Preparing Leadership for Safety Culture Change

AAC ConferenceNorth YorkApril 9, 2013

Norbord at a glance

§ Top tier producer of OSB§ History of highly decentralized

decision making§ Geographic diversity is

added challenge§ Operations managers and

supervisors are central to success

§ Lean organization - reliant on input from site resources

Norbord Safety Performance History

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

OSH

A T

otal

Inju

ry R

ate

History of safety improvement was not an accurate reflection of safety program

Despite “average” performance, 4 fatalities

& numerous serious injuries

What Issues did we identify…and how did we respond?

§ Very poor perception of management commitment

§ Low and ineffective employee involvement

§ Understanding of hazard identification was poor

§ Slow to implement common company standards

§ Safety Leadership Program (SLP)§ Training front line

managers to lead safety improvement

§ Norbord Safety Star Certification§ A standardized safety

management system (based on US OSHA Voluntary Protection Program)

§ Strengthening and adhering to internal safety expectations

Support need for change with facts:

§ DuPont Safety Culture Improvement survey

§ Confronting internal hypocrisy & challenging assumptions

% that Believed Safety 1st

for Managers

Managers 50

Supervisors 32

Workers 16

It has to be salient:

Talk about impact on real people§ Case studies

§ Make character of organization clear

§ Provide useful tools for addressing change

Norbord is a lean organization willing to invest in its front-

line leadership!

Recognition & accountability

§ Clear measures for tracking implementation§ Immediate & personal

responsibility for change

§ Clear accountability & consequences for meeting new expectations§ Don’t imagine everyone is

going to make it and be prepared to make those decisions

§ Recognition for achievement

Participant certification & accountability

30 Day 60 Day 90 Day§Sign commitment pledge§Communicate vision and new expectations §Develop personal safety action plan§Demonstrate effective use of communication tools§Participate in hazard identification

§Demonstrate regular use of communication tools§Complete incident reporting and investigation process§ 360° review to demonstrate desired safety behaviours§Participate in development of SSOPs/SSOWs§Demonstrate knowledge and use of company KPIs

§Involve team in safety communication§Demonstrate understanding of risk identification and control process§Review and revise personal safety action plan§Develop and apply team KPIs§Demonstrate subject matter expertise

Is it working?60% improvement since roll-out

§ Approximately 350 participants to date§ Over 200 certified

Safety Leaders§ >60% reduction in OSHA

rates§ No very serious

incidents§ 40% increase in safety

involvement§ >100% increase in near

miss reporting

OSHA Injury Rate History

1.7

0.89

1.52

1.3

0.74

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Average 45% reduction in weighted injury rate in struggling mills

3 Year Rolling Weighted Injury Rate

6.55

2.41

4.55

2.59

6.64

1.09

2.06

3.4

29.48

15.2

11.54

10.59

4.84

4.17

2.74

2.18

1.92

0.77

14.91

7.15

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Genk, Belgium

South Carolina

Inverness, Scotland

La Sarre, Quebec

Cowie, Scotland

Georgia

Minnesota

Texas - Nac

South Molton, England

Mississippi

Weighted Injury Rate

2010-2012 2007-2009