**3. Safety performance measurement**

The primary goal of measuring safety performance in a work environment is to intervene in an attempt to mitigate unsafe behaviors and conditions that can lead to accidents. Various measures of safety performance have been used for decades and they have served a useful purpose [27]. Generally, performance measurements can either be reactive or active monitoring [10]. While reactive monitoring means identifying and reporting on incidents and learning from mistakes, active monitoring provides feedback on performance before an accident or incident occurs [28].

In the US, safety performance has traditionally been measured by metrics such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recordable injury rate (RIR); days away, restricted work, or transfer (DART) injury rate; or the experience modification rating (EMR) on workers' compensation [27]. Past safety performance has been largely measured and driven by lagging indicators (including

**69**

*Industrial Safety Management Using Innovative and Proactive Strategies*

injuries, illnesses, and fatalities), but improvements and enhancements of safety performance can be experienced through implementing safety leading indicators to measure worker safety performance [11]. Although lagging indicators will continue to be used, they have serious limitations when it comes to the prediction of the current and future safety performance of a project or work environment. This makes

The term "indicators" is used to mean observable measures that provide insights into a concept that is difficult to measure directly; a safety performance indicator is a means for measuring the changes over time at the level of safety as the result of actions taken [29]. An indicator is a measurable and operational variable that can be used to describe the condition of a broader phenomenon or aspect of reality. An indicator can be considered any measure (quantitative or qualitative) that seeks to produce information on an issue of interest [30]. Safety indicators can play a key role in providing information on organizational performance, motivating people to

The major distinction between leading and lagging indicators lies in the type of response that is elicited by them when the measures indicate that performance is not as desired. While in leading indicators, the response is proactive in nature with the intent of making changes in the safety process to avoid injuries, with lagging indicators, the response is reactive as a response is made after injuries have already occurred and the response is initiated to try to prevent the occurrence of further injuries [27]. Hence, the two categories of safety metrics are: (1) lagging indicators (i.e. metrics linked to the outcome of an injury or accident); and (2) leading indica-

Lagging indicators are related to reactive monitoring which involves identifying and reporting on incidents to check that controls in place are adequate, to identify weaknesses or gaps in control systems, and to learn from mistakes [10]. They show when the desired safety outcome has failed, or when it has not been achieved [32]. Since lagging indicators might prompt response after an injury or a series of injuries have occurred, it should be evident that lagging indicators of safety performance are based on past safety performance results [27]. Lagging indicators do not provide further insights on the existing safety conditions once an accident has occurred because they do not give room for informed decision making based on continuous data collection and analysis [33]. The most commonly used lagging indicators are accident rate, lost workday injuries, medical case injuries, and experience modifica-

Leading indicators are measurements of processes, activities, and conditions that define performance and can predict future results [9]. A leading indicator is the result of periodic measurements of specific safety performance. Leading indicators provide opportunities for safety managers to identify areas of safety performance that need improvement before injuries or fatalities occur [34]. Leading indicators measure the building blocks of the safety culture of a project or company. When one or more of these measures suggest that some aspect of the safety process is weak or weakening, interventions can be implemented to improve the safety process and, thereby positively impact the safety process before any negative occurrences (injuries) are sustained [9]. The common leading indicators used in industrial sectors are near miss reporting, project management team safety process involvement, worker

the need for leading indicators of safety performance very crucial [27].

work on safety, and increasing the organizational potential for safety [31].

tors (i.e. metrics or measurements linked to preventive actions).

**3.1 Lagging indicators**

tion rate (EMR), among others.

**3.2 Leading indicators**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93797*

#### *Industrial Safety Management Using Innovative and Proactive Strategies DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93797*

injuries, illnesses, and fatalities), but improvements and enhancements of safety performance can be experienced through implementing safety leading indicators to measure worker safety performance [11]. Although lagging indicators will continue to be used, they have serious limitations when it comes to the prediction of the current and future safety performance of a project or work environment. This makes the need for leading indicators of safety performance very crucial [27].

The term "indicators" is used to mean observable measures that provide insights into a concept that is difficult to measure directly; a safety performance indicator is a means for measuring the changes over time at the level of safety as the result of actions taken [29]. An indicator is a measurable and operational variable that can be used to describe the condition of a broader phenomenon or aspect of reality. An indicator can be considered any measure (quantitative or qualitative) that seeks to produce information on an issue of interest [30]. Safety indicators can play a key role in providing information on organizational performance, motivating people to work on safety, and increasing the organizational potential for safety [31].

The major distinction between leading and lagging indicators lies in the type of response that is elicited by them when the measures indicate that performance is not as desired. While in leading indicators, the response is proactive in nature with the intent of making changes in the safety process to avoid injuries, with lagging indicators, the response is reactive as a response is made after injuries have already occurred and the response is initiated to try to prevent the occurrence of further injuries [27]. Hence, the two categories of safety metrics are: (1) lagging indicators (i.e. metrics linked to the outcome of an injury or accident); and (2) leading indicators (i.e. metrics or measurements linked to preventive actions).

## **3.1 Lagging indicators**

*Concepts, Applications and Emerging Opportunities in Industrial Engineering*

Within a positive safety culture, the organization's formal management systems and leaders' informal management practices encourage, recognize, and reinforce safe behaviors, and create an environment where employees feel responsible for their safety and the safety of their peers [14]. The largest indicator of a management's commitment to safety is the investments made for safety including discretionary safety funding [24]. Previous research investigated the correlation between safety discretionary funding of construction companies and their corresponding safety record [25]. Results suggest that increasing the amount of discretionary safety funding in a construction company can improve their incident record. Furthermore,

The primary goal of measuring safety performance in a work environment is to intervene in an attempt to mitigate unsafe behaviors and conditions that can lead to accidents. Various measures of safety performance have been used for decades and they have served a useful purpose [27]. Generally, performance measurements can either be reactive or active monitoring [10]. While reactive monitoring means identifying and reporting on incidents and learning from mistakes, active monitoring provides feedback on performance before an accident or incident occurs [28]. In the US, safety performance has traditionally been measured by metrics such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recordable injury rate (RIR); days away, restricted work, or transfer (DART) injury rate; or the experience modification rating (EMR) on workers' compensation [27]. Past safety performance has been largely measured and driven by lagging indicators (including

companies that invest in safety programs, training, and employee incentives can improve their safety record [25]. Finally, results from a construction safety study found that organizational commitment throughout all levels (top management, site level, to the individual level) is the key to promoting improved safety

**68**

performance [26].

**Figure 1.**

**3. Safety performance measurement**

*European Railway Safety Culture Model 2.0: Components.*

Lagging indicators are related to reactive monitoring which involves identifying and reporting on incidents to check that controls in place are adequate, to identify weaknesses or gaps in control systems, and to learn from mistakes [10]. They show when the desired safety outcome has failed, or when it has not been achieved [32]. Since lagging indicators might prompt response after an injury or a series of injuries have occurred, it should be evident that lagging indicators of safety performance are based on past safety performance results [27]. Lagging indicators do not provide further insights on the existing safety conditions once an accident has occurred because they do not give room for informed decision making based on continuous data collection and analysis [33]. The most commonly used lagging indicators are accident rate, lost workday injuries, medical case injuries, and experience modification rate (EMR), among others.

## **3.2 Leading indicators**

Leading indicators are measurements of processes, activities, and conditions that define performance and can predict future results [9]. A leading indicator is the result of periodic measurements of specific safety performance. Leading indicators provide opportunities for safety managers to identify areas of safety performance that need improvement before injuries or fatalities occur [34]. Leading indicators measure the building blocks of the safety culture of a project or company. When one or more of these measures suggest that some aspect of the safety process is weak or weakening, interventions can be implemented to improve the safety process and, thereby positively impact the safety process before any negative occurrences (injuries) are sustained [9]. The common leading indicators used in industrial sectors are near miss reporting, project management team safety process involvement, worker

observation process, job site audits, housekeeping program, stop work authority, safety orientation and training, etc. Leading indicators consist of both passive as well as active measures. Passive measures are those which can be predictive over an extended period while active measures are those which can initiate corrective steps in a short period. These two measures of leading indicators are further described as follows.
