Transforming Motivation in HSE

Transforming Motivation in HSE: From Complex Standards to Clear Criteria

Employee motivation in Health, Safety, and Environment (HSE) is a key element in building a safety culture at any enterprise. However, assessment and reward systems often become too cumbersome and confusing for those they are intended for. In her presentation, Yulia Pavlycheva, Safety Culture Development Manager at PJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel, analyzes the process of transforming the motivation system using the company's individual championship as an example.

The speaker demonstrates how transitioning from a complex 35-page standard with 37 criteria to a transparent and clear assessment system allowed for a multiple increase in employee engagement. The main insight: the simpler and more transparent the rules of the game, the more people are willing to play it, and consequently, actively participate in ensuring occupational safety.

Analyzing the Existing System and Identifying Flaws

Before the transformation, the company's occupational safety competition system was based on a voluminous standard. It outlined 37 assessment criteria covering all possible aspects: from industrial and fire safety to workplace certification and general initiatives (such as planting trees).

The speaker highlights the key flaws of the old approach:

• Complexity of perception: The document was written in complex language, which deterred potential participants.
• Formal approach: Participation was often initiated by the manager ("you will participate, fill out the form") rather than the employee themselves.
• Low engagement: Only about 30 people across the entire company participated in the competitions annually.
• Vague criteria: Including initiatives loosely related to direct occupational safety (like planting trees) reduced the focus on actual safety.

A New Approach: Simplicity, Transparency, and Automation

The transformation began with a change in format. The main principle highlighted by the speaker is: "the fewer words, the easier it is for people to understand." The new document was written in plain language, without fluff, clearly specifying deadlines, responsible persons, and communication channels.

The next step was revising the assessment criteria. They were adapted for different categories of participants: structural division managers, line managers, HSE specialists, and workers. The number of criteria was radically reduced, and the focus shifted to proactive and reactive indicators.

Criteria for Managers

The following key indicators were established for managers:

• Zero fatalities: The baseline criterion. A fatality (including among contractors) excludes the manager from the rating for a year. Zero fatalities award points. This emphasizes the manager's responsibility for all workers on their site.
• Lessons learned: Implementing measures based on injury incidents and proposing their own initiatives.
• Training: Completing safety culture training ("Three Steps to Safety," "Dynamic Risk Assessment," etc.). Additional points are awarded for positive feedback from subordinates regarding the manager's practical application of the acquired knowledge.
• Saving lives (Cardinal Safety Rules - CSR): Identifying CSR violations. Points are awarded not only for the manager's personal findings but also for cases identified by their subordinates, encouraging the manager to develop a safety culture within the team.
• Risk identification: Participating in the bonus program for identifying and mitigating risks.
• Personal achievements: Additional points from the HSE management for specific merits and improvements.

An important innovation was the automation of data collection. The organizers independently collect most of the information (injury statistics, training completion, CSR identification) from corporate systems (SAP, ASKUB). Participants are only required to provide information about personal achievements. This significantly reduced the bureaucratic burden on employees.

Criteria for HSE Specialists and Workers

For occupational safety specialists, in addition to standard criteria (training, CSR identification), an indicator for "Changing the image of the HSE department" and an assessment of safety improvements were introduced. The speaker emphasizes that this criterion revealed the high engagement of specialists who, alongside their main work, manage numerous additional projects.

For workers, the key criteria were:

• No disciplinary actions (more than three violations exclude them from the competition).
• Active identification of cardinal safety rule violations.
• Identifying risks in the workplace.
• Completing training for workers.

Transformation Results and Effectiveness Evaluation

Simplifying the system and automating data collection yielded impressive results. In the very first year after implementing the new rules, the number of candidates participating in the individual championship grew from 30 to 110 people. This clearly demonstrates that transparent and understandable rules stimulate employee engagement.

The speaker concludes that the effectiveness of a motivation system directly depends on how understandable and convenient it is for people. By taking a step toward employees, simplifying the structure, and reducing the bureaucratic burden, the company achieves genuine engagement in safety issues rather than formal paperwork completion.

What you will learn from this webinar:

• How to recognize that the existing HSE motivation system is outdated and needs revision?
• Which assessment criteria are most effective for different categories of employees (managers, specialists, workers)?
• How to automate data collection for evaluating occupational safety metrics and reduce the bureaucratic burden on staff?
• How to link the identification of risks and cardinal safety rule violations with the reward system?
• How simplifying standards and rules impacts genuine employee engagement in safety issues?