Schools can often be a chaotic environment. From moving chairs and children running around to paper planes flying past, schools are very fast-paced; and with an environment that changes as dynamically and often as this, it can be difficult to keep on top of classroom health and safety.
Therefore, building a solid foundation for classroom safety is important to minimising the present risks to counteract the ever-changing environment.
Maintaining a safe foundation in every classroom is crucial to protecting everyone present – this includes children, teachers, staff and visitors. However, building this foundation and ensuring the classroom is clear of risks can often be a daunting task, especially when you are not sure what to look for.
To help you with this, we have broken down some of the key points you should check for, based on the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) Health and Safety Checklist, which provides a template to assess potential hazards in a standard classroom (not a specialist classroom such as sports facilities, DT areas or Science Labs).
It is recommended that these checks are undertaken at the start of each term to ensure a good foundation to begin with, or when significant changes occur.
This will help you to identify any new risks before the classrooms start to fill up again. However, this checklist should not be used alone, as it should also be used in conjunction with other school-wide approaches to assessing and managing risks.
Preventing Slips and Trips
Slips and trips make up 55% of injuries in the education sector, so it is important to keep the risks to a minimum. This means preventing slips and trips in the classroom by keeping the walkways and floors clear. Some key areas to check are:
the condition of the flooring
walkways are free from obstruction (chairs tucked in, cables kept away, spills cleaned up)
steps and handrails are well maintained
floors aren’t slippery, particularly around entry points.
In regards to falls, the HSE checklist asks whether an appropriate step stool or step ladder is available if needed, and if there are opening windows high in the classroom, is an appropriate window-opener available and in use?
Suitable Furniture and Fixings
Furniture and fixtures (such as cupboards and shelves) can quickly become a hazard by either coming loose or being damaged. So it is important to check their condition and ensure they are still fit for purpose. The HSE checklist further advises checking that portable equipment such as TV sets are housed on a suitable surface, with no danger of being knocked over or slipping off.
It is also important to check that all hot surfaces such as radiators or hot pipes are protected to avoid the risk of burns, and especially if young children are present, check for any holes or damage that small hands could reach through. If you are on an upper floor, it is also a must to check that window restrictors are still in good condition.
Electrical Equipment Checks
Electrical equipment can create a whole different kind of risk, so it is crucial to check if they are in good condition before use.
The key things to check are switches and plug sockets, as well as plugs and cables. Often damage can vary, so make sure to look carefully at each part, as what can appear as minor damage could still create significant risk. Ensure that any portable electrical equipment has been checked and, where appropriate, tested regularly to help maintain your classroom health and safety.
To keep track of damages, also make sure to report any damaged electrical equipment that has been taken out of service or replaced.
Checking Fire Safety Equipment
Fire hazards pose a large risk to schools, so it is critical that your response is well planned, with everyone knowing their role in the event of a fire or drill. Additionally, checking the environment is safe is also key to mitigating risk, so you should check all fire exit doors to ensure that they are unobstructed, kept unlocked and easy to open from inside.
Also, make sure to check that fire-fighting equipment is readily available and fire evacuation procedures are clearly displayed, including procedures for dealing with any vulnerable adults or children.
Ventilation and heat are commonly forgotten when assessing areas, but they are a factor that should be included. Rooms should have natural ventilation where possible, and an appropriate temperature needs to be maintained, which might normally require that blinds or similar window dressing are provided to protect from glare and heat from the sun.
Some schools still contain asbestos on-site. If this is the case, are staff aware of its location and condition? Ensure that all staff are further aware of the guidelines concerning securing anything to walls or ceilings that may contain asbestos.
Finalising your Classroom Health and Safety Checklist
Throughout this blog we have given you a basic guide taken from the HSE checklist advice; however this does not apply to every classroom or to specialised classrooms.
Therefore use a common sense approach to fill out the blanks and personalise it to your environment. This will help you build your perfect classroom health and safety checklist to help you minimise the risks present, so that as the everyday classroom chaos ensues, you all continue to feel safe.
Every year, hundreds of thousands of people get injured, develop an illness or are killed at work. Although these numbers are mostly trending downwards over time, year-by-year the lives of many people are permanently changed through often through unsafe working conditions and employer negligence.
Health and safety risks can be found in every working environment, so all business owners are required to provide a workplace that is both safe for employees and the public.
However, these risks vary in severity, therefore it is recommended that companies use Risk Assessments and also take preventative measures in order to reduce the risks identified, regardless of their severity.
Whilst some may find the overall process to be time-consuming and, in some cases unnecessary, keeping everybody safe and healthy should be a priority for any organisation – good health and safety practices can boost overall productivity along with making staff feel safe and cared for.
With this in mind, we have put together some of the ways in which good health and safety practices can help.
Preventing Accidents
In 2022, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) reported that around 565,000 employees suffered an injury at work, with 150,000 of these people being absent for at least 7 days due to their injury and over 6 million working days being lost.
These statistics show the direct relationship between safety in the workplace and productivity. Every time an employee is absent, it costs the employer both money and resources, which is one of the reasons why avoiding injuries through good risk management should be a top priority for organisations.
It should be noted that not all of the accidents within these statistics will be due to poor health and safety practices, but it is likely to be a key factor.
The effects of stress
Research has found a link between stress and poor health, especially the low-level, chronic stresses often found within the workplace. As well as potentially leading to sickness and absence, due to a weakened immune system, stress can also be demotivating which can lead to employees becoming less productive.
Some of the main factors that contribute to workplace stress include:
feeling powerless (no control over your current situation)
feeling as if you are wrong for your job
witnessing traumatic events within the workplace
a poor working environment
Although health and safety practices do not cover all of these issues, any way in which you can relieve stress for your workers will not only benefit them individually, but also the business.
Creating a safe working environment
The conditions of a working environment can affect productivity in a variety of different ways. For example, employees that are often uncomfortable are not going to work to the best of their ability.
On top of that, certain conditions can even affect the health and safety of your employees and therefore lead to absence. Environmental factors which can cause this include:
temperature
humidity
lighting
air quality
bathroom facilities
the presence of dangerous particles (such as asbestos or moulds)
All of these need to be factored into a business’ health and safety practices, with measures in place to protect employees from the risks identified.
The impact onreputation
Health and safety is also a key aspect of a business’ reputation, which can either be positively or negatively affected by your health and safety standards.
Companies that have a reputation of providing a safe working environment, are more likely to be respected and therefore favoured by potential employees. The same is also true of the opposite; a business with a poor reputation for health and safety is less likely to attract workers.
With more avenues for public reviews such as social media channels, and companies such as Glassdoor providing a platform for current or former employees to provide first-hand insight into a business’ practices, the potential for reputational damage is bigger than it has ever been. Additionally, for more serious incidents, the HSE publishes a list of all convictions and notices which is publicly available to view.
Health and safety reputation is also built into the way customers perceive companies, which in turn will affect their choices concerning your products or services. This perception could stop customers from buying a business’ product, therefore creating another crucial reason to upkeep your health and safety standards.
Conclusion
Health and safety can often be complex, and therefore requires good management and commitment. Good practices will not only safeguard your employees and your customers but will also help protect your organisation from lapses in morale and productivity.
Every year, over half a million accidents occur in the UK workplace, which leads to around 60 million lost workdays through injury. From freak occurrences to oversights in safety, these injuries often occur for a range of reasons.
As the responsible person you have a legal requirement to identify and minimise the risks, and a common way to do this is through a Risk Assessment.
The law states that employers must make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the safety risks to their employees that they may encounter whilst at work. If you are an organisation with 5 or more employees, this is then required to be recorded – both detailing the findings and any employees that may be at an increased risk.
A risk assessment covers this legislation, as carrying one out involves finding the potential hazards and introducing control measures to minimise the risks, which in turn will ensure a safe workplace.
So, who can complete risk assessments?
Anyone who is deemed ‘competent’ can complete a risk assessment. According to the HSE, this is deemed as having the “relevant skills, experience, and knowledge to manage health and safety”.
Inspection
The first step towards increasing safety is to identify any potential risks: Take a walk around your workplace whilst being mindful of any potential hazards, regardless of the severity.
Make sure to take into account any changes that may happen, as workplaces are often busy and changing, so make sure to try this at different times of the day and week, to see if any other issues present themselves.
These changes could affect the overall safety of your business, so it is important to check often to keep everyone safe.
After all, a business environment can be completely different from one day to the next and this should be factored into your overall assessment. To avoid missing common risks that are often forgotten, we would suggest that you use a risk assessment template.
Communication
As well as conducting inspections, it is imperative that you communicate with all employees.
Your employees are working within your business every day and likely encounter a range of risks daily, therefore developing an in-depth understanding of the risks involved, so make sure to ask them!
They will be able to offer a different perspective on the issues faced, as well as being able to point out anything you may have missed.
This can be valuable feedback to help you keep them safe and feel heard.
It can also be useful to reach out to external organisations for advice. If you have any machinery or equipment within your workplace, it may be a useful idea to contact the manufacturers or check the manuals for guidance.
You can also get in touch with occupational safety organisations for more generalised guidance.
Expectation
When identifying the risks in your organisation, you need to be thorough and not just look for expected hazards. You need to be considerate of unexpected events which could occur, and these can include anything from faulty equipment to something coming loose and falling, for example.
By looking beyond the expected hazards, it allows you to plan for the unexpected – just in case. This will, therefore safeguard everyone that might enter the working environment – both employees and the general public.
Although commonplace, you might forget to think about employees who work outside of regular hours, such as cleaners or maintenance staff. This highlights the importance of considering all aspects of the working day, so make sure to take everyone into account.
Long Term
Long-term risks can often be overlooked during inspections, but it is important to take them into consideration. This is particularly important for environments with unique conditions such as a high level of noise or the use of chemicals.
Although most long-term risks may not appear dangerous at first, they have the potential to cause lasting damage to employees who deal with them regularly.
Due to them being less prominent, long-term risks can often require more research. For example, if you are unsure about a specific hazard (such as sound levels for example), it might be useful to read up on it or contact an organisation who are more knowledgeable in that area.
Analysis
Analysis of the illness and accident records can be a great tool to help you to identify safety risks. They can highlight patterns in ill health, which in turn will aid you in finding the root causes.
Patterns may include anything from location, use of machinery, time of day or even training level.
These real-world examples can often be very informative of the working environment, therefore are key for helping you to prevent future ill health due to a recurring risk.
Personalisation
Risk assessments are ultimately about protecting people, and this should be kept in mind when looking for hazards.
Extra consideration should be given to vulnerable people, including older, younger, people with disabilities, pregnant women and new mothers.
Consideration should also be given to employees with little or no training who may not be fully acclimatised to your business yet.
Conclusion
To recap: risk assessments are a legal requirement for employers to ensure the safety of everyone in their workplace. It is important they are completed by a competent person to a high standard, taking into account all potential risks both long and short-term.
This should be done whilst also considering the changes in the workplace during the day and any vulnerable people who may require extra attention to ensure their safety.
Analysing past incidents and speaking to employees will help improve the quality of the risk assessments you complete, as this will assist you in finding any overlooked hazards and also provide a different perspective on issues.
As this week marks a month of national lockdown – Britain’s third since 23 March last year, there remains uncertainty about a timeline for the lifting of restrictions.
The government has not yet made any clear indications for industries classed as ‘non-essential’ in the private sector about re-opening dates. However, schools have received more clarity, with the youngest pupils in Scotland set to return to classes full-time from 22 February and England hoping to bring back pupils from 8 March.
Whilst schools have not been completely shut to all pupils during the on-going pandemic; just like in September last year, re-opening will carry several health & safety challenges as temporarily abandoned facilities and buildings will need to be assessed for safety before being re-utilised to accommodate the increase of staff and pupil numbers.
Professional Services Availability: Site Visits
Per Government guidelines, our team continue to work remotely and remaining accessible by telephone, Zoom, MS Teams and email. However, our risk assessors are available for site visits nationwide to ensure that risk assessments remain up-to-date even while businesses and institutions remain temporarily closed.
We are still taking bookings for the following professional services:
Regarding a COVID-19 Risk Assessment, the HSE state that:
“As an employer, you must protect people from harm. This includes taking reasonable steps to protect your workers and others from coronavirus. This is called a COVID-19 risk assessment and it’ll help you manage risk and protect people.”
We released the following resources last summer, which can all be accessed through Smartlog:
If you wish to access any of these resources, or for more information, fill in our contact form, get in touch with our customer services team on 01908 320152 or send us an email to: customerservices@safesmart.co.uk with your request.
Increasingly year-on-year health and safety management is incorporating lots of statistics that are recorded, monitored and reported on a regular basis using health and safety software. This software improves management and ensures things are not forgotten, particularly if like Smartlog, risk assessments automatically assign tasks to individuals and remind them via email so that they take corrective action. On the other hand it can be considered that too much focus on statistics, in particular risk scores in a risk matrix can hide certain hazards by focusing on other hazards due to their numeric values. Moreover whilst statistics and reporting are great to measure progress and identify frequently occurring accidents, it is evident that the majority of time in health and safety management should be on prevention by design, planning and training.
Whilst risk assessments that feature risk scores can list a multitude of different levels of hazards for identification and review purposes, they create confusion over what is the most likely to happen and what is the highest severity of harm, as peoples’ perceptions of risk and severity differ. Risk assessment categorisation of risk focusing on likelihood and injury severity together under the term priority and then setting normal or high priority is a better system as issues are fixed quicker based on priority and not based on the subjective aspect of severity which is circumstantial in every case. For example tripping on the stairs because of a worn surface can be unlikely and can often only result in minor injury accidents however it can also result in death; this highlights the potential issue with risk scores in a risk matrix which might rate this with a low numerical value for both likelihood and severity.
An Outdated System?
In health & safety management risk scores and the risk matrix structure could be considered as a 20th century management tool originating from paper based risk assessments as a way of highlighting risk within the lines and columns on a paper risk assessment to decide which should be considered first. With 21st century cloud based health and safety software like Smartlog, risks are automatically moved to the top a priority action list and removed when they are resolved. Today’s quick priority identification and resolution via software means it is questionable what purpose risk scores achieve in today’s era of health and safety management with quick software that can facilitate quick corrective action if it’s designed that way.
The concept of risk and risk assessments has a long history. More than 2400 years ago the Athenians offered their capacity of assessing risk before making decisions and over the years it has become central to keeping people and operations safe. The introduction of The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 introduced documentation and management rules however there is no mention in these two pieces of legislation about the use of risk scores or a risk matrix in risk assessments.
Analysis – HSE
In fact risk scores and risk matrices are not mentioned in any health and safety legislation. Risk score matrices are mentioned on the HSE website but it’s only written that a risk matrix can be used, not that they must be used. In the Risk Management FAQs part of the HSE website here: www.hse.gov.uk/risk/faq.htm they have written:
‘Most businesses will not need to use risk matrices. However, they can be used to help you work out the level of risk associated with a particular issue. They do this by categorising the likelihood of harm and the potential severity of the harm. This is then plotted in a matrix (please see below for an example). The risk level determines which risks should be tackled first. Using a matrix can be helpful for prioritising your actions to control a risk. It is suitable for many assessments but in particular to more complex situations. However, it does require expertise and experience to judge the likelihood of harm accurately. Getting this wrong could result in applying unnecessary control measures or failing to take important ones.’
(Accessed 19/11/2018)
The HSE explicitly mention here that getting risk scores wrong can result in failing to take important control measures. This is the issue and danger with using risk scores.
The HSE do not state that a score or colour rating of risk about the likelihood of risk occurring or severity is needed or that score and colour needs to be recorded or have a matrix. There is no mention of it on HSE’s website, in risk assessment examples from the HSE or in health and safety legislation. Moreover there is no mention of it in their risk assessment guide, HSE document indg163. www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg163.pdf
The image of the risk matrix shown in the HSE’s mention of risk matrices on their website shows the complexity and subjectivity issue of deciding on a combined numeric value and colour for a risk. This is an example of a 3×3 grid matrix; when a grid gets larger e.g. 10×10 there can be the possibility of even more confusion, differences in opinion and lack of consistency in scoring amongst people.
An article in IOSH magazine from an independent health and safety consultant also mentions that ‘in most cases it is not possible to quantify either the likelihood or the severity with such accuracy, we make relative judgements’ furthermore she writes that:
‘To avoid confusion, ditch the numbers and replace “mostly harmful”, “unlikely” and so on with descriptions that match your organisation’s risk profile, and simply use the coloured areas to categorise the risk bands.’
Clearly it is also questionable as to what purpose the colours even serve if high and normal priority settings are used with health & safety management software that facilitates speedy corrective action in a priority list format. In summary she also concludes her article by writing ‘Poorly understood severity and likelihood categories and arbitrary risk bands will lead us to draw the wrong conclusions.’
Similarly the author of the article also presented a presentation named ‘What is significant risk?’ at the 11 February 2014 IOSH London Metropolitan Branch Meeting. This presentation sought to highlight the issues and over complexity of quantitative risk assessment (QRA) risk matrices based on risk scores amongst IOSH members.
Moreover the same author mentioned in another IOSH magazine article that ‘In most cases, we don’t have enough reliable data for QRA. Rather than sticking numbers on to categories and mistakenly calling assessments quantitative or semi-quantitative, we should be proud of producing high-quality qualitative risk assessments.’ Risk assessment that focuses on high and low priority allocation of corrective action and descriptive text from hazard assessment rather than numbers is qualitative rather than quantitative.
Regarding risk assessment methodology it is Safesmart’s view that you should choose a qualitative risk assessment so not to come across the issues of risk scores in the prioritisation of corrective action tasks based on over complexity via numbers in a risk matrix structure.
As you can see in the HSE’s risk assessment template there is no mention of risk scores or a risk matrix:
INDG163 is the HSE’s legal guidance for completing risk assessments.
In document INDG163, The HSE state that in a risk assessment you need to:
– Identify the hazards – Decide who might be harmed and how – Evaluate the risks and decide on precautions – Record your significant findings – Review your risk assessment and update if necessary.
Regarding HSE legal requirements for risk assessment it is important to remember that there is no required format for risk assessment so long as within the format you can achieve these aspects mentioned in INDG163.
Evaluate the risks and decide on precautions:
In this section on p2 of HSE document INDG163, it does not specify that a risk likelihood, severity score, colour rating or risk matrix needs to be recorded. It just mentions that you have to decide ‘how likely it is that harm will occur and what to do about it.’
On p2 of HSE document INDG163 in the ‘Evaluate the risks’ information section it states:
‘Having identified the hazards, you then have to decide how likely it is that harm willoccur, ie the level of risk and what to do about it. Risk is a part of everyday life andyou are not expected to eliminate all risks. What you must do is make sure youknow about the main risks and the things you need to do to manage themresponsibly.’
Record your significant findings
When recording a risk assessment, the HSE state on p3 of INDG163 that ‘any record produced should be simple and focused on controls’. They state you need to ‘record of your significant findings – the hazards, how people might be harmed by them and what you have in place to control the risks.’
The passage reads:
‘Record your significant findings, Make a record of your significant findings – the hazards, how people might be harmed by them and what you have in place to control the risks. Any record produced should be simple and focused on controls.’
Putting hazards in order
On p4 of HSE document INDG163 it’s stated that the hazards identified need to be put in order of importance to address the most serious risks first.
The HSE state on p4 of INDG163 that:
‘If your risk assessment identifies a number of hazards, you need to put them in order of importance and address the most serious risks first.’
By stating simply whether a hazard is normal or high priority it can be clearly and simply differentiated which hazards are high priority.
In addition to the HSE’s comments about the danger of using risk scores and a risk matrix the ‘Health and Safety Laboratory’ (HSL) the research arm of the HSE have also conducted research on behalf of the HSE about ‘Good practice and pitfalls in risk assessment’ in the 2003 research report 151 (RR151).
RR151 mentions the following pitfalls that seemingly could be the case with quantitative numeric focused risk assessment with risk scores and risk matrices:
• ‘Carrying out a detailed quantified risk assessment without first considering whether any relevant good practice was applicable, or when relevant good practice exists’
• ‘Making decisions on the basis of individual risk estimates when societal risk is the appropriate measure’
• ‘Inappropriate use of risk criteria’
Moreover on p32 under the title of individual risk measures RR151 mentions a problem with numerical risk scores in a matrix:
‘Each risk box in the matrix represents the combination of a particular level of likelihood and consequence, and can be assigned either a numerical or descriptive risk value (the risk estimate). If numerical consequence and likelihood category indicators are used, it is common to estimate the risk values as the product of the likelihood and consequence values, as a convenient way of ranking the risks. Care should be taken if such an approach is adopted as, for example, hazards of low severity and high likelihood will receive the same risk value as hazards with high severity and low likelihood. Although the risk values may be the same, the response to these different hazards in terms of priority for correction may be very different (St John Holt, 1999), and care therefore needs to be taken to ensure the method for estimating risk results in values or categories that can be interpreted appropriately.’
Furthermore where there is mention of quantitative numeric risk assessment on p14 in RR151 it is not mentioned as a legal requirement it is just written that:
‘Where the hazards presented by the undertaking are numerous and complex, and may involve novel processes, for example in the case of large chemical process plants or nuclear installations, detailed and sophisticated risk assessments will be needed, and it is appropriate to carry out a detailed quantitative risk assessment in addition to the simple qualitative assessment. Quantitative risk assessment (QRA) involves obtaining a numerical estimate of the risk from a quantitative consideration of event probabilities and consequences (in the nuclear industry the term ‘probabilistic safety analysis’ is used in place of QRA).’
Regarding RR151 it is important to remember that ‘This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy.’
But ‘it is hoped that this report will provide useful guidance for Inspectors involved in the assessment of industry risk assessments on the appropriateness of the adopted approaches, and also to practitioners in industry involved in the process of carrying out workplace risk assessments of how to avoid common pitfalls.’
There is a lot of research online that criticises the use of a risk matrix and we encourage you to research and read this to understand the issues.
Examples of academic texts include Louis Anthony Tony Cox of the University of Colorado Department of Biostatistics and Informatics who wrote a journal article in 2008 for Risk Analysis the official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis in which risk matrix limitations are listed – the abstract of this journal article called ‘What’s Wrong with Risk Matrices?’ can be viewed here
As well as this, a well written piece called ‘The Risk of Using Risk Matrices’ was published in September 2013 for the Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE Economics and Management Journal. It was written by Philip Thomas, SPE, and Reidar B. Bratvold, SPE, University of Stavanger; and J. Eric Bickel, SPE, University of Texas at Austin. They have written in this article about risk matrices (RMs) saying that:
‘Despite these claimed advantages, we are not aware of any published scientific studies demonstrating that RMs improve risk-management decisions. However, several studies indicate the opposite: that RMs are conceptually and fundamentally flawed.’
Moreover this journal article is concluded with the following:
‘In this paper, we have illustrated and discussed inherent flaws in RMs and their potential impact on risk prioritization and mitigation. Inherent dangers such as risk-acceptance inconsistency, range compression, centering bias, and category-definition bias were introduced and discussed by Cox et al. (2005), Cox (2008), Hubbard (2009), and Smith et al. (2009). We have also addressed several previously undocumented RM flaws: ranking reversal, instability resulting from categorization differences, and the LF. These flaws cannot be corrected and are inherent to the design and use of RMs. The ranking produced by RMs was shown to be unduly influenced by their design, which is ultimately arbitrary. No guidance exists regarding these design parameters because there is very little to say. A tool that produces arbitrary recommendations in an area as important as risk management in O&G should not be considered an industry best practice.’
A summative key point to take from HSE INDG163 is that it’s written there that:
‘Any record produced should be simple and focused on controls’
Risk assessment risk scores are not simple and as the HSE says themselves ‘could result in applying unnecessary control measures or failing to take important ones.’ The other benefit of keeping risk assessments simple is that they can be understood and conducted by all to help improve health & safety management and awareness across a whole organisation. Engagement and awareness of staff in health and safety is proven to reduce the likelihood of accidents.
Does Smartlog have numeric risk score scales, colour coding or a risk matrix structure?
No, Smartlog has been designed to keep risk assessment simple and efficient in order help you improve safety quickly. In HSE document INDG163 on page 3 it’s actually stated that ‘any record produced should be simple and focused on controls’. Safesmart believe in safety through efficiency.
Smartlog’s qualitative risk assessment structure focuses on actions to improve safety and lower risk. Actions to correct hazards. Rather than having the option to give a numeric score or colour rating for a risk, Smartlog focuses on pass/fail questions with comments & images to ensure compliance and clearly show what action needs to be taken to improve safety via the selection of normal or high priority.
Scoring a risk out of 5 for example may mean that lower numbered risks are ignored or forgotten about. As mentioned earlier in this blog post, The HSE write online that ‘Getting this wrong could result in applying unnecessary control measures or failing to take important ones’.
Low risk hazards that may or may not have significant severity are still important and Smartlog ensures that all risks are clearly visible putting high importance hazards at the top of the interactive to-do list called ‘due checks & tests’ automatically based on answers to risk assessment questions and the selection of high or normal priority. Based on risk assessment answers, reminders are also sent to remind individuals to take corrective action, there are also reminder escalation levels so seniors are notified if action hasn’t been taken by tasked individuals. When corrective action is taken the due check & test is moved to complete and the risk assessment is updated accordingly so focus can again be on remaining corrective action that needs to be taken.
Safesmart’s view is that there is extensive difficulty in determining a score number for the likelihood and severity of risks as it’s a subjective process. As well as creating the issue of lower risk score hazards being forgotten, deliberation over scores can create confusion and waste time when the priority of a risk assessment is improving safety. Evidently time should be spent on this, not deliberating about the scoring of everything with a number or colour. Due to the nature of this subjectivity, discrepancy and difference in reporting by different individuals, issues are inherent in number & colour scoring of risk assessments. This means that compliance monitoring is affected, thus creating the possibility of confusion and misinformed decision as a consequence of scoring.
Conclusion
We hope reading this article has highlighted the issue of numeric risk scores and risk matrices. If you are still using a risk matrix with risk scores for your risk assessment process we urge you to reconsider and discover Safesmart’s Smartlog software. Our software is designed for fast and efficient risk assessment needed in today’s 21st century management environment that seeks to involve all in improving safety without unnecessary over complication and bureaucracy. Smartlog’s risk assessments are always live, always assigning corrective action and always helping to save lives.
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website you show that you consent to our website’s use of cookies. Click here to view our Privacy Notice.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
