By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service
While technology and automation have reduced a lot of workplace hazards, on-the-job injuries and fatalities are still a big problem in the U.S. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there was an 8.9% increase in fatal work injuries between 2020 and 2021.
OSHA reported a 16.3% increase in deaths for driver/sales workers and truck drivers in 2021, for example, and field service-related injuries increased even faster. According to the OSHA data:
“Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations had 475 fatalities in 2021, an increase of 20.9 percent. Almost one-third of these deaths (152) were to vehicle and mobile equipment mechanics, installers, and repairers.”
To put that in context, OSHA reported that there were 302 fatalities in 2021 among protective service occupations, meaning that maintenance/repair workers had an on-the-job fatality rate roughly 60% higher than that of police officers and firefighters.
A lot of field service jobs involve servicing complex equipment with heavy moving parts, working in environments with exposure to high voltage equipment or volatile chemicals, or working in dangerous industrial environments. The work must be done quickly and efficiently, and often on short notice. Technicians have to follow their own organization’s safety protocols, but also remain safe in customer environments that may be held to a wide variety of standards.
Technology is helping – field service management tools provide automated reminders and checklists so that technicians follow required steps, and with mobile devices they can quickly communicate unsafe conditions or accidents. But safety remains, by and large, a cultural issue. That was the subject of a recent talk I had with Franklin Maxson, VP Field Services, North America at Socomec, a company that specializes in electrical and power products.
Because of the nature of the equipment Socomec technicians work with, safety has to be top of mind. But the technicians work in a distributed environment and at client sites where they don’t know how well safety policies have been implemented until they get there. Because service leaders don’t have direct control over the technician environment, Franklin says they had to take a step back and look at safety from a cultural perspective.
“We have to make sure that [safety] is embedded within our culture, within our vision, and our mission, and that it remains an active part of every conversation so that we can maintain that focus,” Franklin said. “Safety is one of those things that if you don't focus on it, you become complacent about it.”
There are a few key components to that approach. First, you have to normalize safety as a default – it should take priority over other considerations like speed and cost, otherwise technicians will feel pressured to take safety shortcuts. Leadership and team members all have to be clear on that.
Tap Into the Power of Curiosity
Additionally, Franklin says companies should have an open-door policy so that leaders can listen to employee safety concerns without judgment. Employees should feel free to report safety incidents, even if that means self-reporting their own mistakes. The key is to make sure that reporting is met with curiosity, so that the team works together to solve any problems and make sure the incident is not repeated – which may mean revisiting policies, providing training, or investing in different equipment. A punitive approach will backfire and reduce organizational visibility into safety issues.
Another helpful tip: identify team members that have some passion around safety. They can help drive the safety culture across departments.
Getting away from a “checkbox” approach to safety can also be valuable. In the electrical industry, Franklin said that the lockout/tagout process is often handled using a list completion approach. But a better way might be to have regular conversations around the process – are there challenges to implementing the company policy? Do employees always have the right equipment on hand to complete these processes when they arrive on site? Those types of conversations can help create new solutions and improve safety for everyone.
Those conversations also empower employees to suggest new solutions, and also lets them know that if an unexpected scenario occurs, they can feel free to delay the work until the safety issue is addressed.
“[T]ypically, what we find when we do the incident investigations, is something changed,” Franklin said. “Something went outside of the expected norm, and we weren't prepared for it. So how do we take that moment and say, ‘You know what? Let's take 10 minutes. Let's review our hazard analysis. Are we actually ready to proceed to do this, or do we have to take a step back?’”
The approach Franklin says has worked at Socomec combines top-down leadership with a grassroots safety culture. But they must be aligned. Leadership needs to set goals and expectations and have methods in place to measure progress. Team members, on the other hand, need a mechanism to document safety observations and hazard reports, and management should focus on addressing those to the best of their abilities. Franklin said he actually tracks the close rates on reviewing and answering those reports.
Finally, he said that safety has to constantly be on the radar of service leadership. “If you stop paying attention to safety, safety will erode,” he said. “Just quick look away, and the next thing you know, there are things that are changing and that are not going the right way, because we stopped focusing on it. And it didn't take long, just a couple of months, and it started to erode.”
We covered a lot of ground in our discussion, including the personal and professional experiences that led Franklin to be such a safety cheerleader. You can listen to the entire podcast here.