According to a report released by the Center for Construction Research and Training (CPWR), the number of fatal falls in the construction industry has increased by 50% over the course of the last 12 years. Our approach to fall prevention isn’t working—it’s time for a new tactic.

The construction industry often defaults to the easiest and most convenient path: blaming the worker for failing to use fall protection equipment properly or recognize a fall hazard. That’s the wrong approach, and it robs organizations and the industry of valuable learning opportunities.

If you ask anyone involved in the industry what the leading cause of construction fatalities is, they will immediately answer falls. We see this grim statistic year after year. And every year, OSHA reports that fall protection is its most violated safety standard, suggesting that the problem is bigger than workers’ personal decisions. The industry knows this but has been unable to meaningfully impact this brutal reality.

The industry should adopt a more nuanced, data-driven approach to preventing falls that addresses the root cause of not only accidents but also observed exposures.

The value of tracking events with SIF potential

The construction industry has historically focused heavily on recordable incidents when determining which events to investigate and when assessing contractor performance. A recordable incident is a work-related injury or illness that requires medical treatment beyond basic first aid. More severe recordable incidents can also result in days away from work, restricted duty, job transfer, loss of consciousness or a fatality.

Organizations spend significant time investigating each recordable incident and implementing corrective measures. While the industry has lowered its recordable rates significantly in the last 30 years, fatality rates have not followed suit. This discrepancy reveals that the focus on reducing the frequency of recordable incidents has not had the anticipated impact of reducing Serious Injuries or Fatalities (SIF)—a realization now being recognized across the industry and the safety profession.

Why is this the case? Many recordable incidents are less severe in terms of the result. And many, if not most, did not have the potential to result in a more serious outcome. At the same time, near misses and exposures occur frequently and don’t get the attention they deserve.

Exposures are especially valuable learning opportunities. Crews typically address these unsafe conditions or behaviors in the moment, perhaps with a brief conversation with the crew leader and the worker. In some cases, the response is to send a worker home or remove them from the project. This is the easy way out and provides a false sense that meaningful action has been taken. Yes, the immediate threat was mitigated, but further evaluation can uncover insights to improve overall safety.

Considering incidents, near misses, and exposures as “events” that could have—but did not—result in a SIF offers more complete visibility into job site risks. Companies should investigate events with SIF potential with even more diligence than recordable incidents. Investigate, determine the event’s root cause, and identify actions required to prevent a future recurrence. We only need to look as far as the reduction in recordable rates to know that this approach can be successful.

Evaluating systemic issues

As stated above, too often when project teams and organizations address events like a fall exposure in the field, the team identifies personal choice as the root cause and continues with business as usual. While the individual may bear some responsibility, there are likely underlying factors as well. Was the worker set up for success through effective training, proper planning, and the development of a safety culture that allows the worker to take a step back when adequate controls are not present? Asking and answering this question could help prevent recurrences and other potential injuries.

Both recordable incidents and other events with SIF potential offer valuable opportunities to make meaningful systemic change. Following an event, companies should evaluate their training, planning, job pressures, communication and overall safety culture to find opportunities for improvement and develop an action plan. Pinpointing concrete steps to be taken in response to an event improves outcomes.

For example, a more thoughtful and complete investigation of what led to a fall exposure may reveal gaps in employee training and development efforts. The company could provide more comprehensive, task-specific, hands-on training on a recurring basis, which will deliver long-term benefits beyond those resulting from a brief conversation or worker reassignment. Of course, additional root causes may exist, but without proper attention and investigation, they will not be uncovered.

Investigation of SIF-potential events combined with regular audits and inspections produce data that empowers organizations to continuously refine their planning, training and execution approaches.

The high fatality rate and continued challenges associated with working at heights make it clear that the current approach to fall prevention is insufficient. Identifying, investigating and tracking all events with SIF potential, including observed exposures, is one approach to reducing falls and fall exposures that can begin to address past shortcomings. With additional insights, organizations can find meaningful opportunities for improvement that can prevent future SIFs.