sling or rip it apart. For vertical- tension for other types of hitches (e.g.,
or bridle-hitch slings with one or two choker and basket hitches) and for slings Figure 2 provides a “seeing is believ-
evenly loaded legs, tension in each leg is ing” example of tension in the legs of
calculated as follows:







where:
T = tension (pull) in each sling leg due
to the force of the load at a particular angle
W = weight of the load (including the
weight of any hardware added between
the sling and the load)
N = number of sling legs
θ = angle of loading (angle from hori-
zontal)
sin = sine of the angle
Figure 5 (p. 44) illustrates the compo-
nents of the equation.

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 43

MATH TOOLBOX

a vertical sling. In Figure 2 (p. 43), the •This time, the angle of loading is 51°. where:
weight of the load (W) is the sum of This is the value of θ in the formula. Wmaximum = maximum weight that will
the 4-lb lifting beam plus the two 25-lb not exceed the rated load at the angle of
dumbbells (W = 4 + 25 + 25 = 54 lb). Based on these data, we calculate the interest, θ (maximum weight includes
Since Figure 2 depicts a two-leg sling, tension per sling leg (Tper sling leg): any hardware added between the sling
the number of legs is N = 2. Finally, both and the load)
sling legs are vertical, so the angle of T90° rated load per sling leg = manufacturer’s
loading is θ = 90°. Inserting these num-

rated load (WLL) for the single-leg, ver-
bers into the equation, we calculate the tical-hitch sling (this is the tension that
tension (Tper sling leg) as follows: In Figure 3, the tension displayed must never be exceeded)
for each spring scale is approximately N = number of sling legs
34.74 lb, as calculated. Thus, for both ex- θ = angle of loading (angle from hori-



amples, the calculated values match the zontal)
tensions displayed by the spring scales sin = sine of the angle
Our calculated value of 27 lb per leg in the training model. Note: If your cal- To illustrate this use of the modified
indeed matches the tension displayed for culation resulted in 40.28 lb, see the note equation, imagine a sling for which the
each spring scale in Figure 2. about degrees versus radians in the first manufacturer’s chart or label indicates a
example. rated load of 4,400 lb per leg when used
Note: Most calculators have a SIN in a single-leg vertical hitch (Figure 6).
button that will provide the correct Calculating Maximum Acceptable The chart in Figure 6 includes addition-
answer with keystrokes similar to the Load When Angle of Loading Differs al rated loads for other configurations,
following in this case: 54÷(2XSIN90)=. From Manufacturers’ Charts & Labels which we will ignore for now. Let’s imag-
If your calculation results in 30.20 lb, ine we will make a lift using two of these
it is likely that your calculator is set to We can use our equation to solve many same sling legs in a bridle hitch at a load
interpret angles in units of radians in- practical on-the-job rigging problems. angle of 50°. What is the maximum load
stead of degrees. The calculator manual By rearranging the formula, for exam- for the two-leg bridle sling at this unlist-
will explain how to select the degree ple, we can calculate the rated load for ed 50° angle of loading?
function (for example, many calculators angles that differ from those provided by To review, here are the data for our
have a dedicated button that toggles be- the manufacturer. To begin, look up the problem:
tween DEG, for degrees, and RAD, for weight (W) of the manufacturer’s rated •The manufacturer’s chart indicates a
radians). The procedure is different in an load for a single-leg, vertical-hitch sling. vertical rated load per sling leg of 4,400
Excel spreadsheet because the program Use this value as maximum tension (T) lb. This is the value of T90° rated load per sling leg,
requires converting the angle to radians for the rated load, because W = T for sin- representing the maximum tension that
before applying the sine function. You gle-leg vertical slings (as demonstrated must never be exceeded.
can calculate the answer in Excel for this in Math Toolbox, PSJ July 2020). We then •The sling has two legs. This is the val-
example with the following cell formula: rearrange the formula and solve for W ue of N in the formula.
=54/(2*SIN(RADIANS(90))). to find the maximum weight (i.e., rated •The angle of loading is 50°. This is the
load) at the new angle of interest. value of θ in the formula.
Figure 3 (p. 43) illustrates a second Step 1: Start with the sling tension
example, as follows: Since we are solving for the maximum equation, modified to solve for Wmaximum:
weight based on the manufacturer’s rated
•The load still weighs 54 lb. This is the load per sling leg, we rearrange the equa-




value of W in the formula. tion and adjust the subscripts for W and
T, as follows:
•The sling still has two legs. This is the
value of N in the formula.





FIGURE 5

EQUATION COMPONENTS

Bridle hitches (left) are rigged at acute angles, with legs attached to a single fitting at top. Vertical hitches (middle and right) are rigged perpendicular-
ly to the load.

44 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

FIGURE 6

SAMPLE CHART OR LABEL A

Sample load chart or label (A) for rated sling loads.

Step 2: Insert the known values for the Rated load (working load limit, WLL)
vertical rated load (T90° rated load per sling leg =
4,400 lb), number of sling legs (N = 2), Single-leg Two-leg Two-leg
and angle of loading (θ = 50°). Then solve vertical hitch vertical hitch bridle hitch
for Wmaximum:
90 90 60 45




Note: Most calculators will provide 4,400 lb 8,800 lb 7,621 lb 6,222 lb
the correct answer with keystrokes
similar to the following in this case: FIGURE 7
4400X(2XSIN50)=. If your calculation
resulted in -2,308.9 lb, see the note about SAMPLE CHART OR LABEL B
degrees versus radians in the first exam-
ple. In an Excel spreadsheet, the proper Sample load chart or label (B) for rated sling loads.
formula is: =4400*(2*SIN(RADIANS(50))).
Rated load (working load limit, WLL)
Step 3: Our calculation indicates that
6,741.19 lb is the maximum weight we Single-leg Two-leg Two-leg
can handle with a two-leg bridle sling at vertical hitch vertical hitch bridle hitch
a load angle of 50° when each sling leg
has a vertical rated load of 4,400 lb. 90 90 60 45

Important: Besides ensuring that we 2,000 lb 4,000 lb 3,464 lb 2,828 lb
do not overload the sling legs, we must
also avoid overloading any connectors, FIGURE 8
lifting devices or other hardware in-
volved in the lift. This means we can SAMPLE CHART OR LABEL C
handle 6,741.19 lb only if all components
of the rigging are rated for this load. Sample load chart or label (C) for rated sling loads.
Furthermore, our calculations apply
only for vertical- and bridle-hitch slings Rated load (working load limit, WLL)
with one or two legs. Finally, the value
we use as T90° rated load per sling leg must be the Single-leg Two-leg Two-leg
manufacturer’s rated load (or WLL) for a vertical hitch vertical hitch bridle hitch
single-leg vertical hitch.
90 90 60 45
Alternate example: To confirm that
our calculations are consistent with the 3,500 lb 7,000 lb 6,062 lb 4,949 lb
values shown in the manufacturer’s chart
or label, let’s calculate the rated load for



This confirms that our procedure
one of the angles shown in the chart. is correct. Note: If your calculation
Once again, the manufacturer’s chart Insert the current values for vertical resulted in -2,682.33 lb, see the note
indicates a vertical rated load per sling rated load per sling leg (T90° rated load per sling leg about degrees versus radians in the
leg of 4,400 lb as shown in Figure 6. To = 4,400 lb), number of sling legs (N = 2), first example.
confirm our procedures, let’s calculate and angle of loading (θ = 60°) to obtain
the maximum rated load using two of the following result: As always, we must check the specifi-
these sling legs in a bridle hitch, this time cations for our lifting devices and other
at a load angle of 60°, which we can ver-


hardware to ensure that all components
ify from the chart. Does our calculated of the rigging are rated to handle the
maximum load match that shown in the 7,621 lb maximum load.
manufacturer’s chart (i.e., 7,621 lb for the
two-leg bridle sling at a 60° angle)? Here Our calculated result can be rounded You Do the Math
is a summary of our data:
to 7,621 lb, matching the rated load for Apply your knowledge to the following
•The manufacturer’s chart indicates a
vertical rated load per sling leg of 4,400 lb. the 60°, two-leg bridle sling in Figure 6. questions. Answers are on p. 55.
This is the value of T90° rated load per sling leg.

•The sling has two legs. This is the val-
ue of N.

•The angle of loading is 60°. This is the
value of θ.

To calculate the maximum load for
the two-leg bridle hitch at the angle of
60°, we use the sling tension equation
arranged to solve for Wmaximum:

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 45

MATH TOOLBOX

1. As shown in Figure 7 (p. 45), a N = number of sling legs sling leg of 3,500 lb. This is the value of
manufacturer’s chart or label indicates Recall the data from our example T90° rated load per sling leg in the formula.
a 2,000-lb vertical rated load per sling based on Figure 8:
leg. We need to make a lift using two •The manufacturer’s chart indicates a •The sling has two legs. This is the val-
of these sling legs in a bridle hitch at a vertical rated load per sling leg of 3,500 ue of N in the formula.
load angle of 72°, which is not shown lb. This is the value of T90° rated load per sling leg.
in the chart. What is the rated load for •The sling has two legs. This is the val- •We will lift a load of 6,062 lb. This is
the two-leg bridle sling at the 72° angle ue of N. the value of W in the formula.
of loading? Use the rated load for a sin- •We will lift a load of 5,500 lb. This is
gle-leg vertical-hitch sling as the value the value of W. To calculate the minimum angle of
of T90° rated load per sling leg. Then use the sling Step 1: Start with the sling tension loading, we use the sling tension equa-
tension equation arranged to solve for equation, modified to solve for θminimum: tion arranged to solve for θminimum:
Wmaximum at 72°. The result is rated load
for the 72°, two-leg bridle sling.



2. To confirm our procedures, calcu-
late the rated load for the 45° angle of
Insert the current values for weight
loading as shown for the two-leg bridle
of the load (W = 6,062 lb), vertical rated
sling in Figure 7. Once again, use the load per sling leg (T90° rated load per sling leg =
2,000-lb vertical rated load per sling leg Step 2: Insert the known values for 3,500 lb) and number of sling legs (N =
as the value of T90° rated load per sling leg. Then weight of the load (W = 5,500 lb), vertical 2). Then solve for θminimum:
use the sling tension equation arranged rated load per sling leg (T90° rated load per sling leg
to solve for Wmaximum at 45°. The = 3,500 lb) and number of sling legs (N =


result should match the rated load for 2). Then solve for θminimum:

the 45°, two-leg bridle sling, as shown
in Figure 7.


Our calculated result can be rounded


to 60°, matching the angle shown for
the 6,062-lb rated load in Figure 8. This
Calculating the Minimum Angle of Note: If your calculator has a SIN-1 confirms that our procedure is correct.
Loading When Weight of Load Differs or ASIN button, your keystrokes will Since the angle must be no less than 60°,
From Manufacturers’ Charts & Labels be similar to the following in this it would be acceptable to use larger sling
case: SIN-1X(5500÷(3500X2))=, or al- angles (e.g., 65°, 70°). On the other hand,
As a final use of our formula, we can ternatively: ASINX(5500÷(3500X2))=. it is not acceptable to use smaller angles
calculate the minimum angle of loading If your calculation results in 0.90°, (e.g., 50°, 55°). Finally, we must ensure that
for weights that differ from those provided make sure your calculator is set all components of the rigging are rated to
by the manufacturer. For example, imag- to the degree function, as noted. handle the 6,062-lb load. If your calcula-
ine a sling with a manufacturer’s chart in- In an Excel spreadsheet, the prop- tion resulted in 1.05°, make sure your cal-
dicating a vertical rated load per sling leg er formula for this example is: culator is set to the degree function.
of 3,500 lb, as shown in Figure 8 (p. 45). =DEGREES(ASIN(5500/(3500*2))).
Now imagine that we need to lift a load of You Do the Math
5,500 lb using two of these sling legs in a Step 3: Our calculation indicates that Apply your knowledge to the following
bridle hitch. What is the minimum angle we must rig the two-leg bridle sling with
of loading for the two-leg bridle sling a load angle of no less than 51.79° to safe- questions. Answers are on p. 55.
when handling this 5,500-lb load? ly lift the load of 5,500 lb using the two 3. A sling manufacturer’s chart indi-
sling legs with rated vertical-hitch ca-
Again, we use the manufacturer’s pacities of 3,500 lb each. Since the angle cates a vertical rated load per sling leg
vertical rated load per sling leg as of loading must be no less than 51.79°, it of 3,500 lb, as shown in Figure 8. We
T90° rated load per sling leg. This time, however, we would be acceptable to use larger angles need to lift a load of 6,300 lb using two
adjust the subscripts and rearrange the (e.g., 55°, 60°, 85°). On the other hand, of these sling legs in a bridle hitch. What
formula to solve for minimum angle of it is not acceptable to use smaller angles is the minimum angle of loading for the
loading (θminimum): (e.g., 30°, 45°, 50°). Once again, we must two-leg bridle sling when handling this
check the specifications for our lifting 6,300-lb load? Use the rated load for a

devices and other hardware to ensure single-leg vertical-hitch sling as the value

that all components of the rigging are of T90° rated load per sling leg. Then use the sling
rated to handle this 5,500-lb load. tension equation arranged to solve for
where: θminimum with a load of 6,300 lb.
θminimum = minimum angle of loading Alternate example: To confirm that
that will not exceed the rated load our calculations are consistent with the 4. A sling manufacturer’s chart indi-
sin-1 = inverse sine (arcsine) of the angle values shown in the manufacturer’s chart cates a vertical rated load per sling leg of
W = weight of the load (including the or label, let’s calculate the minimum 2,000 lb, as shown in Figure 7 (p. 45). We
weight of any hardware added between load angle for the two-leg bridle sling in need to lift a load of 3,700 lb using two
the sling and the load) Figure 8 when handling a load of 6,062 of these sling legs in a bridle hitch. What
T90° rated load per sling leg = manufacturer’s lb. Does our calculated minimum angle is the minimum angle of loading for the
rated load (WLL) for the single-leg, ver- of loading match that shown in the man- two-leg bridle sling when handling this
tical-hitch sling (this is the tension that ufacturer’s chart (i.e., 60° for the two-leg 3,700-lb load? Use the rated load for a
must never be exceeded) bridle sling with a load of 6,062 lb)? Here single-leg vertical-hitch sling as the value
is a summary of the data: of T90° rated load per sling leg. Then use the sling
tension equation arranged to solve for
•The manufacturer’s chart in Figure 8 θminimum with a load of 3,700 lb.
(p. 45) indicates a vertical rated load per

46 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org

Final Comments vertical rated load per sling leg as the For Further Study
Our two-article exploration of ten- value of T90° rated load per sling leg. Then use Learn more from the following source:
the sling tension equation arranged
sion has focused on vertical and bri- to solve for Wmaximum at 53°. The ASSP’s ASP Examination Prep: Program
dle hitches having no more than two result is the rated load for the two-leg Review and Exam Preparation, edited by
evenly loaded sling legs. Keep in mind bridle sling at a loading angle of 53°. Joel M. Haight, 2016. PSJ
that tension is calculated differently
for other types of hitches and for ad- 6. As shown in Figure 6 (p. 45), a References
ditional rigging components such as manufacturer’s chart indicates a ver-
crane hooks and lifting beams. Also, tical rated load per sling leg of 4,400 American Society of Mechanical Engineers
remember that slings may fail because lb for a single sling leg when used (ASME). (2018). Slings (ASME B30.9-2018).
of harsh work conditions and improp- in a vertical hitch. We need to lift a
er load-handling practices. Refer to load of 7,250 lb using two of these Bulunuz, N. & Jarrett, O.S. (2010). The ef-
recognized standards for guidance on sling legs in a bridle hitch. What fects of hands-on learning stations on building
these broader issues (e.g., ASME, 2018; is the minimum load angle for the American elementary teachers’ understanding
OSHA, n.d.). two-leg bridle sling when handling about earth and space science concepts. Eur-
this 7,250 lb load? Use the vertical asia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Tech-
How Much Have I Learned? rated load per sling leg as the value of nology Education, 6(2), 85-99. https://doi.org/
Try these problems on your own. An- T90° rated load per sling leg. Then use the sling 10.12973/ejmste/75230
tension equation arranged to solve for
swers are on p. 55. θminimum with a load of 7,250 lb. OSHA. (n.d). Guidance on safe sling use.
5. As shown in Figure 8 (p. 45), a www.osha.gov/dsg/guidance/slings/index.html

manufacturer’s chart indicates a ver- Ricketts, M. (2020, July). The case of the
tical rated load per sling leg of 3,500 overloaded sling. Professional Safety, 65(7),
lb. We need to make a lift using two 48-52.
of these sling legs in a bridle hitch, at
a load angle of 53°. What is the maxi- Mitch Ricketts, Ph.D., CSP, is an associate professor of safety management at Northeastern State
mum load for the two-leg bridle sling University (NSU) in Tahlequah, OK. He has worked in OSH since 1992, with experience in diverse settings
at the unlisted angle of 53°? Use the such as agriculture, manufacturing, chemical/biological laboratories and school safety. Ricketts holds
a Ph.D. in Cognitive and Human Factors Psychology from Kansas State University, an M.S. in Occupa-
tional Safety Management from University of Central Missouri, and a B.S. in Education from Pittsburg
State University. He is a professional member and officer of ASSP’s Tulsa Chapter, and faculty advisor
for the Society’s NSU Broken Arrow Student Section.

Walk confidently into
your certification exam

We are so confident in our workshops that
if you do not pass, you can retake the same
workshop for FREE.

ASSP online prep
courses include:

Math Review CSP
ASP SMS
CHST

Find a workshop near you | assp.org/education

assp.org AUGUST 2020 PROFESSIONAL SAFETY PSJ 47

CHECKPOINTS

COMPATIBILITY FACTOR

Interdependency of Design Safety & Ergonomics

By Doug Sten

Machine design safety should conform to good engineering practices, industry standards,
national or international standards, and government codes and regulations that are
applicable for that particular product (Bass, 1986).

When properly designed, a product 2. Determine the anthropometrics of Problem: Many HMI screens in-
should be fundamentally sound, have the worker population, such as physical stalled with machines on shop floors are
the proper safeguards, be operated and (e.g., stature, reach, strength, limitations) fixed in the vertical position. This does
maintained with minimum risk to the and mental abilities (e.g., education, not allow for workers of various heights
user, and fail to a safe condition when a training, perception). to properly view the screen, especially
fault is detected in the safety control sys- those wearing prescription safety glass-
tem (Sten, 2009). The environment in which the prod- es. This has resulted in noticeable visual
uct will be used may have a significant challenges and muscular discomfort to
The term “compatibility factor” refers negative effect on one’s physical state workers’ necks and shoulders. Provid-
to the state in which two conditions can (stress) and well-being (decision-mak- ing a step stool only creates a major trip
exist or occur together, producing positive ing process). These conditions can be and fall hazard.
outcomes. So, where does ergonomics and influenced by temperature extremes,
the compatibility factor come into play? chemical exposures, flammable at- Solution: Design and install HMI
When designing to an operator’s or tech- mospheres, dust, water, inadequate screens that can be manually adjusted
nician’s needs, the designer or engineer illumination, and other physical and both vertically and horizontally to fit the
must take into account a person’s physical environmental conditions (McCormick user’s needs.
and mental abilities (and limitations) in & Sanders, 1982).
relation to the demands of the machine, Problem: Many two-hand palm but-
job-related tasks (frequency and duration) Furthermore, ergonomics or human ton controls are designed and installed
and the work environment. factors engineering should analyze the on top of the control box with protec-
design of the controls, types and location, tive rings to create an anti-tie-down
The design review process should in- human-machine interface (HMI) display condition. Now, instead of using one’s
clude the following steps: units, visual and auditory, and other hu- palms as designed, the user is forced to
man factors such as anthropometrics to actuate the controls with their fingers,
1. Define the production process, promote operator comfort and minimize generally applying 5 lb of pressure every
which includes materials (e.g., dimen- physical stress and fatigue (ISO, 2016). 15 to 30 seconds.
sions, weights, characteristics), opera-
tions (e.g., setup, workstation, manual Following are a few less-than-desirable Solution: Design and install the two-
loading and unloading, maintenance) conditions the author has observed over hand palm buttons on the sides (left and
and cycle time. the years with real proven solutions. right) of the control box. No protective
rings are required. The worker can use
TABLE 1 the palms rather than the fingers, elimi-
nating ulnar flexion movement to actu-
STANDING WORKSTATION DESIGN ate the controls. Alternatively, electronic
swipe controls require no force at all to
Specifications that provide design criteria for workstations in which the operator is standing, use- actuate and can be used with protective
ful for designing work surface locations and features applying ANSI B11 TR1 guidelines. Ergonomic gloves if required.
assessent may need to be performed on a task-by-task basis.
Problem: Yellow-painted, expanded
Criteria Dimension Description metal guards (fixed or moveable) are
Work height Adjustment: 37 to 50 Distance from standing surface to hand work everywhere. Urban legend has it that
Hands precision work in. (94 to 127 cm) height for fine hand manipulations or visually general industry took this to be an
Fixed: 44 in. (110 cm) intensive tasks OSHA compliance requirement. This is
not so. To my knowledge, there are no
Light assembly Adjustment: 33 to 42 Distance from standing surface to hand work global safety rules requiring guards to
in. (84 to 107 cm) height for tasks requiring force exertion less be painted yellow, red or orange. The
Fixed: 38 in. (95 cm) than 10 lb (4.5 kg) critical issue is that yellow in particular IVAN-BALVAN/ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES PLUS
presents a significant diffusion of visual
Heavy work Adjustment: 28 to 39 Distance from standing surface to hand work acuity, meaning it can be difficult to see
in. (71 to 99 cm) height for tasks requiring force exertion through it. This causes problems when
Reach Fixed: 34 in. (85 cm) greater than 10 lb (4.5 kg) trying to troubleshoot the machine
Display height when it is in operation, when perform-
19 in. (47.5 cm) Maximum reach to grasp hand work ing inspections or when making adjust-
Foot clearance depth Preferred adjustment: Distance from standing surface to middle of ments during the production process.
57 to 70 in. (145 to 178 viewable portion of display screen This has led users to remove these yel-
cm) Rotate 45° up/down from vertical position is low expanded metal guards to perform
Fixed: 60 in. (160 cm) preferred with horizontal adjustment
Minimum 6 in. (15 cm) Depth from front of any obstruction

48 PSJ PROFESSIONAL SAFETY AUGUST 2020 assp.org