Why ZERO Accident - If not ZERO defects or ZERO waste

This time, I am presenting my views on an aspect (a long text which I avoid but pl bear this time) we have been following since long in safety profession.

I have never come across any industry in my tenure of almost 20/26 years where performance of employee are judged against the annual target of ZERO quality defects or ZERO process waste generation. Although no organisation aims to produce defective products or high waste generation, yet they take a target of certain reduction over hind year and gradually reach near zero value through continuous technology up gradation and people involvement.  Several rounds of meeting are hold with line function before arrival at an annual target to be achieved. SMART philosophy is employed for goal setting. While doing the exercise it is collectively realized that achieving ZERO defects, waste or breakdowns is not possible because of many disabling factors in the system after certain level and non fulfilment will have negative impact. ZERO is good as long as this is mission/vision of the organisation. It’s true, ZERO is not achievable (as ‘A’ part of the SMART is lacking) even if other parameters fits well for this target/goal. I welcome this right approach in order to set the goals in quality, production and maintenance areas. Here someone may say target and a goal are technically different but I am using both to convey the same meaning here. If analysis of the process adopted is done, it can be seen that all the elements required in ideal goal setting have been considered well. I mean to say, involvement of all concerned persons to decide the goal to be achieved makes them feel part of it and motivate them to work as an interdependent team to “achieve success”. That is why; an organisation is able to achieve the target – a key to sustainable growth.

On the contrary to this, what happens when target for safety is decided?

Well, even after much disagreement from major section of employee, a fancy target of ZERO Accident is enforced. You might be aware as what logic is given while advocating for such target, “You cannot plan for an accident – hence target should be set zero”.  My friend, do you agree that this target is attainable (it is altogether different matter that many organisation celebrate this status for years). In order to show ZERO, LITs are redefined, injuries are under reported, fractured employees are made to seat in the offices, disable are given light duty so on and so forth. Facts and figures are distorted and system procedures are manoeuvred to fit the ZERO. This way closing the eyes from the facts (weak safety system) leave the organisation to face a wrath of randomly appearing severe accidents, leave apart a great loss of moral and ethics.

So what’s the conclusion?

Yes, I wish to say there is no wisdom in keeping the ZERO accident targets. It is unrealistic to achieve because a sense of “fear of failure” in the employee that automatically sets in, hinder the safety improvement within the organisation.

Therefore, remember, for the good of the organisation, if not ZERO defects, ZERO Waste, ZERO Breakdowns, set no ZERO Accident as annual track able targets for safety too.