Some excellent research that might help with workplace conversations on the suitability of interventions in your workplace, undertaken by Jakkovan Kampena, Marre Lammersa, Wouter Steijnb, Frank Guldenmun, Jop Groeneweg. They considered the Intervention types, the proportion of respondents that use a particular intervention, the proportion of those users, which considered it one of their ‘three most effective interventions’. The table is sorted from most used to least used by respondents. It is important to remember that not all organisations are at the same point in their safety maturity or exist within the same regulatory or industrial environment. These figures indicate the most likely to be used as against those that are considered the top 3 most effective. There is a clear imbalance between those required and those that are felt to be effective.
Intervention Type %Used %Top 3 Most Effective
General risk inventory and assessment - 98% 10%
Reporting, cataloguing and investigating (near) accidents - 97% 24%
Emergency preparedness exercises - 93% 10%
Safety symbols on dangerous objects, machines, rooms or equipment - 93% 1%
Employee safety training focused on cooperation - 88% 56%
Safeguarding the dangerous parts of machines (e.g. hot or moving) - 88% 5%
Internal audit of SMS - 86% 3%
Task risk assessment - 86% 10%
Safety observations and inspections by trained staff - 85% 21%
Individual certified safety training for employees - 85% 7%
Instructions on the safe use of substances, machines and equipment - 85% 9%
Procedure/method for reducing hazards at the source (inherent safety) - 81% 9%
Systematic scheduled discussion of safety issues within the company - 80% 15%
Visual markings on the work floor - 79% 0%
Providing site visitors with basic house rules - 77% 2%
Leadership training focused on safety roles - 75% 35%
Placing information on hazardous machines - 75% 0%
Defining/communicating short list of essential rules (life-saving rules) - 73% 8
External audit of SMS - 73 %3 %
Employee safety committee - 72 %5 %
A final safety check just before starting work (LMRA) - 72% 12 %
Gate instruction for suppliers and contractors specifying safety rules - 72 %2 %
Digital safety information (e.g. intranet) 71 %1 %
Using a work-permit system - 70 %9 %
Sensors and alarms for process equipment - 69 %1 %
Lock-out tag out for safeguarding machines for maintenance - 69 %4 %
Maintenance based on technical state (preventative or predictive) - 69 %3 %
Human centred design of work environment to reduce human error - 66 %4 %
Collecting and sharing good practices - 66 %5 %
Discussing safety in a structured handover process - 65 %7 %
Discussing safety in daily start-work 64% 22%
Additional risk assessments (e.g QRA, HAZOP, FMEA, Bowtie) 64 %6 %
Campaign focused on improving employee safety behaviour (posters) - 62% 8%
Management of change procedures - 57% 12 %
Sanctioning individual employees for non-compliance - 55 %4 %
Including safety performance in employee rewards - 55 %4 %
Using lessons from earlier project in work preparation - 54 %3 %
Surveys focused on employee safety perceptions and experiences - 53% 6%
Organising a safety day - 52% 12 %
Assessing safety performance if awarding projects to sub-contractors - 49 %5 %
Campaign focused on using personal protective equipment (e.g. posters) - 49% 1%
Logging safety lessons after project completion - 47 %1 %
Accessible electronic system for managing action items related to safety - 45 %2 %
Managing lists of safety critical elements - 45 %1 %
Human centred design of computer systems to reduce human error - 44 % 1 %
Making short movies focused on safety awareness 39 %4 %
Campaign focused on preventing worker stress (e.g. posters) 35 %1 %Including safety performance in manager rewards (bonus) 32 %3 %