Your company must also go through the 5 stages of safety management!

Thread Content

In bg3.png, enterprise safety management generally goes through five stages: pathological management, experience-based management, system-based management, systematized management, and cultural management. These five stages correspond to different levels of corporate safety culture. Senior corporate executives and security managers need to understand what stage of safety culture their company is currently in, so as to have a clear understanding; this enables them to set higher development goals and make continuous improvements in order to realize the company’s vision for growth. I. Stage of pathological management: This is the initial stage of an enterprise’s safety culture, during which safety management operates in a lax and unguided manner. This is manifested in several ways: Management shows little interest in employees’ safety; their main concern is how to minimize problems caused by employees. Even when there is any communication or exchange regarding safety, it occurs only from top to bottom ； Companies do not have dedicated security departments; those responsible for safety management are usually part of the general administrative staff, and safety-related matters are handled based on individual preferences and experience. Some companies appoint security personnel merely to meet legal requirements ； Companies have few management and operational procedures, and almost no dedicated safety management systems. The few safety requirements that do exist are often included within general management rules and regulations, and they mainly serve to restrict people’s behavior by imposing various prohibitions People’s view of breaking rules is that \"as long as no one catches you, it’s fine,\" and they rely on their instincts to take care of their own safety ； There aren’t many meetings with safety-related topics at this stage; work is carried out directly, and little attention is paid to quality aspects, let alone safety ； At the work site, people have no idea what the concepts of hazard identification and risk control are ； There is very little training, and the distribution of safety equipment is pitifully inadequate, or even non-existent. There is no comprehensive work plan; it’s simple, focused on saving money, and there’s certainly no talk of a safety plan. There are usually no written safety reports, which covers up accidents; no reports are submitted to the relevant authorities after an accident occurs, and investigations are only conducted in the event of serious accidents. There are also no records of following up on accidents or taking corrective actions ； Regarding the causes of accidents, human factors are not taken into account; as long as nothing is illegal, that is considered sufficient, with no consideration given to anything other than protecting enterprises and maximizing profits. When choosing contractors, only cost is taken into consideration; safety is rarely considered. Companies believe that it is the contractors’ own responsibility to ensure safety, and that it has nothing to do with the company ； There are no safety inspections; even if there are any, they’re just for show. Needless to say, there’s no one conducting daily safety inspections; the focus is solely on financial audits. II. Experience Management Phase: This is the initial stage of a company’s safety culture. Although significant efforts are made in terms of safety management, many accidents still occur. This is evident in the following aspects: When faced with the choice between profit and safety, management tends to consider costs to be important; sometimes investment is made in equipment maintenance, but production factors still play a dominant role. By choosing a contractor or focusing solely on price, safety issues are not taken into account; the company believes that the contractor is entirely responsible for its own safety. At this stage, the security department is small and has little power. Security staff lack passion in their work; it’s a trivial job in an administrative office. Workers rely solely on their own experience to ensure safety, with little or no awareness of safety precautions; accidents avoid happening only due to a lot of luck. Employees aim to obey; their compliance regarding safety is passive ； Managers at all levels consider safety to be the responsibility solely of the safety department and safety managers, with a lack of involvement from senior management. Management will punish those who cause accidents, but it will not reward those who perform well in terms of safety ； After an accident, the management gives verbal assurances regarding safety, but these are quickly forgotten over time; the usual response to such accidents is to simply fire the employees. Safety reports are very simple; after receiving them, companies do not track the actions taken to address the issues. In accident investigations, no system has been established to identify root causes; there is no comprehensive and systematic analysis and summary of the accidents, nor is any consideration given to whether previous accidents are related to the current one. The work site is inspected after serious accidents or deaths occur. **Audits are sometimes conducted by relevant parties or third parties, but companies do not conduct audits on their own very often; and even when they do conduct such audits, they deliberately ignore certain sensitive aspects. The entire audit process was purely procedural; no analysis was conducted on issues within the management system, making it impossible to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future ； There are no plans for audits and reviews; audits are regarded as a punitive measure. Managers believe that training is a waste of time ； During this period, it was the managers who organized the meetings, speaking whatever came to mind, and sometimes it seemed like holding these meetings was a waste of time. When inspecting the work site, managers merely glance around; they check whatever comes to hand, without any systematic approach or documentation. III. Institutional Management Phase: During this phase, the company’s safety culture develops to an intermediate level. Although the company has detailed systems in place to manage safety, many accidents still occur, as illustrated by the following aspects: The head of the safety department reaches a middle-management position; the department grows in size and gains certain powers. The meetings are very unproductive; people attend only out of obligation. It’s a good opportunity to blame others for past mistakes ； Companies impart a great deal of information to their employees and frequently conduct training; however, management talks a lot about workers’ safety issues but listens little, resulting in poor communication from top to bottom. Companies believe good safety performance can be a reason for promotion. By establishing a baseline for accident incidents, collecting and making all data public, it is believed that the accident incidence rate can be measured. However, there is no prediction of the trend of accident development or inference regarding potential future accidents; no efforts are made to set concrete targets using “figures”. Regarding the accidents, management began to consider reducing exposure time as a way to minimize such incidents; they complained about faulty machinery and inadequate maintenance. At the same time, management failed to take a holistic view of the causes behind these accidents. It’s a balancing act between safety and profit; the amount spent on safety can vary. If none of the contractors meet the requirements, then hire the one who is better. Employees who violate safety regulations may be fired; their compliance with safety rules is merely out of fear of being fired or punished. Employees follow safety rules and regulations passively ； Management oversees and controls safety, repeatedly emphasizing its importance and setting specific safety goals. Companies have begun to recognize the losses caused by accidents from top to bottom; after an accident occurs, extensive statistics are collected along with accident analyses. Accident information is not shared, and the understanding of the causes of accidents as well as the effectiveness of corrective measures need to be improved ； With accident-based regulations and internal standards in place, companies hope to improve their management levels by investing money. After an accident, extensive training is conducted, and the effectiveness of that training improves. Selecting contractors involves many steps, many of which are unnecessary ； The pre-screening generally involves checking the contractor’s past accident record; if the contractor does not meet the standards, the conditions for hiring will be reduced ； No consideration is given to helping contractors meet high standards. Regarding risk management techniques in the workplace, people’s ability to proactively stop dangerous tasks is at a very low level. At the site, there are only some standards regarding what can and cannot be done; no other risk management techniques exist, and there is no systematic risk management system in place at the work site. There are work plans, but there is little evaluation of their quality. There are many procedures, but procedures are often the main focus of training. At first, there were numerous procedures; security personnel developed these procedures and required employees to follow them. Employees did not participate in the creation of these procedures, which took a lot of time, but sometimes they weren’t very effective. Safety reports followed a fixed format, and documentation-based management was introduced. Some potential hazards in the workplace began to be recorded, and a preliminary system for tracking rectifications was established. Enterprises also started demanding the completion of various documents. An accident investigation was initiated, and some information dissemination systems were set up. There are regular inspection plans, but they are quite superficial; they focus only on high-risk tasks, prefer to inspect others, while being rather passive when it comes to internal inspections. Someone checks safety on a daily basis, but senior management does not participate; inspections at the work site are carried out only to meet the minimum requirements, and procedure manuals are in place to ensure the safe operation of employees. IV. System Management Phase: This is an advanced stage of corporate culture, during which efforts are made to identify potential hazards and prevent accidents. This is manifested in the following aspects: The company has a reward system that takes into account rewarding those who perform well in terms of safety, with TRCF serving as the benchmark for such rewards ； Be able to actively balance the relationship between production and profits in order to achieve safety as well ； Before selecting a contractor, it is necessary for them to meet high standards; otherwise, the work will be delayed, but sometimes financial considerations are also taken into account. It is now believed that EHS management is related to contractors; preliminary assessments rely on past safety records, and there are implementable systems through which companies can assist contractors with training. Management began to pay attention to the operation of the entire EHS system, including processes and procedures; however, some accidents still occurred ； Be able to share accident cases after an incident occurs, and be capable of addressing non-conformities ； Programs are written at the operational level, and approved by the management level. Management recognized the desire for mutual dialogue at the operational level, and two-way communication was established between management and the operational staff. Ask and you will get an answer; the workplace emphasizes mutual care among workers. Colleagues have started to look out for each other’s safety, and there are some commitments in place, but overall it still doesn’t seem like the best effort is being made. During this phase, EHS offered high compensation and considered it to be a very important job role. The training department carries out its work in accordance with the training plan, regularly providing refresher training for workers. There is no procedure for evaluating employees’ capabilities yet, but the role of training remains rather limited. Implement safety work analysis and a two-person work system in the workplace. Work plans include systems such as work permit procedures and itinerary management, all of which are in standard formats; they are usually implemented and executed, with their effectiveness evaluated. The procedures are required to be updated regularly in real time; if workers feel that a certain work procedure needs to be updated, it will be reviewed and modified. It began to advocate \"write what you do, and do what you write.\" Safety reports focus on why something happened, rather than what happened and when it happened; they can be submitted quickly, with blank fields included for future filling in. Incident reports are used within the company to share incident information and convey lessons learned. There are trained incident investigators, as well as systems to track change management and documentation; however, this is not done consistently. There is no attention paid to potential accidents, or to all reports of hazards, near-misses, incidents, and accidents. There are numerous audits within the organization, including cross-audits and others. Audits are regarded as a positive thing. Team leaders can conduct daily inspections in person, while also encouraging workers to check their own safety. Managers conduct genuine inspections without going through the motions; however, their skills in identifying potential hazards need to be further improved. Managers also participate in internal cross-audits. V. Cultural Management Phase: In developed Western countries, **industrial safety management has moved beyond the later stages of pathological management, experience-based management, institutional management, and system-based management; many companies are now at the ultimate stage of safety culture management. When a company reaches the stage of managing through a safety culture, the standards it establishes are higher than those set by laws and industry standards; for example, the standards in the international oil exploration industry are already higher than most legal requirements. The international oil geophysical industry advocates that \"in field operations, only footprints should be left behind!\" ”. This stage is characterized by the realization that good safety performance is the most valuable thing, and that workers can conduct self-evaluations during their work. The company’s accident rate is below industry standards; it attaches great importance to unsafe human behaviors and uses both ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ measures for management. All employees are implementing improvement plans to enhance the level of management. The relationship between safety and profit is no longer a topic of discussion; companies can delay projects so that contractors can meet safety standards. Contractors receive special attention from the very first day of work, and the company applies the same standards to its commitment to their safety as it does to other aspects. In well-managed companies, contractors are regulated from the very beginning. There’s no discernible difference between contractors and the company’s own employees. This is achieved through the sharing of information such as EHS policies, procedures, and practices. In well-managed companies, there is two-way communication between management and frontline employees; sometimes managers receive more feedback than they give. These processes are transparent, and managers consider it as harmful if their employees are hurt, just as it would be harmful if their own family members were hurt ； A meeting is considered an opportunity for communication; there is no need for formal notification, anyone can convene a meeting at any time, and participation is free. By talking with some Western consultants, we can learn that in Western companies, even monthly EHS meetings are primarily held with representatives from the front-line staff; employees are free to attend various meetings, allowing for effective communication of information. Some large Western companies have eliminated their EHS departments because they are not necessary. A safety attitude has become as important as knowledge and skills. The commitment and level of effort among employees to look after one another are very high. In large Western companies, employees are expressing a need for training; there is an increasing emphasis on training-related knowledge and skills, with training viewed as part of the career journey, rather than something that involves passive reception of information. Workers proactively identify training needs and methods. The standards are established at the operational level; employees in Western companies regularly review work safety analyses, and people are willing to discuss potential hazards and risks, actively reminding others of them. They will continuously update and review the procedures to ensure they are accurate and effective. They believe that safety is a matter concerning themselves and their colleagues; everyone checks for safety, and they can refuse to work depending on the conditions on site. When making decisions, management integrates safety and various other factors in a cohesive manner and implements effective measures to achieve this. Senior managers pay attention to daily safety reports and share information within the company; work plans, including work permit systems and itinerary management, are integrated throughout the entire work process. With fewer documents, people focus more on how to carry out their work. The plan is to be widely disseminated and made known to everyone. Western oil companies use electronic systems to manage EHS documents, identify potential risks through self-audits and cross-audits, and conduct thorough reviews and corrective actions; they pay more attention to human behavior ； They use statistical data such as events, accidents, investigations, and analyses to predict future trends, and include them in tracking systems ； Any incident or accident that occurs in the workplace can receive prompt feedback from senior management ； Management believes that safety can create value; it stops asking who is responsible for accidents, ceases to blame others, and instead looks for internal reasons at the management level to make improvements, examining systems and personnel from a broader perspective. After an accident occurs, management can participate in the accident investigation. VI. Conclusion By understanding the characteristics of enterprises at different stages of their safety culture, we can roughly determine which stage they are in, thereby carrying out our work more purposefully and striving to improve the enterprise’s safety culture. I will use my experience in managing EHS for international oil geophysical operations to explain what I understand by EHS.