KPI (Key Performance Indicators) vs. Objectives

[samsung]

Often I can see analysing the number and severity of incident reports against the number of safety meetings and risk assessments performed on site, usually the higher the number of meetings, the less sever and number of injuries.

Would you please explain what should be the minimum number of safety meetings to bring the injuries to zero level ?

 

[amanbhai]

Little off topic but it would be of help if we could provide the definition of KPI as provided by ISO. Thanks

 

[samsung]

Little off topic but it would be of help if we could provide the definition of KPI as provided by ISO. Thanks

As far as I know, ISO hasn't defined KPI in any of its documents/guidelines including ISO/TC 176/SC 2/N 526R (Guidance on the Terminology used in ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9004:2000). I haven't seen this term appearing in any ISO documents.

However, you can find a detailed explanation about Performance Indicators at WIKIPEDIA

 

[engr.post]

Some thoughts:
'key' may/could be used when something's important, in other words, e.g. results a company reports upon internally or externally at board level. An 'objective' can be looked at as something wanted to be achieved and there may be a time component added (to reaching that). A 'target' can be something we are aiming at/for.

In this example we could say the objective of zero accidents by end of period 'x'. To monitor progress, review and take action as appropriate, we could use an 'indicator', and call it a KPI. Each month we could collect organisationwide and report the KPI measurement; e.g. September 'Zero' accidents, October 'Ten' accidents reported.

Hence, there appears a 'Performance' measure in place. Let me (and readers) keep in mind however, what the others have also said and debated; And to emphasise how simple (not unimportant) metrics can be abused.

I hope that helps.

 

[samsung]

The authors of OHSAS/ ILO-OSH as well as the health & safety legislation (supported with a scientific approach) of almost all the countries did recognize the concept of 'Prevention of injury and ill health' but not 'zero accidents' and do seek a top level commitment to this effect in the organization's H&S policy and prescribes that an organization while setting it's Objectives & goals do consider its legal obligations and policy commitments which in this particular case is none other than 'prevention/ reduction in injuries & ill health'.

Now, while an organization has already set a goal for prevention of injuries & Ill Health (practically achievable), why should it duplicate the same thing & confound its people by setting an another hypothetical goal of 'zero accidents'? First you must have a basis (data/history, trends, benchmarking information etc.) for setting a goal. And if you consistently fail to achieve your own goal (which in this instance is highly likely), it's a strong indication that there is something wrong with your goal setting process itself. And a constant failure like this one, is a potential source of employee demotivation.

 

[engr.post]

Samsung this follows my last post..Some thoughts...in which a distinction was made between kpi and objective (within the example/actual situation) specified by the OP. If it's not off-topic, what is it you'd like to debate? "zero accidents" within the context of a Standard(s)? I've no objection, but let's be clearer or agree upon the meaning of some important terms, for example 'accident' and 'zero accidents'.

As a provocative start, 'Company VVF [Very Very Safe e.g.] reported 365 days accident free days in the last quarter published figures. They met their objective of zero accidents for the year'.

best

 

[samsung]

Samsung this follows my last post..Some thoughts...in which a distinction was made between kpi and objective (within the example/actual situation) specified by the OP?

best

No disagreement with your last post (#24). Not at all.

...let's be clearer or agree upon the meaning of some important terms, for example 'accident' and 'zero accidents'. As a provocative start, 'Company VVF [Very Very Safe e.g.] reported 365 days accident free days in the last quarter published figures. They met their objective of zero accidents for the year'.

As you said, can I know what definition did the company 'VVF' use to pass through 365 days without having an accident (aka incident)?

 

[engr.post]

We disagree on whether a distinction has been made? Then we'll have to agree to differ on that one. On the second point if one counts the number of accidents as zero each day, over a period of a year, then one concludes there have been no accidents. Please read my previous post again and note I said about simple metrics.

best

edit addition :
a brief search of the forum notes this topic has been through the mill before and that you've heavily contributed. I haven't read all (one thread has 100ish posts) and ends with a more confused poster and your response to this. Am I correct in saying the concept of "accident" or "zero accidents" is troublesome? For another Standard? For a Technical Group?
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=31290&highlight
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=26692&highlight
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=40028&highlight
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=38555&highlight

best

 

[PotentCompoundSafety]

I really enjoy this discussion...keep it up! Anything but zero is acceptable when it's not your daughter or son. While I understand that in the "real world" zero is impossible, there does need to be a mind set that any accident is not acceptable. This needs to be instilled at all levels. Once that occurs, the organization drives to eliminating causes and feasible corrective actions get implemented as a major effort.

 

[Sam Lazzara]

Performance_indicator