Transcript KNAUF INSULATION GmbH SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROCESS

KNAUF INSULATION GmbH
SAFETY MANAGEMENT
PROCESS
Kevin W. Donohue
Manager, Corporate Safety
Corporate Environmental Health and Safety
Group
EHS0.23.4
Safety Management Process
• Research and Analysis began in 1999
• Starting in 2000 with the introduction of
new elements for the conversion from the
existing “Safety Program” into a
measurable “SAFETY PROCESS”
• Prime Objective- Reduce the variability in
our performance
WHY THE CHANGE?
• If you do what you’ve always done, you’ll
get what you’ve always got! (Deming)
• Our Quality Quest demands an
atmosphere of continuous improvement
• Safety IS a Business Process and should
be managed the same as Financial,
Quality, and Production
Leading Indicators Utilized in
Our Process
• Monthly Behavior
Observations and
Feedback
• Monthly Department
Hazard Analysis
• Critical and At-Risk
Behavior
Identification
• Training
• Mgmt Audit of
Observations
• Gap Analysis of Incidents
v. Recordables
• Procedure Audits and
Corrective Actions
• Accident Root Cause
Analysis
• COR Tracking/Analysis
Behaviors, Observations, and
Feedback
• The Safety Management Process began with a 5
year analysis of accidents, and cause codes
• This lead to a grouping of what turned out to be 4
Critical Behaviors that encompassed some 15 AtRisk Behaviors
• Through this identification process a focus is
developed to target improvements
• First focus was corporate wide, progressed to
Plant specific, next to individual lines/depts.
Within Plants
Behaviors, Observations, and
Feedback
• The next step in the Behavior model was to
Recognize that there are two categories of
behaviors- Employee Behaviors- things
employee(s) do or don’t do that puts them
at-risk, AND Company Behaviors- things
we ask (actively and passively) our
employees’ to do putting them at-risk
Behaviors, Observations, and
Feedback
• With the inventory of Behaviors established
the next step was…
• Development of an Observation component
which was achieved through the BST video
training series
• Management and Supervisors were trained
on how to conduct observations, and a form
developed to record them for reporting
Behaviors, Observations, and
Feedback
• Employee participation is strongly
encouraged in the observation component,
but it is a required function for supervisors
• A key requirement of a good observation is
the understanding that the process is NOT
punitive- Neither Knauf nor its’ employees
does everything wrong. There is as much
value in positive observations as negative
Behaviors, Observations, and
Feedback
• Generating behavior inventories, observing
and recording actions, and NOT providing
Feedback immediately is a waste of time,
effort, and resources
• The Observation Log has a section designed
to record immediate feedback from both the
observer, and the observed employee(s)
Behaviors, Observations, and
Feedback
• We value these measurements to the
point that we also record which Critical
Behavior, At-Risk Behavior, and if
Feedback was provided in our
accident/incident reporting system
How Does the Process Work?
• The process elements are recorded,
reported, tracked, and graphed for trend
analysis
• Data is reviewed quarterly for progress
towards goals established for each Plant
• All the elements are reviewed and
compared with risk data to determine what
focus is necessary for add’l improvement
How Does the Process Work?
• If negative results continue we do
provide on-site activities such as
employee meetings, audit and review,
and utilize other Knauf tools such as
4D Problem Solving Teams
What We Do At The Plant &
Corporate Levels
•
•
•
•
Complete the elements
Measure the process
Analyze the data from the measurements
Improve performance by intervening in
negative trends
• Control the process, avoiding variability
• Implement Continuous Improvement
Does this Process Work?
•YES
•YES
•YES
2005 Total Recordable Incident Rate by Location v. Company Goal
14
Plant I
Plant II
Plant III
12
Plant IV
Corp Mfg.
Corp Off.
Corp
10
GOAL 2005
8
6
4
2
0
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Knauf Corporate 10 Year Incident Rate Review
25
Total Recordable Incidence Rate
20
15
10
5
0
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
Years '94-'05YTD
2002
2004
2006
Does this Process Work?
• In the first 3 months of 2003 Plant IV Shasta Lake
had a series of accidents for failure to control
hazardous energy. Two of which resulted in very
serious injuries
• Meetings were held by Corp. Safety with every
employee discussing the incidents. Since then, No
Other Injuries from this cause have occurred.
Further they finished the year with the equivalent
of 7 months without a recordable accident
Does this Process Work?
• In 2003 Shelbyville Plant III demonstrated a
continuing negative trend. By the end of the 1st
quarter ‘04 a Knauf 4D Problem Solving Team
was put in place. The team was sponsored by
Corporate Safety and the Plant Manager. Lead by
the Plant Production Superintendent, facilitated by
the Plant QA Mgr., and include team members of
4 Production employees and the Facility Engineer.
Why Does It Work
• Our Safety Process is a group of
defined, specific activities that
when developed, implemented,
managed, and measured properly
will produce the desired end result
What Knauf’s Safety Process Is
NOT
•
•
•
•
•
•
A short term fix
A regulatory requirement
A Mandate
Done easily
Maintained with Little to No effort
Going to go away
From the President’s Office down
to the Production Floor
• YOU CAN ONLY ACHIEVE THE
LEVEL OF SAFETY THAT YOU
DEMONSTRATE YOU WANT
TO ACHIEVE