THEORIES OF ACCIDENT CAUSATION

What is your opinion

concerning the various
theories of accident
causation?
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
To explain all theories of accident causation
To identify the advantages and disadvantages all the accident
causation theories
To evaluate the right model to explain accident causation at the
workplace
THEORIES OF ACCIDENT CAUSATION
Domino Theory of Accident Causation
Human Factors Theory of Accident Causation
Accident/Incident Theory of Accident Causation
Epidemiological Theory of Accident Causation
Systems Theory of Accident Causation
Combination Theory of Accident Causation
Behavioral Theory of Accident Causation
Drugs and Accident Causation
Depression and Accident Causation
Management Failures and Accident Causation
Obesity and Accident Causation
INTRODUCTION
Each year, work-related accidents cost the United States almost
$50 billion.
This figure includes costs associated with lost wages, medical
expenses, insurance costs, and indi-rect costs.
The number of persons injured in industrial place accidents in a
typical year is 7,128,000, or 3 per 100 persons per year.
In the workplace, there is one accidental death approximately
every 51 minutes and one injury every 19 seconds
DOMINO THEORY OF ACCIDENT
CAUSATION
An early pioneer of accident prevention and industrial safety was
Herbert W. Heinrich, an official with the Travelers Insurance
Company. In the late 1920s, after studying the reports of 75,000
industrial accidents, Heinrich concluded that
88 percent of industrial accidents are caused by unsafe acts
committed by fellow workers.
10 percent of industrial accidents are caused by unsafe
conditions.
2 percent of industrial accidents are unavoidable.
Heinrichs Axioms of Industrial Safety
Injuries result from a completed series of factors, one of which is
the accident itself.
An accident can occur only as the result of an unsafe act by a
person and/or a physical or mechanical hazard.
Most accidents are the result of unsafe behavior by people.
An unsafe act by a person or an unsafe condition does not always
immediately result in an accident/injury.
The reasons why people commit unsafe acts can serve as helpful
guides in selecting corrective actions.
Heinrichs Axioms of Industrial Safety
The severity of an accident is largely fortuitous, and the accident
that caused it is largely preventable.
The best accident prevention techniques are analogous with the
best quality and productivity techniques.
Management should assume responsibility for safety because it is
in the best position to get results.
The supervisor is the key person in the prevention of industrial
accidents.
In addition to the direct costs of an accident (for example,
compensation, liability claims, medical costs, and hospital
expenses), there are also hidden or indirect costs.
Domino Theory
1932 First Scientific Approach to
Accident/Prevention - H.W. Heinrich
Industrial Accident Prevention Industrial Accident Prevention
Social Environment Social Environment
and Ancestry
Fault of the Fault of the
Person
(Carelessness)
Unsafe Act Unsafe Act
or
Condition
Accident
Injury
MISTAKES OF PEOPLE MISTAKES OF PEOPLE
Ancestry and social environment. Negative character traits that may lead
people to behave in an unsafe manner can be inherited (ancestry) or acquired
as a result of the social environment.
Fault of person. Negative character traits, whether inherited or acquired, are
why people behave in an unsafe manner and why hazardous conditions exist.
Unsafe act/mechanical or physical hazard. Unsafe acts committed by people
and mechanical or physical hazards are the direct causes of accidents.
Accident. Typically, accidents that result in injury are caused by falling or
being hit by moving objects.
Injury. Typical injuries resulting from accidents include lacerations and
fractures.
Heinrichs theory has two central points: (1) injuries are caused by the action
of preceding factors and (2) removal of the central factor (unsafe
act/hazardous condition) negates the action of the preceding factors and, in so
doing, prevents accidents and injuries.
Heinrichs Theory
Corrective Action Sequence
(The three Es)
Engineering
Education
Enforcement
HUMAN FACTORS THEORY OF
ACCIDENT CAUSATION
The human factors theory of accident causation attributes
accidents to a chain of events ultimately caused by human
error.
It consists of the following three broad factors that lead to
human error:
overload,
inappropriate response, and
inappropriate activities
Human Factors Theory
Overload
Environmental
Factors (noise,
distractions
Internal Factors
(personal
problems,
emotional stress)
Situational
Factors (unclear
instructions, risk
level)
Inappropriate
Response
Detecting a
hazard but not
correcting it
Removing
safeguards from
machines and
equipment
Ignoring safety
Inappropriate
Activities
Performing
tasks without the
requisite training
Misjudging the
degree of risk
involved with a
given task
OVERLOAD
Overload amounts to an IMBALANCE between a persons capacity at
any given time and the load that person is carrying in a given state.
A persons capacity is the product of such factors as his or her:
Natural ability,
Training,
State of mind,
Fatigue,
Stress, and
Physical condition.
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE AND
INCOMPATIBILITY
How a person responds in a given situation can cause or prevent an
accident. ( Examples)
If a person detects a hazardous condition but does nothing to
correct it, he or she has responded inappropriately.
If a person removes a safeguard from a machine in an effort to
increase output, he or she has responded inappropriately.
If a person disregards an established safety procedure, he or she
has responded inappropriately.
The incompatibility of a persons workstation with regard to size,
force, reach, feel, and similar factors can lead to accidents and
injuries.
INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVITIES
Human error can be the result of inappropriate activities. An
example of an inappropriate activity is a person who
undertakes a task that he or she doesnt know how to do.
Another example is a person who misjudges the degree of risk
involved in a given task and proceeds based on that
misjudgment.
Such inappropriate activities can lead to accidents and injuries.
ACCIDENT/INCIDENT THEORY OF
ACCIDENT CAUSATION
The accident/incident theory is an extension of the human
factors theory. It was developed by Dan Petersen and is
sometimes referred to as the Petersen accident/incident theory.
Petersen introduced such new elements as ergonomic traps, the
decision to err, and systems failures, while retaining much of
the human factors theory.
Petersens Accident/Incident
Theory
Overload
Pressure
Fatigue
Motivation
Drugs
Alcohol
Worry
Ergonomic Traps
Incompatible
workstation (i.e.
size, force, reach,
feel)
Incompatible
expectations
Decision to Err
Misjudgment of
the risk
Unconscious
desire to err
Logical decision
based on the
situation
Systems Failure
Policy Inspection
Responsibility Correction
Training Standards
Human Error
Accident
Injury/Damage
A variety of pressures such as deadlines, peer pressure, and budget
factors can lead to unsafe behavior. Another factor that can
influence such a decision is the It wont happen to me syndrome.
Following are just some of the different ways that systems can fail,
according to Petersens theory:
Management does not establish a comprehensive safety policy.
Responsibility and authority with regard to safety are not clearly
defined.
Safety procedures such as measurement, inspection, correction, and
investigation are ignored or given insufficient attention.
Employees do not receive proper orientation.
Employees are not given sufficient safety training.
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL THEORY OF
ACCIDENT CAUSATION
Industrial hygiene concerns environmental factors that can lead
to sickness, disease, or other forms of impaired health.
This trend has, in turn, led to the development of an
epidemiological theory of accident causation.
Epidemiology is the study of causal relationships between
environmental factors and disease.
Epidemiological Theory
Predisposition
Characteristics
Susceptibility of people
Perceptions
Environmental factors
Situational
Characteristics
Risk assessment by
individuals
Peer pressure
Priorities of the
supervisor
Attitude
Can cause or prevent
accident conditions
The key components are PREDISPOSITIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
and SITUATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS. These characteristics, taken
together, can either result in or prevent conditions that may
result in an accident.
For example, if an employee who is particularly susceptible to
peer pressure (predispositional characteristic) is pressured by
his coworkers (situational characteristic) to speed up his
operation, the result will be an increased probability of an
accident.
SYSTEMS THEORY OF ACCIDENT
CAUSATION
This theory views a situation in which an accident may occur as a system
comprised of the following components: person (host), machine (agency), and
environment.
The likelihood of an accident occurring is determined by how these components
interact. Changes in the patterns of interaction can increase or reduce the
probability of an accident.
For example, an experienced employee who operates a numerically controlled
five-axis machining center in a shop environment may take a two-week vacation.
Her temporary replacement may be less experienced. This change in one
component of the system (person/host) increases the probability of an accident.
Such a simple example is easily understood. However, not all changes in patterns
of interaction are this simple. Some are so subtle that their analysis may require
a team of people, each with a different type of expertise.
Systems Theory Model
Machine Person
Environment
Interaction
Collect
information
Weigh
risks
Make
decision
Task to be
performed
Five factors should be considered before
beginning the process of collecting
information, weighing risks, and making a
decision:
Job requirements
The workers abilities and limitations
The gain if the task is successfully
accomplished
The loss if the task is attempted but fails
The loss if the task is not attempted
Combination Theory
For some accidents, a given model may be very accurate, for
others less so
Often the cause of an accident cannot be adequately explained
by just one model/theory
Actual cause may combine parts of several different models
BEHAVIORAL THEORY OF ACCIDENT CAUSATION
Often referred to as behavior-based safety (BBS)
7 basic principles of BBS
Intervention
Identification of internal factors
Motivation to behave in the desired manner
Focus on the positive consequences of appropriate behavior
Application of the scientific method
Integration of information
Planned interventions
DRUGS AND ACCIDENT CAUSATION
According to surveys by the Department of Health and Human
Services, some 77 percent of drug users are employedmore than
9 million workers. An estimated 6.5 percent of full-time and 8.6 of
part-time workers use illicit drugs. More than a third of all workers
between the ages of 18 and 25 are binge drinkers. . . . Alcoholism
alone causes 500 million lost days annually (125 million days are
lost each year due to work-related injuries). . . . Some 20 percent of
workers report that they have been put in danger or injured, or had
to work harder, redo work or cover for a co-worker, as a result of a
co-workers drinking.18
Many companies implement drug-free workplace programs.
Drug-free workplace policy, supervisory training, employee
education, employee assistance programs, and alcohol and
drug testing.
DEPRESSION AND ACCIDENT
CAUSATION
Depression results in more than 200 million lost workdays and
costs the U.S. economy $43.7 billion annually. Much of that cost is
hidden, including $23.8 billion lost to U.S. businesses in
absenteeism and lost productivity. Beyond productivity issues,
studies suggest that depressed workers may be more prone to
accidents.
Stephen Heidel, M.D., MBA, an occupational psychiatrist in San
Diego, notes a lack of concentration, fatigue, failing memory and
slow reaction time as reasons that workers who are depressed may
not work safely.
Safety and health professionals are not mental health professionals and
should not at-tempt to play that role. However, they should be alert to the
warning signs of clinical depression in employees. These signs are as follows:
Persistent dreary moods (sadness, anxiety, nervousness)
Signs of too little sleep
Sleeping on the job or persistent drowsiness
Sudden weight loss or gain
General loss of interest, especially in areas of previous interest
Restlessness, inability to concentrate, or irritability
Chronic physical problems (headaches, digestive disorders, etc.)
Forgetfulness or an inability to make simple decisions
Persistent feelings of guilt
Feelings of low self-worth
Focus on death or talk of suicide
MANAGEMENT FAILURES AND
ACCIDENT CAUSATION
Poor housekeeping or improper use of tools, equipment, or facilities. Management
either has not developed the necessary requirements, or has but does not enforce
them. The management failure in this case could be lack of safety procedures (failure
to let employees know the expectations), lack of training (failure to give employees
the knowledge and skills they need to work safely), or failure to properly
supervise (failure to monitor employee actions).
Pressure to meet deadlines. Sometimes management has developed a good safety
and health policy, established good safety and health procedures, built safety and
health expectations into job descriptions and performance appraisals, and provided
the necessary training only to put all this aside when a rush order comes in. This
may be the most problematic of the many different types of management failures
that can occur because it can undermine all of the organizations safety and health
efforts. When management allows safety and health procedures to be ignored or,
worse yet, encourages them to be ignored to speed
OBESITY AND ACCIDENT CAUSATION
Obesity has long been associated with such chronic diseases as
high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, diabetes, and certain
types of cancer, but these studies now tie it to workplace injuries
too.
The World Health Organization estimates that there are more than
300 million obese people worldwide. In the industrialized nations
of the world nations such as the United Statesthe number of
people considered obese is growing rapidly.
These studies used a standard body mass index (BMI) score of 30 or
above to define obesity.