From Inspector to Mentor: Conducting Audits the Right Way

What do we most often use in our work to comply with technological processes, maintain product quality, or ensure safety? Naturally, rules and instructions. This is the most common tool in the practice of most companies.

However, rules do not always work. This statement is especially true if breaking a rule does not lead to any immediate negative consequences. And that is usually the case — cutting a corner here, neglecting PPE there... and nothing happened! You only saved time — nothing but benefits! But we understand that sooner or later, breaking the rules will lead to the tragic consequences those rules were meant to protect us from. Moreover, it often happens that all the conditions are met — PPE is issued on time, tools are available and in good working order, and a marked pedestrian crossing is nearby — yet people still do not follow the rules. What should be done in such cases? The key to solving this problem is safety audits — a tool for managing behavioral risks and hazardous situations.

However, many myths and stereotypes have formed around this procedure, acting as barriers that hinder the development of safety culture as a whole.

What do most people associate with the word "audit"? The first thing that comes to mind is a very threatening-looking inspector with a notebook and pen, whose goal is to identify as many violations as possible and punish as many people as possible. On average, with such associations, only one thought arises: to run as fast and as far as possible from the "inspector"! By the way, this scene can often be observed at some production sites — the sight of a white helmet causes fear and trembling among the workforce, resulting in a "heels-clicking" sprint to get out of sight.

At OTEKO, we set ourselves the task of changing this perception. An audit should not be a tool of intimidation, and an auditor should not be a harbinger of punishment. First and foremost, we began changing the perception of those who most frequently act as auditors — the managers. In our specially developed training on Behavioral Safety Audits (BSA), we explain the real benefits of an audit and teach how to use this tool correctly even in the most difficult situations.

During the training, managers learn that a behavioral audit is not a punishment tool, but a way to correct unsafe behavior and reinforce safe behavior. We explain the benefits a high-quality audit can provide to a manager — besides correcting unsafe behavior, the manager can also gain valuable information about opportunities for improvement in their area or risks they might not notice. Furthermore, correctly conducted audits, especially on a regular basis, create an atmosphere of trust and openness within the team. Employees know that their safety is cared for, their problems are heard, and they are helped in solving them. Thus, the manager gains an invaluable information channel and can more effectively manage not only production safety but all other processes in their department.

Practice is an important part of our training — during the course, participants work with trainers to practice skills in recognizing and handling difficult reactions. I will share some "life hacks" for building an effective conversation in this article.

Establishing contact involves actions necessary to build trust and create an atmosphere of safety. These include a greeting, addressing the person by name (if you know the worker), and a handshake. Your actions at this stage will help the worker understand what is happening. This stage is also necessary to prevent misunderstanding and aggressive reactions from the worker. The main goal of this stage is to put the interlocutor at ease and show that you want to have a conversation, not to punish them.

If a person is not inclined to communicate, you will not be able to discuss behavior or obtain objective information — at best, you will get excuses for unsafe actions.

A positive comment is a simple way to draw attention to a part of the work that was done well. It should be made personally, immediately after the observation is completed.

✅ A positive comment should concern the person's actions, not their personality. You need to specifically point out which actions the worker performed well and correctly.

❌ It is better to avoid evaluative judgments, such as "Good job," "Super pro," or "Nice one." Evaluative judgments themselves do not show which actions are correct.

Joint discussion of unsafe actions is the central and longest stage of the conversation. It is important not to tell the worker what they are doing wrong, but to structure the conversation so that they realize their unsafe actions themselves.

Therefore, ask questions!

They say, "as the question, so the answer." In our training, we teach managers how to formulate questions correctly. Effective questions should not be leading or contain hints; their task is to obtain information and help the person draw the right conclusions. When the auditor tells the worker how to do the job correctly, it can be perceived as lecturing, causing open resistance or quiet sabotage: “don't tell me how to live”.

Handling difficult reactions

The most common difficult reactions during a safety audit are:

🙊 Silence — a reaction where workers avoid the conversation, do not engage in dialogue, and withdraw into themselves. They wait quietly, looking down, for the conversation to end.

😡 Aggression — a reaction colored by the worker's intense emotions: indignation, anger. Such workers often emphasize their experience and knowledge, using their authority to pressure. They behave quite provocatively.

👽 Deception — a complex manipulation where the worker tries to steer the conversation in another direction, does not admit fault, and says that nothing happened.

😨 I don't understand you — this reaction occurs when it is convenient for the worker to take the position that they do not understand the subject of the conversation. Most often, this reaction is shown by employees of contracting organizations for whom Russian is not their native language. Or when the worker understands everything but pretends not to. Essentially, by citing a lack of understanding, such workers try to avoid an unpleasant dialogue, manipulate, and mislead.

Sometimes workers may demonstrate several difficult reactions at once.

In the training, we analyze in detail the methods and techniques for working with such reactions: "getting the interlocutor to talk," "argumentation," "handling deception," "emotional reaction," techniques for establishing and maintaining contact, and techniques for relieving emotional tension.

Working with emotional tension is a useful skill that will come in handy not only in production but also in everyday life.

In addition to everything mentioned, when implementing safety audits, it is very important to consider one detail — regularity. A safety audit is not a one-time event, but regular work that builds a culture of safe behavior at the enterprise day by day. Systematic work is required to overcome the workers' fear of "inspection." Changing a person's behavior by having only one conversation will not succeed. Research shows that at least 3 correctly conducted safety audits are required to correct and reinforce behavior. It should be remembered that on one side of the worker's scale are time savings, effort savings, meeting production volumes, bonuses and income, fear of punishment for uncompleted work, and fear of being ridiculed for following safety rules (if it is not accepted in the team). On the other side of the scale is a possible injury, which is far from certain to happen, and possible punishment for a violation — and only if they get caught. Our task, through the audit, is to make the second side of the scale heavier. This can only be achieved through regular influence.

To date, 850 of the Company's managers are involved in conducting safety audits. Audits are conducted three times a week. The results are recorded in the Automated Safety Management System (ASUB). The use of observation handbooks and classifiers allows for the automatic generation of analytical and statistical reports on identified problem areas, which in turn serve as the basis for planning further work.