VelocityEHS’ Post

𝗥𝗼𝗼𝘁 𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀, 𝗮 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝘆 👷 Analysing what went wrong provides valuable information. While immediate factors such as inattention and poor communication may seem obvious, a closer look is needed. By examining the underlying causes, such as training protocols, established procedures and administrative controls, we can develop effective action plans to avoid similar incidents. 𝗟𝗲𝘁'𝘀 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗳𝗲𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲, 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 ❓ #CauseAnalysis #SafetyFirst #ContinuousImprovement 

I cannot overemphasize the importance of staying up to date with the latest developments in your field. You may have been doing something incorrectly for 10 years and only gotten by because no serious incidents occurred. OHS is a knowledge-based field.

One of the first new inspections, The report is very short all readable online, outcome score eg 3 for the QS included, they looked at 5 QS, used old ratings as a score eg if good the QS got a 3. They also included the marks out of 100 per Key Question . What isn’t in there yet but CQC have said they will include later is the scoring card that shows the scores for evidence categories. Looks like a gentle and reasonably easy start. I’m guessing that so far unless they were rated as RI or Inadequate previously they will stick to the main 5 QS of Involving people to manage risks Safe and effective staffing Safeguarding Independence, choice and control Equity in experiences and outcomes They all revolve around a safety culture so it makes sense. Additionally smaller report means much quicker publication from on site inspection with assessment to publication was 16 days. So much quicker.

Thanks to Peter Bateman for the great write up in this week's edition of Safeguard Update Subscriber Newsletter. Rethinking ICAM "Think about it in your organisation – where is it that you are relying on a person to do something 100 percent right, 100 percent of the time?"  Australian incident investigation specialist Georgina Poole, speaking at an Auckland NZISM branch meeting, said this is the key message she wanted people to take away. She outlined her journey from using ICAM as an investigation tool to using a modified form incorporating elements from the HOP approach. ICAM, she said, was developed by BHP in the 1990s – with assistance from James Reason – to provide a consistent investigation framework. Previously, BHP's investigations were inconsistent and tended to focus on who did what and who was to blame. "They were going nowhere." Thirty years on, however, Poole said ICAM's limitations are apparent, including having many categories and boxes into which every situation has to fit. "Find a box and make it fit." Work, she said, is a messier story than the Swiss cheese model allows for. "All the holes don't need to line up for things to fail. And if you try to apply ICAM to psychosocial risk you'll be there forever." Another common issue is that people still misunderstand the purpose of an incident investigation, which she emphasised is to learn from an event. "If I ever see an introduction to an investigation report that says the purpose is to prevent something bad from happening, I will vomit into a bucket." These days Poole is on board with HOP's learning teams, where she brings together the people involved in an event, some of their fellow workers, and an HSR if appropriate. It is, she said, often the only opportunity they have to share "some of the stuff sitting on their shoulders".  "Please be prepared for the amount of information you will be given!"  She asks them what a good day looks like and what is the worst thing that could happen. "If you went home and said you'd had a shitty day, what would you tell them?"  The aim is to identify the good, the bad and the ugly, where the ugly is "unmitigated exposure to risk". Workers will always deviate, she said, so some drift away from procedures is to be expected, provided it is within tighter margins around critical risks. "It is part of human nature to breach a procedure." Hence her observation about how unrealistic it is to expect someone to do something 100 percent right 100 percent of the time.  "I'm not saying HOP or Safety Differently is better. It's just different."

Job Safety Analysis is an essential workplace tool for identifying #hazards, controlling #risks, and conducting effective worker safety trainings. It helps ensure safe work practices are communicated consistently across the enterprise. Yet, many organizations still rely on outdated paper forms and spreadsheets to manage #safety — a process that can be inefficient, unreliable and difficult to standardize. If you'd like to see a better way to manage the JSA process, join us next week for Demo Day, where we will highlight the key components of the JSA software within VelocityEHS Operational Risk. Register today: https://bit.ly/3Nbgxzf

Every unsafe act observed at your site can be categorized into two segments based on human failure: Errors and Violations. Errors are unintended decisions, while Violations are deliberate deviations. According to HSG 48, Errors can be further categorized into Skill-Based Errors and Mistakes. Similarly, Violations can be divided into Routine, Situational, or Exceptional. Why do this? It helps identify the best methods to solve the problem—whether through behavior-based training, work-at-height training, providing the right equipment, or ensuring proper supervision. While I can explain and analyze behavior, it's equally important to hire someone with a "common sense" of risk perception for their own safety, unlike in the video. #WorkplaceSafety #HumanError #RiskManagement #BehaviorBasedSafety #SafetyTraining #HSG48 #SafetyCulture #AccidentPrevention #SiteSafety #WorkAtHeight #ProperSupervision #SafetyFirst

Want to understand what the Online Safety Act means for you? Join the Trust & Safety Summit in London this March to hear from a host of Ofcom experts to discover how the OSA could impact you. Our expert speakers from Ofcom will be joining a speaker faculty of T&S Leaders to explore topics including: 👥 Navigating The Changing Landscape: The Evolution of Trust & Safety and Online Harms 👨⚖️ Managing your Organisation Through Local & Global Regulation 👁 Creating More Transparent Trust & Safety Policy Structures 🔐 The role of CSA Reporting & Response to Ensure a Safer Online Envrionment 👮♂️ Combatting Deepfakes, IIA & Other Challenges In Online Harassment 🎱 What's Next for Trust & Safety Professionals #trustandsafety #onlinesafetyact #osa #ofcom

Have you heard of APIE model ? This model stands for incidents involving HAZMAT. In my opinion I believe this model can fit in any type of incident not only HAZMAT because it makes the situation easy to deal with. Lets define them first so we can understand how the model works and how is it important to mitigate and making the incident stable. A stand for (Anlayzing ) including the hazard, situation, level of incident and the type of hazard. Also something we call is ( size up ). This part of model the first responder can do. Also the safety officer and incident commander can be involved with. P stand for ( planning ) after gathering all the information that we need regarding what we analysed, the incident commander and his team will be sitting to sit up a plan to control the scene. As an incident commander you have to be aware that you might create another plan in case if the situation is changed. I stand for ( Implement ). Here is the role of the responders to implement the plan that the incident commander sit it up. However they should understand the reasons and the goals of this plan. E stand for ( Evaluation). Here is an incident commander role and his safety officer to evaluate the process of the plan and how it goes from the beginning until the end. The benefits of the evaluation is to see if there something we need to adjust in the plan in case is not working properly. Also to see if we need to change something in the future or also to improve our responders skills and knowledge. Finally, this is my observation and reflection about the APIE model and how i see it is very useful and helpful to control the incident.

Join over 7,500 professionals trained in the Incident Cause Analysis Method with ICAM Australia. Our courses boost your knowledge in incident investigation, human factors, and safety management. Explore our public and in-house courses here: https://hubs.li/Q02KV5Cb0 #ICAMAustralia #ICAMTraining #Safety #WHS #IncidentInvestigation

Read our latest insights piece on "Leveraging Safety Management System Standards to Support Compliance with the CSRD". In this article, we examine how businesses can use their existing safety management systems to support their compliance with certain elements of the CSRD, specifically ESRS S1. https://lnkd.in/gJf97ypj