Evaluating the Effectiveness of Implementing HSE Tools at NLMK PJSC

Context: Why Evaluating the Effectiveness of HSE Tools is Important

Implementing proactive Health, Safety, and Environment (HSE) tools is only the first step towards zero injuries. The true value of these tools is revealed only when they are applied correctly and their effectiveness is regularly evaluated. NLMK PJSC implemented a large-scale project for the simultaneous introduction of tools such as safety contacts, behavioral dialogues, registration of unsafe acts and conditions, and investigation of near misses. Elena Zelentsova, Project Manager for Training Program Development in the HSE Directorate at NLMK PJSC, shares the company's experience in assessing how well these tools have taken root in practice and what real effect they bring.

Implementation Stages and the Role of Evaluation

The process of implementing HSE tools at NLMK included preparing methodological materials, training the occupational safety function, preparing internal trainers (consisting half of HSE specialists and half of line managers), mentoring practice, and direct implementation at the sites. Methodological support from the project office was provided in parallel. However, the key stage was the timely evaluation of the implementation's effectiveness. The speaker emphasizes that the goal of the evaluation is not to identify non-conformities or punish, but to inspire employees, demonstrate the results achieved, provide an opportunity for direct dialogue with methodologists, and synchronize watches to understand how the process is perceived locally.

Evaluation Methodology: Four Key Areas

The effectiveness evaluation at NLMK is based on four areas:

• Integration into the management system: the presence of KPIs, the level of their tracking, and analysis. This is important for understanding how integrated the tools are into the daily work of managers.
• Competencies: employees' theoretical knowledge about the tools. Without understanding the essence of the tool, its effective application is impossible.
• Practical application: compliance with the methodology during line walks. This allows seeing how theory is implemented in practice.
• Impact on behavioral attitudes: demonstrating a leadership position in occupational safety issues. This is the ultimate goal of implementation — changing employees' attitudes towards safety.

The evaluation is conducted both independently by the site (quarterly) and by an external team (annually). Interviews involve everyone from the CEO to workers (5-10% of the headcount).

Developing Checklists and Conducting the Evaluation

The basis for the evaluation is the procedures and methodologies approved by the company. Checklists contain specific criteria with a ternary scoring system (0, 0.5, 1 point), where some critical items have a higher weight. For example, a high percentage of employee involvement in submitting hazard reports is scored higher. The presentation details the process of forming an evaluation roadmap, calculating the required number of respondents, and the workload on auditors. An important element is involving young specialists from other sites to share experiences and improve competencies.

Results and Impact on Injury Statistics

The evaluation results are discussed with the site management, after which an action plan (using SMART criteria) is formed to eliminate identified areas for growth. The speaker shows by example how detailed the results are presented: from the percentage of implementation for each tool to specific recommendations. The effect of implementation and evaluation is impressive: over 350 trainers have been prepared, over 6,000 managers trained, and over 530,000 unsafe events identified (98% eliminated). This led to a decrease in overall injuries across the group by 22% in 2021 and by 29% in the first 7 months of 2022. The reduction in injuries related to moving parts of equipment is particularly noticeable (by 40%).

Advantages of Internal Audit

Elena Zelentsova highlights several advantages of conducting the evaluation with an internal team compared to involving external auditors:

• Shared understanding: forming a common vision of the effectiveness of tools among all employees.
• Learning in the process: auditors not only record non-conformities but also immediately provide explanations, training employees.
• Deep knowledge of processes: internal auditors better understand the specifics of the company's procedures.
• Post-support: the ability to track the implementation of the action plan and adjust it if necessary.

What You Will Learn from This Webinar:

• How to build a system for evaluating the effectiveness of implementing HSE tools?
• What criteria to use for evaluating theoretical knowledge and practical application of tools?
• How to involve management and line personnel in the evaluation and improvement process?
• Why internal audit can be more effective than external audit in HSE matters?
• How to link evaluation results with a real reduction in workplace injuries?