Transcript Accident Reviews (On-the
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Fleet Safety Benchmarking
Collaborating to Reduce Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities
Jack Hanley Executive Director Network of Employers for Traffic Safety (NETS) International Conference on Road Safety at Work Washington, D.C.
February 17, 2009
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Contents
Background and mission………………………2 Profile of participating companies…………….3
Benchmark objectives………………………….4
Business case…………………………………..5
Scope…………………………………………….6
Types of drivers and types of vehicles……….7
Metrics and Program Elements……………….9
Best practices summary................................11
CPMM, Program Elements results................12
Critical success factors..................................23
Statistical analyses........................................24
Summary and conclusions............................25
1
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Fleet Safety Benchmarking
Started in 1994 Mostly big pharma in early years Funded by J&J through 2006 Funded by Monsanto Co. 2007 2008 Under auspices of Network of Employers for Traffic Safety Collect global and by-country benchmark data
Mission is to reduce crashes, injuries, fatalities among member companies and to model safe driving in the communities where member companies operate
2
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Profile of Participating Companies
Pharma Ag Automotive Beverage Chemical Consumer Delivery/Logistics mgmt Insurance Medical Manufacturing Oil Service 28 Companies 249,000 Total Vehicles 6 Billion Total Miles Driven 104 Countries
Anonymity is maintained
3
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Benchmark Objectives
Improve the vehicle safety record of participating companies Establish common definitions to permit cross-comparisons Be a vehicle safety role model to other companies and organizations Share best practices among participants Provide a network to assess and resolve vehicle safety-related concerns/issues Provide a network to assess the benefits of emerging vehicle technologies Provide resources to assist companies wanting to develop a road safety program
Share best practices to put in place a cost effective, integrated, and comprehensive vehicle safety program
4
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Justification/Business Case
eco3
eco
nomic cost of crashes
eco eco
nomic cost of poor driving habits logical cost to the environment 5
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS …
1. Metrics By country
Benchmark Scope
2. Program Elements By country/world area Light Vehicles Sedans, SUVs, Pick-up Trucks, Mini-vans Medium (10,000-25,999 lbs.) Heavy (>26,000 lbs) 2 and 3-wheeled motorized 6
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Categories of Drivers Covered by Survey
Written policy in place by region % US (22) % M/C (13) % EMEA (14) % AP (12) % LA/CA (12)
Employees driving a company vehicle Employees driving personal/rental on business Family members driving a company vehicle Contractors driving on company business Passengers 100% 86% 73% 50% 45% 92% 77% 46% 46% 62% 93% 79% 43% 43% 57% 92% 83% 42% 50% 67% 92% 83% 42% 50% 67% 7
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Types of Vehicles Covered by Survey
Written policy in place by region
Light vehicles Medium vehicles Heavy vehicles 2/3-wheel vehicles
% US (22) % M/C (13) % EMEA (14) % AP (12) % LA/C A (12)
100% 100% 100% 68% 50% 36% 77% 54% 62% 71% 50% 57% 100% 100% 75% 50% 58% 75% 50% 58% 8
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Metrics
Collisions
46,734 Total Composite: 8.34 CPMM Range : 0.48-16.89 CPMM
Injuries
1,334 Total Composite: 0.25 IPMM Range : 0.0-1.48 IPMM
Fatalities
9 Total
% of Fleet in Crash
Composite: 20% Range : 1-31 % 9
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Benchmark Program Elements
Policies High risk drivers Collision review process Driver education/training Commentary Drives Crash review process Deductible charge policy Use of technology Vehicle safety features Metrics reporting process Severity indices Vehicle safety communication Vehicle safety outreach programs Green fleet initiatives Vehicle safety critical success factors Telemetrics and telematics
Statistical analysis is done to determine which Program Elements correlate to lowest CPMMs
10
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Best Practices (Based on lowest CPMMs)
Universal Practice
Seatbelts
Best Practices
(Statistically significant) 1. Complete mobile phone ban by ALL LEADING companies 2. Collision reviews required by ALL LEADING companies
Additional commonalities from 5 leading companies
Seat belts and air bags Training for tenured drivers Classroom format used Immediate manager involved Follow-up action required Lessons learned shared Mgmt meeting presentations 11
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Fleet Size and Collision Frequency
Country
United States France Japan Germany Italy Mexico United Kingdom Spain Brazil Canada Russia
Total SIN Fleet Fleet
114,558 8,798 8,429 7,738 7.433
6,921 6,304 5,040 4,995 4,603 4,017
238,466 % GT Fleets Collisions
48% 4% 20,411 2,532 4% 1,759 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2,096 2,213 1,985 1,343 1,455 341 717 984
46,734 % GT Collisions
44% 5% 5% 4% 5% 4% 3% 3% 1% 2% 2%
20%
12
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
2007 CPMM by Company
APMM Range: 0.48 to 16.89
27 companies Company numbers assigned by APMM Based on passenger-vehicle data
2007 CPMMs by Company (Pas s e nge r Ve hicle s )
Co. 1 Co. 2 Co. 3 Co. 4 Co. 5 Co. 6 Co. 7 Co. 8 Co. 9 Co. 10 Co. 11 Co. 12 Co. 13 Co. 14 Co. 15 Co. 16 Co. 17 Co. 18 Co. 19 Co. 20 Co. 21 Co. 22 Co. 23 Co. 24 Co. 25 Co. 26 Co. 27 Composite 0.00
0.48
1.07
2.00
2.38
2.38
2.65
3.33
4.16
4.48
5.32
4.00
6.00
6.40
6.54
7.37
7 8.00
8.85
8.34
APM M
9.53
9.98
10.06
10.15
10.66
10.84
11.10
11.51
11.64
12.22
10.00
12.00
14.03
14.00
16.00
15.98
16.46
16.89
18.00
13
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
2007 CPMM by Country
2007 APMMs by Country (Passenger Vehicles)
3.59
BRAZIL CANADA FRANCE GERMANY ITALY JAPAN MEXICO RUSSIA SPAIN UNITED KINGDOM UNITED STATES 6.82
11.42
11.21
7.46
14.28
15.83
14.95
13.51
13.69
14.24
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00
APMM
14
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
CPMM by World Region
2007 APMMs by World Region (Passenger Vehicles)
US CA/LA EMEA AP CAN/MEX COMPOSITE 0.00
5.29
2.00
4.00
6.00
APMM
7.46
11.96
9.63
10.57
8.00
8.34
10.00
12.00
14.00
15
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Policies in place
Fleet Safety Policies
Driver training for new hires Driver training for tenured drivers Commentary drives Collision reviews, for on-the-job collision Collision reviews, for off-the-job collision Periodic motor vehicle record checks Remedial action for high risk drivers Deny employment based on high risk records Termination for DUI/DWI conviction Restrict or ban phone/telematic use
% US (26)
69% 92% 58% 85% 42% 88% 81% 69% 88% 88%
% M/C (15)
80% 100% 60% 80% 27% 67% 80% 40% 67% 87%
% EMEA (15)
80% 100% 67% 73% 13% 60% 73% 33% 67% 87%
% AP (13)
77% 100% 62% 77% 15% 54% 69% 23% 62% 85%
% LA/CA (13)
77% 100% 62% 77% 15% 54% 69% 23% 62% 85% 16
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Mobile Phone Policy
Written policy in place
Yes
% US (26) % M/C (15) % EMEA (15) % AP (13) % LA/CA (13)
85% 87% 93% 92% 92% 17
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Ban vs. Permit Hands-free
Written policy in place by region % US (22) % M/C (13) % EMEA (14)
Ban the use of any type of mobile phone equipment unless vehicle is stopped and parked Permit the use of hands-free mobile phone equipment while driving 41% 59% 31% 69% 29% 71%
% AP (12)
33% 67%
% LA/CA (12)
33% 67% 18
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Reasons for Not Banning Mobile Phones
Reasons for not banning phones
Management hasn't been asked to ban all phone use
% Companies (13)
Management is not aware of the research A ban would be too difficult to enforce A ban is unrealistic; mobile phones are a fact of life 8% 8% 85% 77% 19
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Phone Records for Collisions
Check phone records after collision
Yes, all collisions Yes, but only for injuries Yes, but only for serious or fatal injuries
% US (22)
9% 5% 32%
% M/C (13) % EMEA (14) % AP (12) % LA/CA (12)
8% 8% 7% 7% 8% 8% 8% 8% 38% 36% 42% 42% 20
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Data reported to
Fleet management Field management Drivers Senior management
Reporting and Severity
% US (26)
81% 73% 46%
% M/C (15)
67% 67% 33%
% EMEA (15)
53% 67% 27%
% AP (13)
62% 69% 23% Safety staff
Severity index in place
92% 85%
% US (26)
100% 93%
% M/C (15)
100% 93%
% EMEA (15)
100% 92%
% AP (13) % LA/CA (13)
62% 62% 23% 100% 92%
% LA/CA (13) Yes 15% 27% 27% 31% 31%
21
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Green Fleet Programs
Green fleet program in place
Yes
If yes above, program components include:
Evaluate/quantify greenhouse gas emissions Set reduction goals Educate drivers Limit the use of 4x4s and SUVs Add greener vehicles to fleet options Vehicle upgrades for choosing green fleet vehicles Cash incentives for choosing green fleet vehicles Purchase greenhouse gas credits
% US (26)
42%
% US (11)
91% 64% 73% 64% 82% 45% 18% 9%
% M/C (15)
47%
% M/C (7)
100% 71% 43% 29% 71% 14% 29% 0%
% EMEA (15)
53%
% EMEA (8)
88% 63% 38% 25% 75% 13% 25% 0%
% AP (13)
54%
% AP (7)
86% 57% 29% 14% 57% 0% 29% 0%
% LA/CA (13)
54%
% LA/CA (7)
86% 57% 29% 14% 57% 0% 29% 0% 22
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Critical Success Factors ( Fleet Safety Manager Opinions)
Choose one
Senior management support Field management support Driver training Strong policies High risk program Use of metrics to set goals Incentives
# of Companies
16 5 3 1 1 1 0 23
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Statistical Analyses Results
Based on the 2006 and 2007 data years, the following correlate best with low CPMMs… Frequent measuring of CPPM Reporting of serious crashes to senior management Frequent training of company drivers Total cell phone use ban
Note: There is no correlation between fleet size and CPMM
24
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS…
Summary and Conclusions
STRENGTH IN NUMBERS
Benchmark Program Administered by Network of Employers for Traffic Safety Annual survey Global membership Comprehensive Metrics and Program Elements Low cost/high return For all fleet sizes, public and private organizations Engages People, Processes, and Technology Includes 2 newsletters Annual post-benchmark best practices conference
For information on participating in NETS’ STRENGTH IN NUMBERS Benchmark program, please email
QUESTIONS?
25