And the Safety Culture Survey Says…

A strong safety culture can prevent injuries. But how do you measure the strength of your safety culture? Waukegan Park District decided to investigate and worked with the National Safety Council (NSC) to use its Safety Perception Survey to assess what employees think about Waukegan’s safety culture.

“We did an initial survey in July 2014,” explains Tanya Brady, Waukegan Manager of Risk Management, “holding multiple staff meetings, so we could get a response from every employee.” Brady returned the completed surveys to NSC for evaluation, and the agency received results about two months later.

The survey consisted of 51 standardized questions, which allowed NSC to benchmark the agency’s survey results against nearly 800 other organizations that have participated in its survey. While NSC has a base program, participants have the option to incorporate additional identifier questions. 

Conducting the survey
Waukegan benefitted greatly from having its Safety Committee involved in the survey project from the beginning. Committee members facilitated at the staff meetings, so Brady prepared a brief script for them to read to employees to introduce the survey and explain why Waukegan was conducting the survey. For each question, employees indicated whether they strongly agreed, agreed, were neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed using a scale of 1 to 5.  

The agency received its results two months later, along with a phone call from NSC explaining the scores. A month after that, NSC representatives came to Waukegan Park District to present the survey findings to the Safety Committee, senior staff and the agency’s PDRMA Risk Management Consultant.

“The results gave us a good snap-shot evaluation of our entire safety program,” says Greg Petry, Executive Director. “It brought to our attention things we were doing well that we want to continue, as well as areas we need to give attention to.”

“We were very pleased that we had a highly rated safety culture, and both NSC and PDRMA complimented us on this,” Brady says. “But there was still room for improvement — and we’re up to the challenge.”

The survey helped identify gaps in safety perceptions at all levels. Some were anticipated but others were not.

“Based on the survey, employees didn’t seem to realize the different safety actions management was taking,” Brady explains. “To start improvement in this area right away, our Safety Committee developed some preliminary Plans of Action to improve communications with all staff.” 

The agency created a monthly newsletter devoted to safety-related communications, such as new programs or procedures, how management corrected unsafe situations or security issues and results of accident investigations/incidents that are of concern to employees. “We’re also making it a point to include employees more in discussions about accident investigations, and we’re looking for more ways to recognize employees’ safety efforts,” she says.

“We embrace safety and integrate it throughout the entire agency,” adds Petry. “It’s a priority and not considered secondary at all. From top to bottom, we walk the talk!”

“Both our Safety Committee and senior management thought our safety culture was pretty strong, since we’ve been achieving the highest level of accreditation in PDRMA’s LCR since 1993. And as risk manager, I really believed we had a safety culture — not just a safety program. I was glad to see the survey results did support this overall, but I also found the areas where we could improve to be enlightening.”

“We always encourage change for the good,” Petry explains. “Communicating the ‘why’ helps everyone understand the initiative and buy in to those changes.” A good safety management system is a continuous improvement process, according to the NSC. And that process should include leadership support in assessing gaps, identifying improvements, implementing them, reviewing the results — and starting the process once again. 

The agency will resurvey employees in July 2016 to assess how its new safety communications and recognition, along with employee involvement with accident investigations, are impacting the development of its safety culture.  

If your agency is ready to assess its safety culture formally, whether using NSC’s survey or another avenue, know that it’s a time-intensive process. From requesting approval for the survey to distributing it to employees took about a year. Then the real work of addressing the survey results started. After the Safety Committee identified initial actions, the agency used workshops to give all employees the opportunity to identify the five most important areas they wanted to address to improve the safety culture. Then the agency held additional workshops, which included staff from all departments and levels, to develop a Plan of Action for each area. With the busy summer season being part of that timeline, it took Waukegan just over a year to complete the post-survey process.

“It’s very important to include all departments and staff levels so you get agency-wide input,” Brady points out. “Doing so promotes buy in from employees, because they’re involved in the process from the beginning.

“While we won’t know until next year what impact our actions have had on our culture, I do hear employees talking more about safety culture,” she notes. “And I hope that means we’re putting the idea in the forefront of their minds that safety isn’t just a program, it’s the way we want to do things.”

And Petry agrees: “Doing things the right way — and the safe way — makes everyone’s job easier and more effective in the long run,” he says.