Since I have started this position, there as been a program in place to record what they call, compliance near misses. This would be things such as missed sign-offs on reports, missing paperwork, GDP issues, training, expirations dates, ect.
Each operator records the finding, then hands it to an ambassador who complies the information and gives it to me and their supervisor. They have requirement to find 8 safety or compliance near misses a year.
I want stop this practice. I want the ambassadors to be more of an informational team, training new employees, being an expert on some of the compliance issues, ect.
This however means stopping that KPI of number of compliance near misses. Every time I suggest stopping this, everyone freaks out. They need numbers. And they think finding all those little things is really improving our system.
Sounds like more discussion with the full team is in order
(Preceded by individual meetings with the team members to get them on board).
When the meeting happens to "vote"...the result should be a foregone conclusion.
Requiring to find 8 near misses a year? What do you punish people with if fewer than 8 near misses happen?
Your policy mandates that you must have near misses...what sense does that make?
In that system, I would intentionally create 8 near misses in the first month just to make sure I met quota...how many of your folks are doing that now?
Have the individual meetings with the stakeholders and get them all on board before you throw it on a public table somewhere...
I would instead put some sort of reward for not having any attributed to you, and some 'ding' for creating them, instead of requiring them to exist.
Better question: How can you have the process stop when a necessary sign-off is missing? Make the miss a show stopper...then they can't happen in the first place.
People aren't perfect...how can the process police itself?...instead of policing the people afterward...?