Strategic training to reduce safety risks

Employers are required by OHS legislation to provide workers with training and supervision to enable them to perform their work in a manner that does not expose them to hazards. Companies with risk-tolerant cultures take a minimalist approach to these requirements. They provide induction with a checklist mentality - ticking off the items and filing it away. This, they believe erroneously, is sufficient to fulfil their duty of care obligations. Unfortunately, companies often fail to appreciate the importance and benefits of employee training and development as part of their overall risk management strategy.

Human resources (HR) has a residual risk (inherent danger that can not be completely eliminated) based on their competency levels. Inexperienced workers have lower levels of competencies than experienced well-trained workers and are a greater source of risk to the business. They tend to have more accidents and to inadvertently cause damage to company assets. They are less safe and less efficient. These HR risks need to be addressed through training, supervision and the development of a culture which promotes safety and efficiency concurrently.

In addition, HR is a threat to the business in terms of their tendency to degrade. Workers suffer from mental and physical fatigue, ill health and loss of concentration. This degradation (called entropic risk) also causes workers to be less safe and less efficient. In addition to management issues such as rosters and job design, training and the company culture are crucial in addressing this risk type.

Training is a critical component of OHS management because the quality of HR has a significant impact on risk levels. Both safety and efficiency are seriously impacted by the presence of high levels of HR risks. Training is not, however, the core solution to managing these risks. It can only be effective if the nature of the work encourages appropriate behaviour. In a production-centred workplace with dangerous physical conditions, such as construction or underground mining, training will not necessarily result in safer, more efficient behaviours. The management system with its production focus can contradict and potentially nullify the learning that takes place during training.

HR residual and entropic risks are illustrated by the Entropy Model - a core tool of productive safety management. The Entropy Model illustrates that HR is one of four system factors within the total business system. The other system factors are processes, technologies and the physical environment. Each of these system factors has inherent dangers (residual risk) and a tendency towards degradation (entropic risk). These risks must be managed effectively to create systems of work and a culture that allows training to be transferred into the workplace.

How can the employer determine what training is required to achieve improvements in both safety and efficiency? Productive safety management uses a tool called the 'Capacity Reservoir' to represent the total competency pool of the business's workforce. The Capacity Reservoir provides a strategic approach to training and development focused on effective management of HR risks. The purpose of this approach is to increase efficiency and safety by improving the quality of the workforce. It also aims to retain competencies and maximise the return on training investment through problem solving and leadership at all levels.

There are six competency builders filling it. The first of these are the competencies developed by the new recruit during previous work experience and training. The business sources these competencies from the labour market through the recruitment and selection process. After commencement, the new recruit needs to be inducted. This is the first phase of in-house training.

When a new employee commences, they bring their skills, values and attitudes into the workplace. There is often a gap between their current capacity and the proficiencies required to perform the job to the required standard. Also, a degree of incongruence usually exists between the recruit's values and attitudes and those espoused by the Productive Safety Culture. Induction is a crucial step in addressing these gaps. The importance of induction is well recognised, particularly in relation to fulfilling the employer's duty of care. As a result, many companies take a legalistic view of this process.

Some businesses fail to appreciate the other benefits of induction. The primary aim of induction should be to assist the new employee to achieve a high standard of safety and performance in as short a time as possible. This helps to manage the risks associated with the new recruit's incomplete competencies. Induction is, therefore, both an important risk management and efficiency strategy. The second aim of induction should be to integrate the new recruit into the company culture. The newcomer has to learn expected values and behavioural standards.

What difference does this make to company performance? Induction can be used to put the new recruit on a learning curve that shifts them towards optimal performance and safety. It helps the new employee to become an 'insider' with goals and values more closely aligned with the Productive Safety Culture. Hence, it is critical for the integration process to be successful. At stake are:

• the new employee's safety, performance, satisfaction and commitment;
• the work group's safety, performance and satisfaction;
• start-up costs invested in the new employee;
• the likelihood that the employee will remain with the company and, therefore, the overall level of turnover and retention of competencies; and
• the cost of replacement of employees who resign.

Induction is an initial in-flow into the Capacity Reservoir.

Next, employees must have a full contingency of job-specific skills to be safe, efficient operators. These are developed through on-the-job support and through training. This phase focuses on two issues. Firstly, meeting legal requirements, such as updating competencies requiring certification; and secondly, ensuring workers have the skills to work safely and efficiently in terms of the tasks in their job descriptions.

Once an employee has completed these steps, does this mean they are a safe worker? These skills make the worker 'safer'; however, without an understanding of the nature of risk there is the potential for the employee to behave inappropriately. This is particularly the case in uncertain, non-routine situations. This training does not provide the skills to identify hazards, appreciate the implications of those hazards or to understand the impact that worker behaviour has on the level of risk.

This competency gap is addressed by providing an understanding of the nature of risk. According to the Entropy Model, risk is not simply associated with known and specific hazards. Workers, particularly those employed in hazardous workplaces, need to understand that nothing is 100 per cent safe. While specific, known hazards may have been dealt with, inherent dangers remain. For instance, in an equipment maintenance workshop, these dangers can include confined spaces, heavy machinery with moving parts, high energy processes such as lifting, and low levels of competencies among apprentices. Workers need to understand that risk is systemic and, in some workplaces, highly variable. The nature of risk can be explained using the Entropy Model and applying the model to workplace-specific conditions.

The next stage of training focuses on gaining employee commitment. To attain 'buy-in', companies need to align employees' goals and values with company goals and values. There has to be compatibility between the management system and employees' belief systems to gain their support. One of the critical issues here is the credibility of managers and supervisors.

The subject of leadership has been widely debated in both safety management and organisational development circles. At the heart of leadership is the ability to make decisions that reinforce shared values and build credibility. When supervisors make decisions for the sake of production to the detriment of employee safety, credibility is destroyed. With it, the supervisor's ability to lead is also sabotaged. For this reason, Productive Safety Management provides a decision-making tool called the Reasonableness Test. This tool ensures that decisions are made to manage risk for the sake of both safety and efficiency. Decisions that pass the Reasonableness Test fit the productive safety culture. In this 5th phase of training, employees learn about the values and decision-making processes that lead to the desired culture. Both competencies and the culture determine whether employees know how to and are motivated to behave appropriately.

The level of motivation is affected by individual and organisational variables. The former includes the attributes that are worker-specific such as ability and experience. Organisational factors include the physical work environment, company culture, leadership and the HR management system used to select, train, reward and compensate employees. Training cannot therefore be relied on as the soul source of managing behaviour-related risk. It is also important to ensure that organisational systems are aligned with the training and facilitate learning transfer. If the conditions on the shop floor do not change and hazards are not addressed, then the training program has little substance. To generate the desired behaviours and attitudes, a strategic approach to risk reduction and management is required, with training being one element of the approach.

The final phase of the Capacity Reservoir is learning to be a positive catalyst. Employees learn to adopt behaviours that support the system and reinforce the desired culture. This learning involves taking ownership of safety and efficiency goals. Workers in this phase are natural mentors, leaders and problem solvers who make suggestions that lead to improved safety and efficiency. They understand the importance of effective risk management for themselves and for the business. The 'safe worker' is someone who:

• is educated about the residual risks in the workplace;
• is vigilant because of these residual risks;
• is kept informed of changes in entropic and residual risks;
• works safely and efficiently to keep entropic risk low; and
• has the competencies and opportunities to make suggestions that contribute to improved safety and efficiency.

Training is an important process for both managing HR risks and pursuing continuous improvement of business systems. The Capacity Reservoir shows that when companies invest in workforce competency development and create a culture conducive to participation, this leads to resourcefulness. Resourcefulness is demonstrated by better review of systems, enhanced problem-solving and decision-making, leadership at all levels and improvements in the quality of the business's system factors. The returns attainable from a skilled workforce who are committed to the company's goals and values have the potential to far exceed the investment in training and development.

* This is an authorised extract from Productive Safety Management (2003, published by Butterworth-Heinemann) written by Tania Mol, TaniaMol@bigpond.com