+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com


According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, a good occupational safety and health (OSH) program uses leading indicators to drive change and lagging indicators to measure effectiveness.
There are two parts to this assignment. For Part I, you must use the CSU Online Library to search for and select an article from an academic journal that discusses leading and lagging indicators in OSH performance. The article must be no more than 5 years old.
Once you have selected your article, you must complete the following tasks in a one-page written review.
Accurately identify the premise of the article.
Analyze the author’s points in support of the premise. 

Correlate the author’s points to concepts covered in this unit.
Your review should include the following:
a summary and definition of leading and lagging Indicators,

a brief discussion of why there is often confusion over terms, and
definitions related to leading and lagging indicators.

For Part II, you will continue to demonstrate your understanding of the use of leading and lagging indicators. You must write a two-page paper in which you discuss the various methods for establishing safety accountability metrics for managers, employees, and safety professionals discussed in this unit. You must specifically address the following.
Outline how you can use both leading and lagging indicators in the application of a Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle framework to improve organizational performance.
Explain the need for language of business communication within the PDCA cycle.

Summarize how systems thinking applies to the PDCA cycle.
Connect points in the article you reviewed to support your Part II discussion.

Submit both Parts I and II in a single document. Your assignment submission must meet the page requirements listed above. The title page (if used), or any reference pages do not count toward the page requirement.UNIT III STUDY GUIDE
Planning, Leadership, and the
Language of Business
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit III
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
1. Apply management tools used to develop an effective safety management system.
1.1 Explore various methods for establishing safety accountability metrics for managers,
employees, and safety professionals.
3. Analyze the importance of clarity in assigning safety-related job tasks.
3.1 Explain the need for safety professionals to speak the language of business.
6. Relate continuous improvement principles to safety management concepts.
6.1 Explore the use of leading and lagging indicators to increase organizational performance.
Learning Outcomes
3.1, 6.1
Learning Activity
Unit Lesson
Chapter 5
Unit III Scholarly Activity
Unit Lesson
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Unit III Scholarly Activity
Required Unit Resources
Chapter 5: A Primer on Systems/Macro Thinking
Chapter 6: A Socio-Technical Model for an Operational Risk Management System
Unit Lesson
This unit will discuss why planning is an essential part of a safety professional’s daily activities. Planning is
critical to ensure that identified action items are controlled. Additionally, we will explore the many areas in
which a safety professional can demonstrate how they add value to an organization as part of the leadership
The Language of Business
One crucial aspect of managing safety efforts is speaking the same language as the leadership team. The
safety professional must be consistent in presenting ideas and making a case for safety improvements.
Having a common language of business determines how leadership and employees receive communications.
Communication is achieved through daily actions, presentations, positive attitude, style, and the professional
presence, which is constantly on view.
There are important considerations for a safety professional to achieve. Manuele (2020) tells us that safety
professionals must sharpen their culture change management skills and actively pursue opportunities if they
want to be visible and recognized by leadership and considered a true member of the management team who
contributes to achieving organizational goals.
OSH 3310, Total Environmental Health and Safety Management
In Unit II, we discussed the perception of the safety professional. Based on theUNIT
a safety
professional needs to conduct a self-evaluation to determine how leadership perceives
them. Is the
perception that the safety professional is a person wearing a hard hat and carrying a clipboard walking around
a workplace, who quotes regulations, and stresses using personal protective equipment without justification
(Roughton et al., 2019)? Unfortunately, in many cases, this image has become the accepted symbol of the
safety profession. It is an image that various publications and traditions have fostered over time.
As stated, the safety professional must learn how to speak the same language of business as leadership. For
example, a presentation format should be similar to other leadership team members when presenting a topic
at a leadership meeting. This effort demonstrates that you are on the same page.
There are ways to demonstrate an understanding of the business languages, for example, preparing return on
investment cost for projects, developing safety performance metrics, and utilizing the Plan-Do-Check-Act to
document continuous improvement for safety-related projects.
Return on Investments
It is vital to effectively communicate with leadership on suggested projects where funds are needed to change
the safety process. Return on investment (ROI) is used frequently by leadership to help make such
investments. ROI allows one to determine what the return will be, typically in dollars in the United States, for
an investment that has been made.
Leadership views a given investment as adding to the bottom line. This concern for the bottom line is
significant for a substantial investment that a corporation might have to address a safety issue adequately.
For example, a case study could be presented to the leadership team, outlining the ROI for a suggested
safety-related project, requiring a substantial cost (Manuele, 2020).
There are other general calculations that safety professionals may face on future professional certification
exams. Again, it is important to utilize financial tools to compare the costs of various acceptable options.
Understanding concepts like the pay-back period and the future value of money can help make a case for
safety in presenting to organizational decision makers. As a safety professional, it is important to understand
how to use the language of business, which frequently includes consideration of the bottom line.
Safety Performance Metrics
According to Manuele (2020), there is much interest in developing leading and lagging indicators for
measuring safety performance. A balanced approach is a way of defining both leading and lagging indicators
to measure the desired outcome. The leadership team will know if planned activities are occurring as intended
through careful monitoring of leading and lagging indicators (U.S. Department of Energy, 2009).
Examples of leading indicators could be factors such as the number of training programs conducted,
inspections made, and safety discussions held. In the long term, leadership will still want to know whether the
application of the leading indicators has been successful. The success will be measured mainly by the trailing
indicators’ trends—the incident experience and costs (Manuele, 2020).
Keep in mind that when planning action items, leading indicators are not implemented and managed in a onesize-fits-all fashion. The “why” of the SMS must be distinctly identified in each area.
Lagging indicators analyze failure or outcome representing where you are and what you have accomplished
but do not necessarily predict the future. They also represent data elements associated with past events.
OSH 3310, Total Environmental Health and Safety Management
(Pornpatrawiwat, n.d.)
One planning format used and proven over time is the concept of specific, measurable, attainable, realistic,
and time-bound. This is commonly referred to as the SMART model. It meets the criteria of being relatively
simple and straightforward.
A SMART concept is an effective tool that provides clarity, focus, and motivation that an organization needs to
achieve established goals. SMART goals are easy to use by anyone, anywhere, without the need for special
tools or training.
The following is a brief overview of the SMART definitions for leading indicators:

Specific: Do leading indicators provide particular action items?
Measurable: To determine if a goal is measurable, ask the following: How will I know when the goal
is completed or accomplished?
Attainable: Do leading indicators track action items that are relevant to the organization’s goals and
objectives? One of the things often overlooked is to assess whether the intended goal is attainable.
Unattainable goals can cause harm to the SMS. If goals are set too high, they may be impossible to
attain. If goals are set too low, they may be attainable but achieving them results in no recognizable
improvement in the SMS.
Realistic: Are the identified leading indicators realistic and achievable? A goal must represent
something of value that the leadership team and employees can support.
Time-Bound: Time-bound is one of the most important and probably least appreciated parts of goal
setting. A goal should identify the specific time frame needed for its completion.
OSH 3310, Total Environmental Health and Safety Management
In Units I and II, we briefly discussed a common theme, the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle, also known as
the Deming-Shewhart framework. The PDCA process provides a structured four-step process for developing
a specific plan.

Plan: Define the goals and objectives of the SMS. The goals and objectives will define specific
conditions and behaviors desired from implementing the elements of the SMS and are determined
based on the organization’s vision. Leading indicators that factor into the plan may include:
o number/percent of hazards identified/corrected,
o number of one-on-one contacts completed,
o number/percent of employees involved in meaningful accident prevention activities,
o number of action plans completed,
o number/percent of near misses reported/investigated/preventive actions completed (Roughton et
al., 2019).
Do: The desired SMS goals and objectives are communicated to employees. The goals and
objectives must be explained as to how and why the specific leading indicators are chosen.
Check: Goals and objectives need to be periodically assessed based on the leading indicators. When
tracking indicators for a while, the progress is evaluated toward goals and objectives to understand if
they are achieving the desired result.
Act: When necessary, change the leading indicators based on what has been learned and
communicate the change (American Society for Quality, n.d.).
As you read through the information presented for this unit, you will see that the PDCA cycle works in a
manner that allows organizations to base decisions and actions on data to improve performance. Continuous
improvement requires applying a systematic means of evaluating the situation and acting on the findings.
PDCA is a systematic framework in ANSI/ASSP Z10.0-2019 and ANSI/ASSP/ISO 45001-2018 standards.
Continuous Improvement
As discussed, one example of applying the PDCA concept to the SMS is defining leading and lagging
Indicators to improve the SMS. Continuous improvement requires a systematic means of evaluating a
situation and correcting action items as identified. The PDCA approach helps to provide a system that has
proven to work well in the SMS. Although the PDCA represents a continuous improvement process, once the
OSH 3310, Total Environmental Health and Safety Management
PDCA is developed for a specific element, one does not have to start at a given
in the cycle
to check the
process. One could start on any of the points in the circle to determine if the process
Title is working correctly.
American Society for Quality. (n.d.). What is the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle? https://asq.org/qualityresources/pdca-cycle
Johari, J. A. Y. (n.d.). Vector illustration of Deming cycle PDCA, Plan Do Check Act. Business process
concept. PDCA is an iterative four step management (ID 204619330) [Illustration]. Dreamstime.
Manuele, F. A. (2020). Advanced safety management: Focusing on Z10.0, 45001, and serious injury
prevention (3rd ed.). Wiley. https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781119605409
Pornpatrawiwat, N. (n.d.). Smart goal (ID 65820048) [Illustration]. Dreamstime.
Roughton, J., Crutchfield, N., & Waite, M. (2019). Safety culture: An innovative leadership approach (2nd ed.).
U.S. Department of Energy. (2009, June). Human performance improvement handbook. Volume 2: Human
performance tools for individuals, work teams, and management (DOE-HDBK-1028-2009).
Suggested Unit Resources
While Chapter 1 in your eTextbook is not a required resource for this unit, you are encouraged to review and
refer back to it as you navigate every unit of this course. The concepts and principles in all units focus on the
application of these two standards, and the information contained therein will assist you in your coursework.
In order to access the following resources, click the links below.
The following article examines the value of systems theory and its application to human and organizational
factors and discusses the benefits of systems thinking in safety management approaches.
Vautier, J.-F., Dechy, N., Coye de Brunélis, T., Hernandez, G., Launay, R., & Moreno Alarcon, D. P. (2018,
September). Benefits of systems thinking for a human and organizational factors approach to safety
management. Environment Systems and Decisions, 38(3), 353–366.
The following Occupational Safety and Health Administration resources offer additional guidance on SMS
planning. You are encouraged to visit both links to explore the information contained therein.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2019, June). Using leading indicators to improve safety and
health outcomes (OSHA Document No. 3970). U.S. Department of Labor.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2001). How to plan for workplace emergencies and
evacuations (OSHA Document No. 3088). U.S. Department of Labor.
OSH 3310, Total Environmental Health and Safety Management

Purchase answer to see full

error: Content is protected !!