Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Control
Core Concepts
Hazard identification should be systematic and proactive, not reactive. Standard tools include task-based job hazard analysis, walkthrough surveys, inspection data, incident and near-miss trends, worker reports, and change management reviews for new equipment, processes, or chemicals.
Risk assessment combines likelihood and severity (consequence). A risk matrix is only as good as the definitions behind its cells; questions test whether a candidate understands that a high-severity, low-likelihood event (e.g., a fall from height) can rank as high risk even when it rarely happens. Residual risk is what remains after controls; it must be evaluated and accepted by an accountable person.
Apply the hierarchy of controls deliberately. Elimination and substitution remove the hazard; engineering controls isolate people from it (guards, ventilation, interlocks); administrative controls change how people work (procedures, rotation, signage, training); PPE protects the individual and depends entirely on fit, use, and maintenance. Multiple layers - the defence-in-depth idea - are preferred for high-consequence hazards.
Traps
- Confusing a hazard (source of harm) with a risk (combination of likelihood and severity).
- Rating risk by likelihood alone and dismissing rare but fatal events.
- Assuming a control is effective without verifying it in the field.
- Overlooking health hazards (noise, dust, ergonomics, psychosocial) because they lack dramatic incidents.
Worked Example
A maintenance task requires reaching into a press. Likelihood of contact is moderate; severity is amputation. The matrix yields high risk. The correct sequence: attempt elimination (redesign so reaching in is unnecessary), then engineering (interlocked guard, two-hand control), then administrative (lockout procedure, training), with PPE last. Document the residual risk and confirm the guard cannot be bypassed.