b. Legal imperative - Just trying to stay out of trouble with Oregon OSHA is actually the least effective business strategy. The employer will do only what is required by law; nothing more.

c. Providing useful information; information that helps management make sound business decisions is the "bread and butter" of safety committees. The better the information provided, the more likely management attitude and behavior towards safety will improve.

d. Any (or all) of the above; of course! Remember the more you talk with your service providers, the more likely your safety management system will be fine tuned, and the less you'll need to worry about the outcome of an Oregon OSHA inspection.

b. False - Actually, in the most effective safety management systems, the safety committee and safety staff are available to "help" by performing consultant activities. "Doing" safety each day is most appropriately the job of line employees, supervisors, and managers.

c. Investments. Remember, thoughts create reality. It's important to get management "thinking" about the money spent on safety as an investment that will result in financial and other returns many times greater.

b. False. I'm always surprised how many students miss this basic question. Actually, accountability, in the context of safety, exists when the accomplishment of assigned duties are evaluated and result in an appropriate, effective consequence. It's not at all about giving someone the right answer.

a. True. You bet it is. One of the supervisor's basic obligations is to supply their "internal customers" with all resources required to meet the employer's performance expectations.

b. The employee's behavior changes in the desired direction. If the Consequence is not effective, the desired behavior will not increase in frequency.

b. Have I provided adequate safety education and training? Since the employee is "new," inadequate training may be most likely the cause for the behavior. Education not only includes formal training prior to the initial performance of a hazardous task; it also includes instruction about "why" safe procedures and practices are important, and it includes increased observation and feedback for a period of time after formal instruction.

b. The number of accidents that occur. Sure, the supervisor may be able to influence the number of accidents through all the other activities listed, but he or she can not actually control the actual outcome. If supervisors are held accountable for an outcome for which they have no control, they will naturally try to gain control over that outcome somehow: The methods they use to do that may not be ethical or otherwise in the best interests of the employer. Emphasize measurement of activities, not outcomes.

b. Tangible rewards. If you can touch, feel, smell, see, or hear it; it's tangible. Hey, food works for me. Give me a gift certificate to a restaurant anytime over another mug, or calculator ;-)

c. Withholding injury reports. As defined within the safety context, "reactive behavior" is an observable activity that occurs after an accident. Withholding an injury report is a good example of an observable activity. When significant positive consequences are withheld whenever injury reports are made, the frequency of reporting behaviors will likely decrease.

a. positive reinforcement. Although negative reinforcement may increase required behaviors, only positive consequences are effective in increasing the frequency of voluntary (discretionary) behaviors.

b. Taking shortcuts to get the work done. Working fast by taking risk is actually rewarded one way or another in a reactive safety incentive program.

b. employee ownership. You bet! As with any proactive involvement, like helping to select the best personal protective equipment or safe procedures in a hazardous task, employee ownership builds. It's important that employees own safe procedures and practices. Why is this important? Because employees value what they own; they use their "own" procedures and practices when not being supervised. Once again, thoughts create reality.

a. Content Level. This describes "what" we're saying. Words are vocal symbols that convey meaning to a receiver. If a sequence of the words within a given communication remains the same, meaning (and relationship) may vary when the inflection or tone is varied. For example; read the following sentence a number of times. Place emphasis "loudness" on a different word each time you read the sentence. You'll sense subtle changes in the overall meaning. "Now is the time to be safe."

b. Relationship Level. You've heard the old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it." We respond to the tone of the message more than the content. The tone conveys or establishes the relationship between sender and receiver.

c. Ignoring what was said. Every response but ignoring acknowledges the existence of the other person. Ignoring says, "you're so unimportant, you don't exist"; the absolute worst message you can send someone. It doesn't matter why you ignore, it "ticks people off." Try it...you'll see ;-) On the other hand, the very best thing you can do each day is to be the first one to say "hi!" to everyone you meet.

d. Supervisor credibility decreases. You get what you give. If a supervisor sincerely thanks employees for a job well done, the supervisor will receive positive responses and improve working relationships. You can take that to the bank!

b. recognizing every suggestion. Yes, it's very important that your suggestion program, no matter what procedures you use, includes a sincere personal "thanks for submitting your suggestion." Try to stay away from more formal/less personal forms of recognition.

True, management controls the policies, proceedures, budget, and staffing levels.

b. Root causes. These are the system flaws that cause or contribute to 98% of all accidents in the workplace. Uncontrollable "acts of God" account for only 2%.

d. Materials, equipment, environment, people.

b. Does not take enough time. We walk around, look around, ask a few questions in a work area, and then move on. It's not likely, especially when workers know they're being inspected, hazards will be uncovered.

d. All of the above. Yes, any of those activities listed could indicate inadequate supervision that would result in failure to detect and correct a hazard before it causes an injury.

a. First determine is system weaknesses exist. To be most effective, an accident investigation must always include root cause or system analysis to determine if weaknesses in the safety management system contributed to the accident. Never consider discipline unless root cause analysis is conducted first.

d. Secure the accident scene. When a serious accident or fatality occurs, first rope or tape off the accident scene. Once you're sure material evidence will not be disturbed, then start documenting the scene.

a. Analyze each event to identify surface causes. Once surface causes are identified, it's important to ask why they exist to discover any contributing root causes.

b. the purpose of the analysis is fulfilled. So what! Big deal! Well, if analysis stops after you've blamed someone; found fault, most likely you'll not continue the analysis process to determine if root causes exist. That's why it's important to conduct root cause analysis BEFORE conducting fault analysis. Most of the time you'll discover that fault analysis is not required due to the existence of root causes. Fix the system...not the blame!

c. Leak in a pipe. Of course, this describes a hazardous condition that might directly cause the accident. All other choices are actually contributing root causes.

b. natural and system. Natural consequences automatically occur as a result of our behavior; they cause hurt or health. If we don't use proper gloves when working with an acid, we get burned. If we use proper gloves, we stay healthy. We are punished or rewarded by what we do. System consequences, on the other hand, may occur when someone in the organization punishes or rewards an employee for their behavior.

b. Training, education. Training is a subset of education; one that teaches us how to do something. On-the-job training is a good example of this.

c. They are administered by someone. System consequences are administered by someone in authority. System consequences intentionally punish or reward someone for their behavior and they certainly do not occur automatically unless one considers "no consequence" as a consequence.

b. Step 2: Trainer show and tell. The first actual training step. The introduction educates more than trains. The trainer completes the procedure, explaining each step as it's performed.

d. All of the above. Strong documentation should describe; what was actually accomplished during training; what tests were conducted to test knowledge and skill; the opportunity to practice procedures and ask question; an understanding of worker accountabilities; trainer certification of learner proficiency; signatures, dates, subjects, etc.

c. programs. Improving programs is one of the most important reasons a safety committee exists. Effective safety committees focus on fixing the system by identifying, analyzing, evaluating and improving programs.

a. structure, inputs, processes, outputs. Remember, all organizational system contains these dynamic components. A system is alive!

b. enforces all safety policies and rules. Yikes! Enforcing safety rules is the job of line management, not staff. Don't get stuck being the "safety cop."

c. determine where we are now. Yes, it's important to know where you are now so that you can contrast that with where you want to be.

b. limit the damage from unexpected outcomes. I bet you thought it was "all of the above." ;-) Not so: according to the text, we want to limit the scope to limit the damage. The number of variables increases greatly as the scope of a change grows. If something goes wrong, it may become impossible to understand why if the scope of a change is too large.