table of contents about paqs: a partnered approach 2 the ... · diploma of management diploma of...

TABLE OF CONTENTS page

About PaQS: A Partnered Approach 2The PaQS Team 4How to Achieve a Safety Culture 9When Good Systems Fail 12Ten Vital Factors to a Safety Culture 17Results and Outcomes 23

2

About PaQS: PaQS’ Partnered Approach

The PaQS ApproachPaQS People and Quality Solutions Pty Ltd safety psychologists specialise in providing organisations

with the tools and support to achieve and sustain their own safety cultures.

Founded in academically proven rational cognition and behavioural psychology, PaQS has developed

the only safety culture training that is nationally recognised.

PaQS partners with organisations to lead and achieve their own unique cultures of safety, quality and

professionalism.

PaQS is a Strategic Partner and Preferred Supplier of several global reinsurance companies.

MethodPaQS’ method is based on a ‘holistic’ culture model focused on individual and team assessment,

monitoring, coaching and promoting safety compliance and commitment to establishing and

maintaining an “attitudinal” safe work environment that extends beyond the workplace to home,

personal life and into the community.

The PaQS method is analogous to professional team sport where unique and specialised attributes are

coached individually but within a framework of team identity and toward team objectives.

In this manner, the PaQS method is first and foremost coaching before policing.

3

Positive Industrial Relations and ProductivityA coaching model of willing participation and responsibility

creates an environment not only for constructive and positive

industrial relations but also an atmosphere of team support,

job satisfaction and lower stress outcomes – increased

productivity.

Outcome - ConceptualA safety culture characterised by effective communication and

commitment to a common ideal of personal responsibility and

cooperation by a safety empowered workforce trained to make

better safety decisions within and outside the workplace.

Outcomes - Statistical - KPIMeasured safety awareness increases exceeding 100% in safety

control, risk avoidance, stress tolerance, operational,

professional and quality attitudes are common and

substantiated by corresponding reductions in organisational

KPI’s.

Resources and ToolsPaQS provides organisations with all training, resources and

support to establish their own dynamic and continuously

evolving safety culture, to include:

Strategic structure

Knowledge and training

Cultural analysis

Training programs and resources

Assessment tools

Partnered implementation

Continuous coaching

Continuous measurement.

About PaQS: PaQS’ Partnered Approach

PaQS is an accredited Registered Training Organisation (RTO) and as such isgoverned by the National Vocation Education and Training Regulator Act 2011 (NVR),the new standards required for an RTO to operate.

4

Carl Reams - Your Project CoachCarl is an organisational psychologist and Managing Director of PaQS.

Carl has worked as a psychologist since 1976 in clinical, training, coaching and organisational

areas.

From 1994 Carl has consulted exclusively in safety psychology by assisting organisations to evolve

their own workplace cultures.

Carl authored and developed the first psychologically based Australian nationally recognised courses

in Personal Safety Awareness and the Australian Safety Awareness and Organisational Safety Culture

psychometrics.

Carl is a member of psychological bodies in Australia and the USA and a former member of the

executive of the Australian Psychological Society (APS).

Carl's special area of interest is in cognition and what drives unsafe

thinking (undeveloped psychological constructs and perceptions) that

affect unsafe behaviour, human error and non-compliance issues.

Carl and PaQS assists organisations with the tools and training to

assess, evolve and lead their own safety culture.

Carl has conducted numerous seminars and workshops on safety

psychology and safety culture solutions to conferences and

organisations.

PaQS People and Quality Solutions Pty Ltd

10417NAT Course in Advanced Safety Awareness

5

Author and Developer:

Safety Culture Management Psychology and Leadership Course Managing, Leading and Coaching Safety Cultures Course Advanced Safety Awareness Level 1 Online**

- Apprentice 2010 (Aust) **- Rail Construction (Aust)**- Road Transport 2009 (Aust)**- Road Transport (NZ)- Road Transport (China/Asia) +- Energy Industry (NZ)- Mining Resources (Aust)**- All Industry - Generic 2008 (Aust)**

10417NAT Course in Advanced Safety Awareness (2014) ** Course in Advanced Safety Awareness 2008 91437NSW ** Course in Advanced Safety & Quality Awareness 1996 90850NSW **

** Australian Competency accredited - nationally recognized+ Strategic Partnered Development

Psychometric Assessments:

Australian Safety Awareness Training Survey (A-SATS) Organisational Safety Culture Assessment (OSCA) Recruit Safety Aware Focused Employees (R-SAFE)

Professional Associations/Education:

Australian Psychological Society (APS) since 1980 APS Executive Member 1989-90 American Psychological Assoc (APA) since 1978 MA Psychology CCSU, Texas 1976 BA Philosophy/Theology, Missouri 1974 BA Texas A&I, Texas (Oregon, Missouri) 1972

Military:

Trainer: Officers Infantry School Ga. US 1969-70- Personnel Organization- Deployment Management- Leadership Protocols

US ARMY 82nd Airborne Division 505 Golden Brigade - Vietnam 1968-69 Paratrooper - combat team leader Non-Commissioned Officer E-5

Carl Reams

6

The PaQS Team

Pete Grzywacz Director Training, RTO Compliance

As PaQS Director Training RTO Compliance, Pete has a strong customerservice focus, and is responsible for the overall operations of PaQS,including co-ordinating and monitoring training projects, the RegisteredTraining Organisation (RTO), company policies, procedures and systems. Additionally, as a qualified trainer/assessor, Pete has extensiveexperience in the development, delivery, assessment and managementof high-quality training and assessment services for the clients ofAustralia’s Vocational Education and Training (VET) system.

Pete also assists with the delivery and assessment of PaQS training and coaching services and isresponsible for a team of contract trainers/assessors and PaQS’ NVR Registered TrainingOrganisation (RTO) compliance under the Australian Qualification Training Framework (AQTF)and national VET standards.

Pete has worked in the training and assessment industry for over fifteen years, working withmajor interstate companies such as QR NATIONAL Coal in NSW and QLD (now known as Aurizon), Rio Tinto, MARS group of companies, Veolia Environmental Services on a national level to namea few.

QUALIFICATIONS Post Graduate Certificate in Management (Learning) current study Diploma of VET Registration and Management Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (TAE40110) Certificate IV in Frontline Management Qualified PaQS Safety Coach Health and Safety Representative

Donna Reams Director Finance and Administration

Donna is an organisational psychologist and is co-owner of PaQS and Director of Finance andAdministration. Donna directs PaQS, coordinating all administrative staff, departments andactivities.

Donna oversees and reports on all safety culture project activities fromorder to completion. Donna is also involved with all aspects of productresearch, design, development and delivery.

As a former member of USMC, everyone gives Donna what she wants!

7

The PaQS Team

Professor Gerard FogartyResearch Advisor and Consulting Psycho metrician

Professor Gerard Fogarty is Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) and Professor ofPsychology at the University of Southern Queensland.

Professor Fogarty has published in journals such as Journal of VocationalBehaviour, Intelligence, and Personality and Individual Differences. He is therecipient of institutional awards for individual research excellence and alsoresearch supervision.

Carla Sorensen Director Assessment and IT, R&D

Carla is the PaQS developer and coordinator of IT platforms, assessmentvalidation, statistical analysis, training resources, research and development.Carla coordinates and supervises organisational safety culture assessments,analysis and reporting.

Lois Bird RTO Coordinator

As PaQS RTO Coordinator, Lois is responsible for maintaining all aspects of the student recordmanagement system, including auditing (internal and external) student records, together withmaintaining policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the NVR Standards. Lois also liaiseswith Safety Coaches to assist, when necessary, with any documentation required by PaQS. Lois isa qualified trainer/assessor and is the primary trainer/assessor for online ASA students as well ascompleting some face to face training during our Managing Leading Coaching Course.

QUALIFICATIONS Diploma of Management Diploma of Quality Auditing Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (TAE40110) Statement of Attainment: Analyse and apply sustainability to learning programs Qualified PaQS Safety Coach

8

The PaQS Team

Jodie Shorter RTO Service Coordinator

As PaQS RTO Service Coordinator, Jodie has an extensivecustomer service background. Jodie is responsible for dataprocessing, data entry of student records, report compilation andissuing certificates. Jodie has excellent attention to detail andaccuracy. Jodie has worked in the role of RTO Service Coordinatorfor over 2 years and has a comprehensive knowledge ofrequirements. Over the years Jodie has worked in customerservice based roles including supervision and training of staffmembers.

QUALIFICATIONS Certificate IV in Small Business Management (RTO related)

Kate Olsen Independent Consultant

Kate has qualifications in behavioural science, Occupational Healthand Safety, Risk Management and Psychology. Kate has more than10 years’ experience applying these skills in cultural developmentand safety management across a range of industries. Her majorstrengths include people development and applying psychologicalprinciples to drive genuine organisational change.

QUALIFICATIONS Post Graduate Diploma, Psychology Post Graduate Certificate, Risk Management Bachelor of Behavioural Science, Psychology and OH&S

10

How to Lead and Achieve a Safety Culture

Evolving your safety culture begins with understanding culture!

Personality is the result of the sum of an individual’s beliefs, attitudes and values ininteraction with the environment and expressed through behaviour – it evolves!

An organisation’s culture is the sum of personalities,predominant attitudes and agreed values in interactionwith the environment and expressed as performance.

Like an individual’s personality, an organisation’s cultureis an evolving process.

People can’t change their personality to be someoneelse and no matter how much they try - organisationscan’t have another organisation’s culture:

Good systems, processes, procedures – yes!

Culture – no!

Unhappy news to the Britney personality or DuPont culture wannabe’s!

All personalities and cultures have evolved to be what they are - unique! All have inherentstrengths and vulnerabilities. Your culture has evolved to be what it is and cannot simplybe exchanged for a different one.

However, cultures, like personalities, have elements that can be continuously improvedby enhancing, developing, modifying, innovating, growing – evolving!

11

In 1986, two events barely three months apart shocked the world and shaped a new understanding

of safety.

On January 28th, 1986 at 11:39am local time, most of the

developed globe watched as Challenger exploded. NASA’s

reputation for safety has never fully recovered.

On April 26th, 1986 at 1:23am local time, an event at Chernobyl

triggered along with Challenger a new focus for traditional OH&S

management - safety culture!!

Shortly after Chernobyl the Federation of Nuclear Cooperation in Asia was formed (FNCA) which

the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) joined. FNCA and ANSTO

defined safety culture for their industry this way:

“Safety culture is that assembly of characteristics and attitudes in

organisations and individuals which establishes that, as an overriding

priority, nuclear safety issues receive the attention warranted by their

significance.”

Safety culture is defined by the values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours about safety or safety

awareness.

But, what is safety awareness? Traditionally and quite correctly, we have thought of safety

awareness in terms of organisational environment and climate.

Environmental Safety Awareness (ESA) is the knowledge of hazards in the environment and the

proper tools (engineering) and systems, procedures and training (OH&S) to avoid them.

However, there is now a much greater, emerging

understanding and focus on the human element,

personal (psychological) safety awareness.

Personal Safety Awareness (PSA) is comprised of several thinking

constructs (or for simplicity’s sake ‘attitudes’) that affect an

individual’s perceptions, judgment and awareness of their personal

ability and responsibility to avoid risks by managing hazards in the

environment.

Safety Cultures

12

The safety culture of an organisation may have and promote a visible ESA but will be driven and

defined by its people’s PSA - their motivation, ability and responsibility to think and behave safely.

When PSA (safety attitudes) are not developed, incident reports typically indicate human error

or non-compliance as the cause.

Clearly, tremendous progress has been made in understanding and applying OH&S systems and

management over the last 30 - 40 years, particularly in Australia.

Unfortunately, no matter how well resourced or skillfully and professionally implemented, good

safety systems often appear to fail or falls short of expectations.

Developments in workplace safety training, enhanced procedural initiatives, and systems

approaches have achieved excellent results, however the greatest challenge continues to be to

understand and eliminate human error incidents.

Human error and non-compliance are often the reasons given as to why an organisation's safety

or quality systems do not achieve anticipated or desired results. Many human error incidents

and injuries are due to unsafe workplace attitude and behavioural factors (PSA), rather than

'environmental factors', like safety education, knowledge and safety skills or systems deficiencies.

Human error (perceptual distortion, fatigue/distraction, error of judgment, etc) is directly

responsible for the majority of incidents, injuries and safety or quality systems failures today.

Safety risk experts predict between 91% and 96% of all incidents involve some element of

human error.

While it is well recognised that safety compliance is

paramount to the success of any safety system, it is

often overlooked for a lack of knowing what to do about

addressing human error and non-compliance issues.

Of course, ESA is a continuous improvement process,

however human error or non-compliance is not typically

an ESA failure. It is predominantly a result of a lower

PSA and an undeveloped safety culture.

When Good Safety Systems Fail?

13

Locus of Control

Human error is usually the result of undeveloped PSA or

safety awareness attitudes in otherwise safety informed and

knowledgeable people.

Personal safety awareness is learned "non-traditionally"

usually through informal life experiences. Numerous

research studies demonstrate that people with lower

Attitudinal Safety Awareness are at greater risk, and have

many more incidents and injuries.

In Australia, many across industry studies of PSA (Accident Risk Management (ARM) survey) have

shown that people with lower PSA have the highest proportion of incidents and injuries, often

greater than 90%.

Safety psychologists have identified three core constructs (safety attitudes) that are the primary

contributors and motivators to how people think and make decisions that influences (affects)

how they are likely to behave in safety sensitive situations.

Briefly, they are:

1. Personal safety responsibility, control and rational judgment2. Risk perception and avoidance3. Stress tolerance (distraction and fatigue resistant).

Psychologically, these three constructs not only determine likely safety behaviour but are reflective

of how a person defines who they are and how they live their life. Psychologists typically refer to

this thinking structure theory as "locus-of-control".

A person's locus-of-control refers to the attitudes or beliefs about who or what controls one's

behaviour and consequences that reach far beyond safety to personal, family and community

life. In a safety context, individuals with an "internal" locus-of-control generally take personal

responsibility for their own safe behaviour and incident prevention. They are more able to see

the relationship between behaviour and outcomes - cause and effect, for example:

> Unsafe behaviour equals more incidents and injuries.

> Following safety procedures reduces my chance of an incident or injury.

Across industry research shows peoplewith lower safety awareness are athigher risk for incidents and injuries.

INCIDENTS LTIs

Higher Risk 74% 91%

Lower Risk 26% 9%

14

Attitudes Reinforce or Override Training

Individuals with an "external" locus-of-control tend to blame incidents on "external" factorssuch as someone else is responsible for what happens to me or fate, chance or even badluck is the cause.

Thoughts like "fate and bad luck causes incidents - so what do we need safety proceduresfor?" more often than not leads to taking a chance.

What confounds and frustrates many safety professionals and managers is why peoplewho have been trained, have the knowledge and know the procedures - don't follow it!

It is really a matter of understanding that information stored as knowledge is not thesame as attitudes (motivations and drives) that will either support or negate (override)knowledge and experience (common sense)!

Examples (the first many people can relate to):

Knowledge/Information Overriding Attitude

I will be healthier if I lose I feel better when I eat.some weight.

I know PPE is for my protection The job will only take a minute.

and I should use it.

You should wear PPE. I don't like people telling me

what I should do.

Benchmarking Project

Four companies representing four separateindustries (Chemical, Food Processing-Bakery,Gas Service, Transport-Bricks) participated inan insurance benchmarking project.

TOTA

L IN

JURI

ES

TOTA

L IN

CIDE

NTS

TOTA

L ISI

CK D

AYS

2581

998

160

1000

2000

3000

Higher Risk Avg Risk Lower Risk

1325

663

298

0

500

1000

1500


140

57

12

0

50

100

150


ARM RISK LEVEL ARM RISK LEVEL

ARM RISK LEVEL

15

Evolving Culture: Not Difficult - Just Different

The importance in understanding locus-of-control in a safety culture strategy is that the safety

attitudes that determine locus-of-control are not skills that are trainable. You can't train other

people's attitudes, no matter how well meaning. People's attitudes define areas of their life well

beyond the workplace.

Evolving your safety culture requires that you do train ESA but that you also address each

individual's locus-of-control safety attitudes.

Fortunately, attitudes do change. Everyone has the ability to evolve, enhance and modify their

own attitudes. Few adults have all the same attitudes they had when they were either five or

fifteen years old.

Attitudes evolve through experience in an environment that provides individual relevance and

acceptance.

The focus needs to be on each individual's current awareness, performance, personal strengths

and areas requiring specific development.

In other words, to use a sport analogy, coaching!

Evolving a safety culture is not difficult - just different!

Analogous to professional team sport, it is where personal

attributes are coached individually but within a framework

of team identity and toward team objectives.

Keep in mind that "evolving" a safety culture is not a

substitute for ESA.

Training, systems compliance, managing and monitoring

(policing) are important.

However, a safety culture of personal safety awareness is

ESA's best foundation. In this manner, it is first and foremost

coaching before policing.

There are certainly some "have to's" when it comes to ESA,

however the PSA attitudes of a committed safety culture

are "want to" attitudes!

16

Self-Directed Safety Cultures

Today, with professional assessment and strategic planning support, and the specialised tools

and training now available:

Organisations can evolve their own safety culture!

A business’ safety culture is the sum of its peoples’ personalities, values and behaviours - it is

living and constantly changing but requires focus and direction.

Any business can be assisted to develop the safety awareness of its people

and culture with the unique assessments, coaching and training tools now

available. Managers and employees can be coached and trained to develop

their personal safety awareness attitudes, abilities and responsibility.

A few are proven, competency based and has achieved national recognition

(Course in Advanced Safety Awareness – Australia).

What is clear is that any business can now evolve, and is best able to develop its own safety

culture with the self-managing assessment and coaching tools now available.

Like living things, safety cultures are not manufactured:they are grown -

EVOLVED!

Research Results: Total Recordable Frequency RateA Western Australia construction companyreduced it’s total recordable frequency rate bygreater than 75% in a 12 month period. Resultswere sustained for 20 months post training to theconclusion of the project.

17

Ten Vital Factors to Achieving a Safety Culture

Your Culture is You!

Every industry and organisation has their own unique environments and operational requirements.

While every organisation's issues cannot be addressed in this short paper, there are some vital factors

(people and operations) to consider to ensure the successful implementation of your safety culture

strategy. People and operational factors overlap so these factors are not presented in any specific order

or priority. The more you can apply, the more effective your strategy implementation.

1. Know Thyself

Good advice from Socrates.

The best start is to know what your culture is now. An objective

psychometric assessment of the safety attitudes and their

relationship to your incident and injury results (where

available) provides you with a benchmark to track your culture

as it evolves.

Make sure you are measuring and assessing safety attitudes

though - not subjective opinions.

2. Accept Responsibility: Drive it Yourself

Evolving your culture has to be driven from within every day, not by consultants who don't know your

culture as well as you do and are here today - gone tomorrow. Certainly use organisational safety

psychologists and accredited consultants to provide you with objective assessment and training of your

coaches and leaders. However, keep the responsibility, leadership and control internal. Also accept the

credit! Consultants don’t achieve lower incidents and LTIs - you and your people do!

3. Operationally Flexible

A program that is operationally flexible is vital.

At the end of the day a company exists to operate its business which

has to be its first priority. It is politically corrrect to say safety comes

before operations which implies a choice. Safety as the way we operate

reduces conflict and the need to choose. A program that can be

implemented around operational priorities (on site?) is more likely to

succeed because it does not conflict. You want a safety culture that

"operates" as part of your business - doing business!

18


4. Measurable Proven Results

Leadership from the top is a given to get any program underway. However, commitment from the top

requires long term, sustainable confidence and support.

Ongoing objective measures, not only of the improvements

to safety awareness, but its impact on incidents, reporting

and lost time injuries are necessary to maintain

management buy-in, support and confidence. Managers

have to account to someone as well.

Frequent objective assessment lets you know your safety culture is evolving by demonstrating lower

incidents and injury trends. If it isn't, find out why and do something about it. Don't be afraid to find out

what is not working (it's not working whether you know about it or not). Knowing gives you a chance to

find out why and fix it.

5. Has Credibility - External Validation

Is it a program that has industry recognition? Is it competency or learning outcome

based? What is the benefit to the employees?

It is one thing to be told you are professional. It is much more meaningful to have

achieved a competency or assessed learning outcome where you have a certificate

that is nationally recognised to prove it.

6. Coaching - not Training

Remember, training imparts knowledge and skills - coaching addresses safety attitudes. Coaching

addresses the core elements of unsafe behaviour, human error (poor judgment, perception, fatigue,

distraction, etc) and non-compliance (conflict, personal issues, lack of insight or maturity, etc). Coaching

is applied to develop safety thinking and judgment not only to current environments and behaviour but to

all future ones as well.

A coaching model is an industrial relations friendly approach - it is developing and empowering personal

awareness and responsibility. It is not policing or confronting unsafe

behaviour.

This may be necessary too as part of your ESA responsibilities but it

does not contribute to evolving your culture.

10417NAT Course inAdvanced Safety Awareness

19


7. OH&S Integration

Select a coaching program that integrates easily with your

current OH&S initiative. Involve your current OH&S or training

professionals from the beginning. Implement as a new

standard operating procedure - not an optional extra that is

easily discounted as inconvenient.

8. Safety Focused

Keep it safety aware focused and promote it as such - safety is in everyone's interest and everyone can

understand it. Flagging culture change can be threatening to employees and managers (remember, it is an

organisation's personality). You wouldn’t like being told you had to change your personality! Keep the

focus on the safety process and to everyone's benefit - a safety culture is the result.

9. Involves Everyone

Achieving a safety culture requires everyone as part of the team approach (from top management to

admin support). Don't single out individuals or workgroups for 'special treatment' because they are

higher risk (even if incident results confirm it). This only creates or reinforces 'them and us' divisions.

Poor performance or behaviour labels are often interpreted as permission to wear it as a badge and act

accordingly (remember when you were a teenager?). Also, don't exclude higher safety awareness people.

They are your greatest on-the-job, day in - day out reinforcement of the thinking and behaviour you want.

10. Return on Investment

Training and focus on safety often have been seen as a cost to an organisation or at best an abstract

benefit for the long term. Evolving a safety culture is an investment that can deliver real returns quickly.

Lower incidents and injury costs, less disruption to operations and productivity, lower insurance premiums

all have an immediate impact on the bottom line. Perhaps a

more profound, if not abstract, benefit is that in today's

competitive market, the safety culture and safety record of an

organisation is increasingly a factor in winning business or

contracts. A visible return on investment is the best guarantee

of a continually evolving safety culture.

A permanent safety culture is achieved when people comply,not only because they have to - but when they want to!Carl Reams

20

Achieving a Safety Culture: SummaryAn organisation's culture is its personality.

Culture is not the assets, equipment, work processes, procedures or paperwork.

Culture is:

* The shared values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of its people - its identity

* Like personality - can be mimicked but never copied or substituted

* Like people - 'unique' and will evolve within the environment created for it by its leaders.

A healthy safety culture is foremost people focused and characterised by individual personal

responsibility, willing participation, professional pride, shared identity and commitment to

continuous improvement.

Evolving your culture begins by moving people from non-

compliance to compliance and then compliance to

commitment. Total commitment occurs when people

comply, not because they have to, but because they want

to! A shared safety vision and behaviour driven by 'want

to' attitudes becomes your organisation's identity - your

organisation's culture.

The overall safety awareness scores of the traininggroup improved by 40% and the Quality Orientation(QO) scores improved by 98% between AS&QALevel 1 and Level 3.

The control group of 150 personnel achieved noimprovement between their first and last surveysover six months.

A 58% reduction in All Injury Frequency Rate wasachieved over 12 months.

Research Results: Rail Industry

1997-98 Total Injuries = 33 Monthly Injury Average = 2.751998-99 Total Injuries = 14 Monthly Injury Average = 1.16

21

How to Grow a Safety Culture.Growing your own safety culture is not difficult - just different.

A committed safety culture is achieved when it is led, managed and coached by internally

committed people already there, know it best and work in it every day.

PaQS provides organisations of every size, type and structure with everything they need to

implement their own safety culture strategies in simple, fully supported and easy to follow stages.

PaQS provides all strategies, guidance and resources with:

> Key Personnel Training > Continuous Coaching Support

> Objective Assessments and Reports > Implementation Strategy and Plan

> Nationally Recognised Qualification > All Employee Resources

PaQS safety culture strategies are designed to accommodate and not conflict with operational

demands so that safety culture growth doesn’t become “if we have time?”

On the job flexible implementation, in your own time, reduces stress, resistance or the need to

choose operational demands over growing your commitment to safety.

How to Grow a Safety Culture

Shows the improvement in AIFR for the 12 monthperiod prior to and following commencement ofthe program comparing the Training and ControlGroup 2. This 58% reduction in injuries is anoutstanding result and is reflective of thesustained improvements in safety attitudes andawareness. UPDATE: Eighteen months past theinitial AS&QAP training a reduction of greaterthan 50% AIFR to pre-training levels has beensustained. FOOTNOTE: The Control Groups fromthis study have now been involved in the trainingand are reporting similar results.

Actual incidents and the number of potentialincidents that occurred during the twelve-monthperiod. Results indicate a doubling of thereporting of potential incidents while the numberof actual incidents has reduced. Supervisorsbelieve this is reflective of the overallimprovement in quality attitudes.

Research Results:All Injury Frequency Rate Incident Reporting

PaQS’ Tools Documentwww.paqs.com.au/tools.pdf

TABLE OF CONTENTSSafety Psychometrics: RSAFE: RECRUITING Safety Aware Focused Employees TNA: TRAINING Needs Assessment for Existing PersonnelE-Learning: Advancing Safety Awareness OnlineOSCA: Organisational Safety Culture AnalysisLeadership Training

24

75% Reduction in TRFR at 20 Months Post ASA Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Sep-

99

Oct

-99

Nov

-99

Dec

-99

Jan-

00

Feb-

00

Mar

-00

Apr-

00

May

-00

Jun-

00

Jul-0

0

Aug-

00

Sep-

00

Oct

-00

Nov

-00

Dec

-00

Jan-

01

Feb-

01

Mar

-01

Apr-

01

May

-01

Jun-

01

Jul-0

1

Aug-

01

Sep-

01

Oct

-01

Nov

-01

Dec

-01

Jan-

02

Feb-

02

Mar

-02

Apr-

02

May

-02

Jun-

02

Jul-0

2

Aug-

02

TOTA

L R

ECO

RD

AB

LE F

REQ

UEN

CY

RA

TE

.

AS&QAImprovement:12 months prior to

training commencement: 0.0275%

Improvement:20 months after

training commencement: 75.55%

CSR Safety - PaQS Safety Program Packs Personalised PunchArticle written by Joe Maglizza, Environment Manager, CSR Readymix Perth

Published by: CSR Limited, ABN 90 000 001 276, Issue 20, July 2002

It's a staggering thought but safety researchclearly shows that human error causes mostinjuries. We are all capable of error - whetherbecause of fatigue, lack of training and the like,because of our attitudes.

Our attitudes drive our behaviour. Accidentscaused by human error - whether at home or atwork - can be reduced if everyone is committedto understanding and developing their personalawareness of safety.

CSR Readymix in Western Australia hassignificantly reduced the number of injuries sinceintroducing the PaQS safety awareness programover two years ago. The PaQS program focuseson people's beliefs, attitudes, behaviours andactions, emphasising that we are all personallyresponsible for our own safety.

In October 2000, the rate of recordable injuries(per million working hours) was 41. It's currently11 and falling.

Safety has been continually improving since CSRintroduced improved safety systems andprocedures in 1988. But in 2000, far too manypeople were still being injured in CSR Readymixin Western Australia. So, CSR Readymix lookedfor a way to develop safety awareness andbehaviour. They found it in a program offered byAustralian based consultant People and QualitySolutions - PaQS.

"We saw the program as an innovative andeffective way to enhance our current initiativesand focus on the people side of managing safety,"says safety, health and environment manager JoeMaglizza of CSR Readymix in Perth.

The program focuses on each individual's safetybeliefs, attitudes and behaviour. A trained coachworks with each person to assess their level ofsafety awareness and discussed how they canimprove it (see article on page 2, below).

Soon after CSR Readmix introduced PaQS in WA,CSR began embracing the Dick Knowles safetyworkshop process. They soon found that the twoprograms are just not compatible but theyactively compliment each other. PaQS focuses onindividuals while the Knowles process focuses onteams, on changing the way people worktogether to create a safer working environment.

Joe Maglizza with Gordon Herrick ata one-on-one safety session atGosnells quarry, Perth

25

This study was conducted throughout New Zealand for a large liquid petroleum transportation

firm.

A significant improvement in safety attitudes was achieved across all areas, in particular Risk

Avoidance. In many road transport ARM benchmarking studies, Risk Avoidance (as well as Driver

Attitude) tend to be quite predictive of incidents related to impulsive decision making, making

this improvement in Risk Avoidance all the more important.

Client Results and Outcomes

102% Improvement in Overall Safety Awareness

Road Transport. New Zealand. 1998. n=20.

A group of long-term unemployed people undertook the first two levels of the Course in AS&QA

in conjunction with a heavy vehicle driving course over a number of months.

All participants were ‘screened’ and

interviewed for a position on the course,

simulating a job interview process. This

included completing the ARM Survey as a

part of the selection process. It is

interesting to note the correlation between

the significant improvement on the Driver

Attitude scale and the fact that the

participants were completing a driving

course.

Long-Term Unemployed Training Program

26

AS&QA project was implemented at a Hunter Valley mine over an 18 month period.

During the time it took to deliver this project, shutdowns, long wall change outs and corporate

restructuring and mergers were taking place, demonstrating the flexibility, resilience and

sustainability of the program. This is supported by the significant improvement in overall safety

attitudes as indicated in the above graphs.

Client Results and Outcomes

Safety Attitudes Develop Underground

Underground Coal Mining. NSW, Australia. 2003. n=160.

The comparison of ARM Scores across three levels of AS&QA training show an improvement of

139% in Safety Control (sense of responsibility for their own safety) and 134% in Quality Attitude

(Quality Orientation).

78% to 139% Improvement in Safety Awareness Attitudes

Local Council: Carpenters Division. QLD, Australia. 2005. n=13 (level1); n=6 (level 3)

27

Benchmark Reports: Risk for Injury Reductions

28


29

Risk for Injury Reductions Level 1: State Gov’t Ports 2010


30

Benchmark Reports: Risk for Injury ReductionsRisk for Injury Reductions Level 1: Stevedoring 2008

% Employeesagreed withStatement

31


RAIL OPERATIONS

32


RAIL OPERATIONS

33

Benchmark Reports: Risk for Injury ReductionsAS&QA Level 1 to Level 5: Rail Freight 2006

A signal passed at danger (SPAD) occurs when a train passes a stop signal without authority to do so

34

Benchmark Reports: Risk for Injury ReductionsQuality OrientationLower scores indicate either a rejection of qualityprinciples or lack of belief in personal ability to achievethem or both. In either scenario, an unwillingness toaccept responsibility for ensuring quality outcomesproves a risk to quality and safety systems. Neglectedmaintenance or a lack of attention to detail can leadto equipment or manufacture defects and ultimatelyfailure.

Professional Operator / Driver AttitudeA measure of safety awareness that provides insightinto participant thinking, attitude and motivationto driving. PO is relevant to anyone that drives butis vital for people required to drive as part of theiremployment. PO applies to driving or operating alltypes and sizes of vehicles from forklifts, boats andmowers, all road vehicles to heavy cranes,bulldozers, trains, planes or ships.

AS&QA Level 1 to Level 5: Rail Freight 2006


35

AS&QA Level 1 to Level 5: Food Services Industry 2007



36

HISTORY/BACKGROUND

For many years BHP has had a strong focus onsafety with excellent results. The benefits of theseprograms however had plateaued and the resultswere not improving.

One of the difficult areas was Rail Operations. RailOperations consisted of 200 employees who hadan AIFR of 328, an absenteeism rate of 9.6 daysper person per year and a perceived reputation ofbeing a difficult department with which to deal.

ADVANCED SAFETY & QUALITY AWARENESSPROGRAM

BHP became aware of the Advanced Safety &Quality Awareness Program (AS&QAP) which wasdeveloped in Australia by PaQS People and QualitySolutions Pty Ltd.

The AS&QAP is divided into three parts or phases:

Level 1 consists of an Accident Risk Management(ARM) questionnaire and a personal one-on-onedebriefing that focuses the individual employeeon their personal responsibility for and their abilityto control safety in their environment.

Level 2 consists of participation in a one-daytraining session to develop and reinforce individualresponsibility into a group context of interactionand commitment on-the-job.

Level 3 consists of reassessment and furtherindividual debriefings as a follow-up to the trainingday to gain permanent attitude change.

The foundation of the AS&QAP was the personalAccident Risk Management questionnaireproviding each individual with a profile of safetyawareness and areas of personal risk.

Psychologists in the US throughout the 1980sidentified three primary and two supplementaryattitudinal factors that contribute to most humanerror accidents and injuries.

ACCIDENT RISK MANAGEMENT PROFILE

The foundation of the AS&QAP was the personalAccident Risk Management questionnaireproviding each individual with a profile of safetyawareness and areas of personal risk.

Psychologists in the US throughout the 1980sidentified three primary and two supplementaryattitudinal factors that contribute to most humanerror accidents and injuries.

These factors are:

> Safety Control - a measure of a person’swillingness to accept personal responsibilityfor their own behaviour and results.

> Risk Avoidance - a measure of a person’swillingness to avoid dangerous risk taking andfollow safety procedures.

> Stress Tolerance - a measure of a person’sability to handle and cope effectively withstress.

> Driver Attitude - a measure of a persons: care,courteousness and commitment to safe andprofessional driving of all motor vehicles.

> Quality Orientation - a measure of a person’swillingness and ability to take personalresponsibility for their performance.

Research in Australia, New Zealand and the U.S.,across many industries, had overwhelminglydemonstrated the ability of the ARMquestionnaire to identify the 1/3 of the populationresponsible for, on average, 75% of accidents and85% of lost-time due to injuries.

The ARM profile had proven itself as an essentialtool in the area of recruitment, particularly forsafety sensitive positions.

However, its primary value was viewed by itsadvocates as its ability to identify the specificfactors (beliefs) underlying unsafe behaviour thatcould be targeted and trained, thus thedevelopment of the AS&QAP.

REPORT ON SAFETY ATTITUDE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

BHP reduced their All Injury Frequency Rate (AIFR)1 by 58%, absenteeism by 28%, and improvedthe commitment to quality and professionalism with the simple introduction of an attitude-based development program. 1 AIFR is the reported injuries per million man hours worked.

Report compiled by Geoffrey Needham, Superintendent, BHP Rail Operations

BHP: Special Report page 1 of 5

37

TESTING ARM

While there were some reservations about whether attitude could be changed, BHP decided totrial the AS&QAP utilising stringent research controls.

As a first stage, to test the ARM questionnaires ability to identify the attitudinal factors contributingto injuries, a study was conducted where 100 employees completed the questionnaire.

Results were then correlated with the previous 12 months injury data for those employees.

Those employees whom the questionnaire identified as higher risk had an average AIFR of 340 ascompared with the lower risk group who had an average AIFR of 150.

As demonstrated in Graph 1, the ARM questionnaire was very effective at identifying higher andlower risk employees based on actual injuries over the previous 12 months. The ARMs ability toidentify the attitudinal factors contributing to accidents was convincing.

TESTING AS&QAP

The next test was to determine if the AS&QAP training program would have the ability to changeand sustain employees attitudes as measured both in terms of ARM questionnaire results over 3,6 and 9 month periods and beyond, and in actual reduction of the All Injury Frequency Rates.

TARGET

A 20% increase in attitudinal safety awareness was the targeted objective. A change of thismagnitude would lift most personnel out of the highest risk one-third of the population where75% of accidents and 85% of lost time injuries occur.

The Department’s 200 employees were divided into 3 groups:

> Training Group: 50 employees completed the entire program> Control Group 1: 50 employees completed the ARM questionnaire only at commencement

and the nine month stage> Control Group 2: The remaining 100 employees hadtheir AIFR tracked and compared.


GRAPH 1:ARM Safety Index Scale vs. AIFR

38

RESULTS

Results were impressive. The AS&QAP demonstrated across all measured factors its ability toimprove safety awareness and to focus individuals on their personal responsibility for accidentand injury prevention. While the Control Groups showed no significant changes the TrainingGroup, as indicated in the following graphics, demonstrates:

> Dramatic increases in Safety Awareness Graph 2> Substantially reduced AIFR Graph 3> Improved reporting of incidents Graph 4> Lower absenteeism Graph 5

ARM SCORES

The results in Graph 2 indicate that Control Group 1 had not, within significant statistical limits,changed attitudes between the first and second administrations of the ARM questionnaire.

The Training Group however had improved between each of the questionnaire administrationswith improvement of between 29% to 98% across the scales (40% improvement on an overallsafety awareness measure).

Note: Practice effect and/or intentional distortion is controlled for within the ARM profile asan internal integrity measure of candidness. No significant practice effect was indicated.

GRAPH 2:Safety Awareness Improvement - Training Group vs. Control Group


39

INJURY RESULTS

Graph 3 shows the improvement in AIFR for the 12 month period prior to and followingcommencement of the program comparing the Training and Control Group 2.

This 58% reduction in injuries is an outstanding result and is reflective of the sustainedimprovements in safety attitudes and awareness.

UPDATE: Eighteeen months past the initial AS&QAP training a reduction of greater than 50%AIFR to pre-training levels has been sustained.

FOOTNOTE: The Control Groups from this study have now been involved in the training and arereporting similar results.

The ARM profile has also been introduced across many departments of BHP in support ofrecruitment of new personnel.


GRAPH 3:Safety Awareness Improvement - Training Group vs. Control Group6-Month Rolling Average

INCIDENT RESULTS

Graph 4 indicates the number of actual incidents and the number of potential incidents thatoccurred during the twelve-month period. Results indicate a doubling of the reporting of poten-tial incidents while the number of actual incidents has reduced. Supervisors believe this isreflective of the overall improvement in quality attitudes.

GRAPH 4:Safety Awareness Improvement - Training Group vs. Control Group

40


ABSENTEEISM RESULTS

Graph 5 shows the days absent per person per year for the Training and Control Groups 12 monthsprior to and following the study. A 28% improvement in the absentee rate was gained with theTraining Group without any significant change indicated for the Control Groups. We believe theseresults show that the AS&QAP has provided a refocused commitment for employees to acceptmore responsibility for their work and improved work satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Results and benefits appear compelling. Clearly the ARM profile was able to identify human errorfactors that contribute to accidents.

The AS&QAP training across our four key performance indicators demonstrated the sustainablechange and development of individual safety awareness and its benefits. Certainly, addressinghuman factors is a vital step in safety management.

While systems provide the structure for a safe and injury free workplace, it is the human factorsthat will determine its success or failure.

Even good systems and skills training will fail if there is a lack of compliance or commitment fromthe people the system or training is designed to support.

The AS&QAP has proven its ability to develop the safety attitudes and behaviours of itsparticipants toward compliance and commitment, ensuring a focused safety culture.

BHP Rail Operations is now training the remainder of their personnel.

BHP Transport and BHP Oil & Gas Pipe have initiated their own AS&QAP training while BHP Slaband Plate and other divisions are now planning similar programs.

GRAPH 5:Absenteeism: Training Group vs. Control Group

41

AS&QA Participant Evaluations

ASA Level One: Coaching Session - Composite Evaluation Was the Coaching Session: Useful/Helpful, Personal/Private, Professionally Presented?

n

37254%

35%

11%

0% 0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Very Good Above Average Average Below Average Poor

AS&QA Training: Participant Evaluations 2012

Feedback from Participants in All Levels:> This course is a move in the right direction to support work place efficiency & harmony

> Very excellent [for] safety awareness and training.

> Useful program - changed awareness and thinking immediately

> Very stimulating & education for safety & health

> Enjoyed it & hope we all learn something from it

> Probably the best training yet

> Very informative and easy to understand

> Always informative and helpful. Food for thought to keep us safe.

> Enjoyed seeing my improvements

> Provided a very useful opportunity to express concerns about current challenges in workplace - thanks.

> Really informative has made me more aware about safety.

42

AS&QA Participant Evaluations

ASA Level Two: Training Day - Composite Evaluation Participants were asked to rate: Presenters and Workbooks

n

41858%

34%

8%

0% 0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


AS&QA Training: Participant Evaluations 2012

ASA Level Three:Coaching Session - Composite EvaluationWas the Coaching Session: Useful/Helpful, Personal/Private, Professionally Presented?

n

265

72%

21%

6%

0% 1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


ASA Level Five:Coaching Session - Composite EvaluationWas the Coaching Session: Useful/Helpful, Personal/Private, Professionally Presented?

n

3262%

36%

2%0% 0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


table of contents about paqs: a partnered approach 2 the ... · diploma of management diploma of...

Documents