OSH Performance Monitoring, Auditing, Inspection and Continual Improvement
Leading versus lagging
Lagging indicators measure outcomes already realised - lost-time injury frequency rate, severity rate, reportable incidents, near-miss counts. Leading indicators measure preventive activity - inspection completion, training hours, permit compliance, corrective action closure rate, safety observations. Questions test whether you can classify an indicator and recognise that a low injury rate alone is not proof of a good system (it may reflect under-reporting).
Inspection, audit and review are different
- Inspection: routine, physical, condition-focused (housekeeping, guarding, PPE use).
- Audit: systematic, evidence-based, against a standard or system element, by competent and ideally independent auditors.
- Management review: leadership evaluation of overall suitability, adequacy and effectiveness, feeding objectives and resources.
Traps: calling an inspection an audit; auditing without criteria; and closing corrective actions on a promise rather than verified evidence.
Metrics and rates
Know the formulas. LTIFR = (number of lost-time injuries × 1,000,000) ÷ hours worked. Severity rate uses lost days over the same base. TRIR counts recordable cases. Always state the base (200,000 vs 1,000,000 hours) because comparisons are invalid across different bases.
Continual improvement
Use trend analysis, benchmarking, root-cause data and audit findings to set objectives. PDCA drives improvement; corrective action must address cause, and effectiveness must be verified at the next cycle.
Worked example
A site works 500,000 hours and records 3 lost-time injuries. LTIFR = (3 × 1,000,000) ÷ 500,000 = 6.0 per million hours. If the corporate target is 4.0, the gap drives a leading-indicator improvement plan, not just a poster campaign.