Measuring total recordable incident rate

For a very long time, companies have been evaluated on lagging indicators, specifically, their total recordable incident rate or TRIR.

The TRIR is a measurement of the number of OSHA recordable injuries multiplied by the number of hours worked by all employees in a year, divided by 200,000. It has been the end-all, be-all by which companies are measured and ultimately, allowed to work with other organizations. I will clarify that there are other measurements for days away restricted work or DART, lost time rate or LTI, fatalities, experience modification rate, and more. For the argument of this blog, we will discuss TRIR.

My argument has always been that TRIR is not a true measurement of safety performance or company safety culture. Sure, it can be, but it is not always the case. I have seen companies with terrible safety programs who are lucky, and as a result, have low TRIRs. On the other hand, I have seen companies with best-in-class safety programs who have a rough patch and encounter a series of recordable incidents, resulting in a climbing TRIR.

So here is the issue. If companies are measured by this KPI and their ability to secure work depends on it, what are they going to do? I think that we all know the answer to this question, and it comes in many forms, but the short version is that they are going to hide the injuries. In my opinion, this is not good for anyone as it creates a false pretense.

I would like to see companies that evaluate their vendors, contractors, and service providers to evaluate differently. Sure, the lagging indicators mentioned above will always be evaluated, but other factors should be considered such as safety culture, programs and training, observations and behavioral reporting, and more. These are measurements that truly frame a safety program and a company’s commitment to safety.

If you work in safety, I am sure that you are muttering to yourself that this will never happen. You may be right, but you also know that what I am saying makes sense. I look at it like this. Let’s say that you have a teenager who is a really good kid. Good grades, thoughtful and respectful, responsible and kind. Suddenly he or she makes a mistake and does something stupid. Should you measure your child based on one decision or incident, or based on the cumulative view? Easy answer, right?

We will always focus on injury prevention and do everything that we can to keep our KPIs low. Good claims management plays a key role, but prevention is everything, and I argue that if and when we focus on the inputs, we will have better control of the results, in this case, less injuries. For now, companies will continue to play the TRIR game, and we can all expect that their reporting will likely match their need to secure work. I understand that this is controversial, but I have seen it play out for years. The stakes are high!