Is your safety data backwards? Do leading indicators become lagging and vice versa?

Does doing more safety activity reduce injuries?

Not necessarily, and sometimes the relationship may run in the reverse.

A study of a major infrastructure project from @helen Lingard, @matthew hallowell and others found that safety activities usually labelled as ‘leading indicators’ didn’t behave as simple one-way predictors of injuries.

Some activities were associated with later changes in TFIR. But TRIFR also predicated later changes in safety activity.

Said differently, some leading indicators became lagging indicators, and vice versa. Safety effort appeared to rise after injury performance worsened, then wean off after reported injuries declined.

This suggests that we may be reacting, rather than preventing.

Shout a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/benhutchinson

Leave a comment