3 min watch: If you were to gather data on the number of ‘at-risk’ behaviours that are being performed in your organisation, this would be a direct measure of the potential for injury. This is not the same as measuring near misses, observations or close calls. There are also far more‘at-risk’ behaviours to measure than there are injuries, which, in most cases, would make it a statistically viable metric.
The good thing about measuring ‘at-risk’ behaviours is that the results will give you a good idea of the current environment. It is also a far better, and far more moral measure than waiting until someone has actually been injured.
Similarly, the number of ‘reduced-risk’ behaviours that are being performed in your organisation would be a direct measure of a successfully aligned environment.
Measure both and you would get a good idea of the proportion of ‘at-risk’ to ‘reduced-risk’ behaviours. If your sampling was consistent you would be able to see increases or decreases in your risk profile.
Watch our short video on how to set up an at risk reduced risk sampling process to baseline your current performance, engage supervisors and operatives and reduce the feedback cycle on whether your interventions or changes are actually making reduced risk working more likely.