Austin 2006

An Introduction to
BehaviorBased Safety
by John Austin, PhD
Western Michigan University
rganizations in the aggregates

industry have long recognized
that worker safety is an essential component of the business and that
they can continuously improve their
safety record by reducing injuries. As an
example of the industry-wide commitment to injury reduction, an alliance was
formed between NSSGA and MSHA
wherein a team was assigned to analyze
injuries in the aggregates industry
between 2000-2002 (MSHA/NSSGA,
2003). The team reported that of the
12,147 injuries reviewed, the top injury
classifications were maintenance, repair,
and construction; handling materials;
and slips, trips and falls. The goals of the
report were to identify areas of potential
improvement, to make recommendations for improvement, and to stress the
importance of eliminating all injuries. To
me, this strongly suggests an industry
that has its priorities straight. As you
will read below, an important step in any
injury reduction effort is to conduct a
careful analysis of the current sources of
injuries, to identify areas for potential
improvement.
It is clear that there are many strategies for managing work safety. In this
articlepages, I will discuss just one of
the many effective strategies: behavior-based safety.
38
Whaty Is BehaviorBased Safety?

Its effective. Sulzer-Azaroff and
Austin (2000) found that 31 of 32 published studies describing behavioral
programs in nine industries and seven
countries showed mean decreases in
injury rates of 54 percent. Grindle,
Dickinson, and Boettcher (2000)
reviewed 18 published studies using
behavioral programs in manufacturing
and found that improvements in
behavior over baseline ranged from 9
to 157percent. Although the studies in
these reviews focused on different
behaviors, different industries, and
each used tailored programs for the
worksites where they were implemented, there were some consistent and
fundamental components of each program, and this approach has been
widely described (see Geller, 2001;
McSween, 2004).
The Components of
Behavior-Based Safety
Behavioral safety has four general
components:
1. Identification of change targets
through a careful analysis and
assessment of the data. These targets can and should be anything that
is observable, and research in the
field shows that it is effective to target behaviors, results of behavior,
conditions and situations that are
related to injury. The most common
mistakes in this phase include failing to get employee input about barriers to safety and risky situations to
target, basing targets purely on
opinion rather than data, and targeting only behaviors. The last is the
most potentially devastating to successful safety performances because

injuries always involve behavior,
but they most often also involve
systems, tools and equipment. Failing to measure these other factors
(in addition to behavior) is a sure
condition for program failure.
2. Development of a measurement
system. The most successful behavioral safety processes involve all
employees and management in data
collection. In fact, I once visited a
site that required all visitors to conduct a safety observation, just to see
if visitors catch anything that was
being missed by internal personnel.
Some keys to success in this phase
include getting buy-in from all parties involved to develop an acceptable data collection process; making
the process open to allnot only
front-line workers; collection of
anonymous and accurate data to use
in problem solvingnot fault-finding; and collection of (and later, correction of) barriers to safe behavior.
3. Development of a feedback, reinforcement and problem solving
process. Normally, a good measurement system will include verbal
and graphic feedback (posted by
group data, not individual), positive
reinforcement for safe behavior or
situations, positive reinforcement
for conducting observations, and
problem solving for at-risk behavior or situations. Feedback and
reinforcement should be a two-way
discussion whereby the observer
tells the observed worker what was
recorded on the measurement
checklist and reinforces the safe
Stone, Sand & Gravel Review, January/February 2006
behavior, and feedback should

occur immediately after observation measures are taken.
Problem-solving involves finding
and fixing barriers to safe performance. These most often are identified
during an observation when at-risk
behavior is observed. In these cases,
the observer and performer are
instructed to discuss, is the at-risk
behavior under the control of the performer? If the behavior is not completely under the control of the
performer, then there is a barrier that
must be addressed in order to facilitate
the safe behavior of the performer. If
you have a behavioral process and you
do not engage in this step, you are at
risk of blaming the worker for every
at-risk behavior, which is both demoralizing and unfair to employees. No
one would doubt the assertion that
safety (and injury) results from a combination of environmental and behavioral factors. It is up to observers to
ably discuss this with workers who are
observed so that solutions to at-risk
behavior (and the situations causing
the behavior) can be effectively crafted
and implemented.
4. Continuous improvement of the
process. Behavior-based safety
processes require a great deal of
time, effort, and expertise but as
discussed above, the payoffs can be
considerable. One place where
processes often fail is after implementationthe point at which people start to lose interest unless the
process changes and adapts over
time. There is one way I know of to
make this continuous improvement
happen consistentlyunfortunately, there is little or nothing published on this topic. One thing we
do know though, is that if the components of the process (observation,
feedback, reinforcement, and problem solving) stop happening, then
the effects go away (see for example, Komaki, Barwick, & Scott,
1978).
The way I have helped organizations
deal with the problem of continuous
improvement is through information
sharing meetings called impact groups.
Developed by a colleague named Doug
LaFleur and me, the concept is systematically to share information about safety processes (behavioral or otherwise)
across (or within) sites. At one organization, impact groups started meeting
in 1998, every six months, and are still
meeting today. The concept has now
spread across virtually the entire organization, and the sites with the most lasting processes are avid supporters of the
impact groups process.
The concept works as follows:
every six months, representatives from
several sites (perhaps two reps from
each of four to six sites or areas) convene for two days at a host site, the
location of which rotates among the
group members sites. During the first
morning of the impact group meeting,
each site presents data on the five to
seven critical dashboard measures they
have developed to represent their safety process. The remainder of the day
and the following day are spent analyzing the host sites process through
various programmed techniques such
as interviewing employees and management, observing work behavior and
observing behavioral observations taking place.
The result of the meeting is a list of
action items on which the host can
improve, along with a timeline and
action plan for improvement. The host
then reports back to the group on these
items once or twice before the next
meeting, and at the start of the next
meeting at a new host site. This may
seem extreme, but experience proves
that continuous improvement does not
happen on its ownit takes a great
deal of effort and systematic planning.
This articlepaper is meant to give a
brief overview of the behavior-based
safety process. Many details have been
omitted due to space considerations. I
strongly suggest that you read some of
the research on the topic (see the website below for a reading list), and that
you read as many anti-BBS papers as
you can, such as the position papers
written by the UAW and the Steelworkers, so that you can avoid the
potential pitfalls of BBS. Search the
Internetthere are tons of resources
supporting and opposing BBS, but be
careful to always ask (and look) for
Stone, Sand & Gravel Review, January/February 2006
data on effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) when you encounter potential

solutions. Logical arguments are great,
but they only go so far, and then you
need some data. If you would like to
learn more about this scientific
approach to organizational management, go to www.obmnetwork.com (a
free site of the non-profit group with
which I am involved) and track down
some of the research in behavior-based
safety and Organizational Behavior
Management.
Dr. John Austin is Associate Professor of Psychology in the Applied
Behavior Analysis and IndustrialOrganizational Psychology programs
at Western Michigan University, where
he teaches behavior-based safety, performance management, and organizational consultation; and engages in
consultation for business and industry.
He can be contacted at John.Austin@
wmich.edu
References
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2004). News
release: Workplace injuries and illnesses in
2003. Retrieved at www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/
os/osnr0021.txt on October 31, 2005.
Geller, E. S. (2001). Working safe: How to
help people actively care for health and safety
(2nd ed.). Lewis Publishers, Inc.
Grindle, A. C., Dickinson, A. M., &
Boettcher, W. (2000). Behavioral safety in manufacturing settings: A review of the literature.
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 20(1), 29-68.
Komaki, J., Barwick, K.D., and Scott, L.W.
(1978). A behavioral approach to occupational
safety: Pinpointing and reinforcing safe performance in a food manufacturing plant. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 434-445.
McSween, T. (2004). The value-based safety
process: Improving your safety culture with a
behavioral approach. Second edition. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY.
Mine Safety and Health Administration
(2005). Comparison of year-to-date and total
fatalities for N/NM & coal. Retrieved at
www.msha.gov/stats/charts/chartshome.htm on
November 1, 2005,
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Austin, J. (2000).
Does BBS work? Behavior-based safety &
injury reduction: A survey of the evidence. Professional Safety, 45, 19-24.
39

Austin 2006

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Austin 2006

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Austin 2006

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Introduction to

rganizations in the aggregates

Whaty Is BehaviorBased Safety?

most potentially devastating to successful safety performances because

Stone, Sand & Gravel Review, January/February 2006

behavior, and feedback should

Stone, Sand & Gravel Review, January/February 2006

data on effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) when you encounter potential

You might also like