Program Evaluation

Several methods exits and have been proposed for gauging the effectiveness of safety programs. Broadly, they can be classified as systematic or organic.

Organic Measures: Organic methods attempt to evaluate how well the safety programs is designed and fulfilled. On interest, in this case is the merit of program’s elements and their level of implementation. Organic measures seek to answer several questions. For example:

  • Is the program effective in changing unsafe behavior.
  • Have safety attitudes been improved ?
  • Have injury-producing physical conditions been corrected ?

These are some of the issues which organic safety performance measures are concerned with.

There techniques are used to measures organic safety effectiveness. Namely :

  • Safety inspection.
  • Safety audit.
  • Comparison.

Safety Inspection: In the inspectors are given specifics to follow. These may include program elements such as formulation of safety committees, how often they meet, as well as more customary items covering compliance with regulations. After inspection, a report of the findings is made to the management concerned. Inspection varies in intensity and scope, but the procedures and objectives remain the same. Inspection is universal in its application too.

Safety Audit: Audit is an in-depth analysis of facilities,  management and employee, attitude towards safety managerial effectiveness in maintaining safety, and quantity of the safety planning as well as the operation’s conformity with safety regulations. In the latter case, the level of compensation is considered as an indicator of operating effectiveness, because audit is not simply concerned with whether regulations are followed to the letter. Overall performance in controlling the operation’s is the audit’s quest, rather than simply determining existing safety oversights.

Audit is comparable to inspection, but differs ordinarily in intensity with which the examination is conducted.

Comparison: This is the third method of evaluating the company’s safety efforts. They purpose here is to compare the experience of a plant or industry with that of another which is comparable. It is well-known that some operations have consistently better frequency rates, often in spite of inherently high operating hazards. The question then is whether the operation is doing then its counterparts and over how long a span it has been improving or sliding.

Systemic measures: The concern is systematic measures is with the effects of the program, that is the achievement of the aims. The program is designed to serve reduction in the rate of accidents, cost, saving.

The most common methods of quantifying safety performance are the incidence ration, severity ratio and frequency ratio. Another methods is to ascertain cost figures and use the data in formulating a safety policy as well as evaluating departmental efficiency with respect to safety performance.

More important is the overall effectiveness of the management itself. Simple evidence of managerial support appears to assist safety achievement only fleetingly. It appears that for safety to be optimized, the management must be generally effective in persuading the fulfillment of all responsibilities that are related to the mission of the organization. The motivation for safety, therefore, is dependent on the management overall leadership qualities. The requirement is no different from that needed for optimizing group efforts generally. This need is inherent in the concept of management hierarchies.

HR-Professionals 12


Explore Tutu'rself