Title: A Data-Driven Approach to Improving Safety Performance
Facility: Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Point of Contact
Attributes of the "Best Practice"
The proposed best practice is an application of a well-established, data-driven, structured approach to improving industrial safety performance through a reduction in the frequency and severity of on-the-job injuries. This approach, known as the Six Sigma
methodology, has been used by many businesses and government entities to achieve significant performance improvement. Application of Six Sigma to the safety aspects of business performance is a unique and creative application of the methodology.
Implementation of the Six Sigma methodology involves four phases: Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. In the Measure phase, the overall scope of the problem is narrowed into a manageable range. Portions of the problem not addressed initially are reserved
for future action. Performance data is examined in detail in the Analyze phase to determine specific areas of imperfect performance and corrective actions are identified and implemented in the Improve phase. In the Control phase, measurement systems and metric tracking mechanisms are
put into place to verify and sustain improvement.
The most important attribute of the Six Sigma methodology and its application to improving industrial safety performance is the ability to pinpoint primary areas of weakness in implementation of ISM and target improvement actions on those specific areas. The
methodology uses performance data in identifying areas of weakness and promotes measurable improvement by focusing on metrics reflecting the frequency and severity of injuries. The emphasis on major and demonstrated areas of weakness eliminates the expenditure of resources on areas
that will have little or no effect on overall performance.
Implementation Experience and Status
Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC, the Management and Integration Contractor for DOE’s Oak Ridge Operations Environmental Management program, used the Six Sigma methodology to address an undesirable trend in recent industrial safety performance. The improvement team
addressing this problem selected the DOE cost index value as the metric to indicate overall industrial safety performance. The cost index value is particularly useful for this purpose since it is comprised of both injury frequency and severity components. The cost index value used
here was calculated on a monthly (non-cumulative) basis and excludes illnesses and cumulative trauma injuries.
Using available data, the team was able to determine that approximately 95 percent of the FY2000 cost index value was attributable to subcontractor injuries with four subcontractors accounting for 65 percent of all subcontractor injuries. In addition, 78
percent of the injuries occurred during routine activities (e.g. mopping floors, changing light bulbs, emptying trash, etc.) and 41 percent of all of the injuries were to backs. Analysis of the injury data using the ISM core functions showed that the greatest areas of improvement
were associated with correctly analyzing hazards, establishing and implementing administrative controls, obtaining and utilizing feedback, and consistently obtaining and incorporating worker input into hazard analyses.
Improvement actions included both process change and behavioral components. Training modules were developed to standardize hazard analysis creation and improve quality (especially for routine activities), checklists were prepared for hazard analysis reviewers,
and rewards and negative consequences were established to encourage supervisor and worker participation in hazard analysis development. In addition, the quality of activity hazard analyses is tracked as a leading indicator of future performance.
From April 1998 to November 2000, the cost index for injuries averaged approximately $12.00/100 jobhours worked. The success of this approach is demonstrated by the decrease in the cost index value for environmental management work since implementation of
improvements started in April 2001. In the six most recent months (June – November 2001), the cost index value for injuries has been approximately $3.00/100 jobhours worked as shown on the figure below. This decrease in cost index value has largely been attributable to a decrease in
the severity of injuries incurred.
When translated into operating costs, these improvements resulted in calculated cost savings of approximately $297,000 for the June to November 2001 time period and are expected to result in cost savings of about $764,000 in FY2002. Costs for identifying
problem areas and developing and installing improvements was approximately $50,000, but any other implementing sites would not incur all of these costs since the overall framework and the required training materials used in some of the improvements have already been developed.
Relationship between the "Best Practice" and Selected ISM Core Functions and Guiding Principles
The proposed best practice uses criteria based on each of the five Integrated Safety Management (ISM) core functions to examine injury data for trends and patterns. Core function trends and patterns indicating imperfections in ISM implementation are
identified, characterized and analyzed using statistical and graphical tools so that their effect on industrial safety performance can be fully understood. Corrective actions are developed to address ineffective areas, documented to facilitate implementation and tracked using
appropriate metrics to verify improvement.
Previous attempts at using root cause analysis alone were not successful in identifying and focusing on the few areas of the safety process resulting in the most defects (injuries). A recent use of the Six Sigma methodology has started the project on the path
to sustained safety performance improvement and created a new and detailed understanding of the process variables that are key to safety success. Using the information from this study, leading indicators have now been developed that are monitored to give insight into the performance
of the safety process. This allows project management to be proactive and head off problem areas in their early stages rather than reacting to injuries after they have occurred.
