Exploring the state of health and safety management system performance measurement in mining organizations

Abstract

Complex arguments continue to be articulated regarding the theoretical foundation of health and safety management system (HSMS) performance measurement. The culmination of these efforts has begun to enhance a collective understanding. Despite this enhanced theoretical understanding, however, there are still continuing debates and little consensus. The goal of the current research effort was to empirically explore common methods to HSMS performance measurement in mining organizations. The purpose was to determine if value and insight could be added into the ongoing approaches of the best ways to engage in health and safety performance measurement. Nine site-level health and safety management professionals were provided with 133 practices corresponding to 20 HSMS elements, each fitting into the plan, do, check, act phases common to most HSMS. Participants were asked to supply detailed information as to how they (1) assess the performance of each practice in their organization, or (2) would assess each practice if it were an identified strategic imperative. Qualitative content analysis indicated that the approximately 1200 responses provided could be described and categorized into interventions, organizational performance, and worker performance. A discussion of how these categories relate to existing indicator frameworks is provided. The analysis also revealed divergence in two important measurement issues; (1) quantitative vs qualitative measurement and reporting; and (2) the primary use of objective or subjective metrics. In lieu of these findings we ultimately recommend a balanced measurement and reporting approach within the three metric categories and conclude with suggestions for future research.

Reliability Model and Critical Factors Identification of Construction Safety Management Based on System Thinking

“…Construction safety management is a big and complex issue with large amounts of tasks and factors. It involves systemic planning and management of various safety elements, including safety standards, safety policies, safety programs, safety evaluation, incident reporting, and in-cident investigation (Choudhry, Fang, & Ahmed, 2008;Hinze, Hallowell, & Baud, 2013;Haas & Yorio, 2016). Different factors, such as terrible weather, complex geological conditions, design quality, schedule, and personal professionality all have impact on safety performance (Hinze, 1997;Mitropoulos, Abdelhamid, & Howell, 2005;Han, Saba, Lee, Mohamed, & Peña-Mora, 2014).…”

A case study exploring field-level risk assessments as a leading safety indicator

“…Worksites often face challenges of determining the best ways to measure and develop suitable tools to facilitate consistent risk measurement (Boyle, 2012; Haas and Yorio, 2016; Haas, Willmer and Cecala, 2016). For example, research shows that assessing site risks using a series of checklists or general observations during site walkthroughs is more common (Navon and Kolten, 2006).…”

“…Risk assessments can occur quantitatively or qualitatively. Research values both types in high-risk occupations to ensure that all possible hazards and outcomes have been identified, considered and reduced, if needed (Boyle, 2012; Haas and Yorio, 2016; Hallenbeck, 1993; International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM), 2012; World Health Organization (WHO), 2008). Quantitative methods are commonly found where the site is trying to reduce a specific health or environmental exposure, such as respirable dust or another toxic substance (Van Ryzin, 1980).…”

Using Sensemaking Theory to Improve Risk Management and Risk Communication: What Can We Learn?

“…First, risk identification consists of identifying a hazard or acknowledging a risk [27]. Common examples include accident records, root cause analysis, hazard inspections, and workplace audits [28,29]. Risk assessment is the process of determining if the hazard poses an unacceptable risk that could result in an incident and therefore, needs to be reduced to prevent an incident [1,27].…”

“…Risk assessment is the process of determining if the hazard poses an unacceptable risk that could result in an incident and therefore, needs to be reduced to prevent an incident [1,27]. Risk mitigation incorporates the "plan" and "do" of the H&S management cycle via the development and implementation of previously developed RM strategies (e.g., machine guarding, work flow, building design, proper/adequate equipment and tools, personal protective equipment) and includes all those involved in the risk [28][29][30]. A risk response entails any type of follow-up effort to mitigate the hazard such as elimination, reporting/placing a work order, or changing a work task or behavior to minimize the threat [1].…”