Preventing Occupational Injuries Based on Communicative Compatibility Assessment

Human Factor and Communication in HSE

Despite technological advancements and process automation, the rate of occupational injuries remains significant. Analysis of accident investigation materials often points to the notorious "human factor". In her presentation, Natalia Kalmykova, Deputy Head of the HSE Department at Ajax Engineering, breaks down in detail what lies behind this concept and proves that one of the key, yet often non-obvious, causes of tragedies is the lack of communicative compatibility within a team.

The speaker provides examples of real accidents during gas-hazardous work, where ignoring colleagues' warnings, insufficient authority of the supervisor, or the inability to properly convey hazard information led to severe and fatal outcomes. These cases clearly demonstrate that the psychological climate and the ability of workers to interact effectively with each other are not abstract concepts, but critically important elements of industrial safety.

Mathematical Justification of Injury Causes

To identify the root causes of injuries, the speaker conducted a large-scale study, analyzing over 1,500 accidents over 20 years in the divisions of the fuel and energy complex. The use of mathematical tools, in particular Pearson's correlation study, made it possible to identify non-obvious patterns.

For example, the study showed that the rotational shift method is the most injury-prone, which can be explained by prolonged social isolation. Interestingly, the most dangerous day of the week turned out to be Wednesday — the day when, after receiving tasks and issuing work permits, the actual execution of work begins. The application of the "5 Whys" method and the construction of event and condition scales confirmed: the lack of communicative compatibility is the root cause of most accidents associated with unsatisfactory work organization.

Automated Compatibility Assessment Complex

Based on the data obtained, Natalia developed an automated software complex for assessing the communicative compatibility of workers. The experimental site for its implementation was the Gazprom Transgaz Yugorsk enterprise.

The complex operates in several stages:

• Identifying leadership qualities: Employees undergo testing (128 questions) that determines their tendency towards dominance, aggression, or friendliness. This allows identifying informal leaders capable of both keeping colleagues from dangerous actions and provoking a conflict.
• Sociometric research: Employees are asked to choose colleagues with whom they would like or, conversely, categorically would not like to work. This stage reveals hidden conflicts and the level of team cohesion.
• Forming optimal teams: Based on the obtained indices, the program suggests the optimal shift composition, eliminating the concentration of several pronounced leaders in one team and identifying workers who require adaptation.

It is important to note that an employee falling into the "red zone" (rejection by the team) is not a reason for dismissal. The program offers a set of adaptation measures: training, conversations with a psychologist, and additional education. The goal is to establish communication, not to get rid of the specialist.

Practical Results and Implementation Prospects

The implementation of the complex showed impressive results. In the departments where the program was used, not a single accident has been recorded since 2021. In addition, the average time to complete production tasks decreased by 12%, and satisfaction with interpersonal relationships in the team increased by 15%.

The speaker emphasizes that this tool is applicable not only in the oil and gas industry but also in construction, mining, metallurgy, as well as in healthcare (for forming surgical teams) and education. Implementation does not require significant financial costs, relying on the existing personnel and hardware resources of the enterprise.

What you will learn from this webinar:

• How does the lack of communicative compatibility in a team lead to severe accidents?
• Which factors (experience, work schedule, day of the week) statistically have the strongest impact on injury risk?
• How does the automated complex for assessing the psychological climate and identifying leaders work?
• How to properly form production teams to reduce conflicts and improve safety?
• What adaptation measures will help integrate "problematic" employees into the team without dismissals?