Balancing Safety Controls and Human Performance in Workplace Safety

Workplace safety methods focus on controls implementation, while Human Operational Performance Theory (HOPT) focuses on risk reduction and safety improvement.

• By Stephen Daigneault
• Feb 13, 2025

Safety in industries such as energy, transportation, and manufacturing requires a structured approach. Health and safety leaders have long relied on safety management systems (SMS) to reduce risks and maintain workplace safety. Two key approaches include controls implementation, a traditional method, and Human Operational Performance Theory (HOPT), a more recent perspective.

Controls Implementation

Controls implementation focuses on physical or procedural measures designed to mitigate risks. These include:

• Engineering Controls: Safety features such as exhaust ventilation, emergency shutdown systems, machine guarding, and fail-safe mechanisms that address hazards at their source.
• Procedural Controls: Standard operating procedures (SOPs), training programs, and risk assessments that influence worker behavior.
• Administrative Controls: Policies and regulations enforcing safe practices, including shift scheduling, supervision, and inspections.

This method seeks to reduce human error by limiting reliance on individual decision-making. Safeguards, warning systems, and clearly defined procedures help prevent accidents in high-risk environments.

Advantages:

• Standardization ensures uniform practices across an organization.
• Predictability reduces variability by establishing predefined hazard responses.
• Automation eliminates human interaction in dangerous tasks, lowering exposure risks.

Challenges:

• Over-reliance on systems may lead to complacency or reduced critical thinking.
• Limited flexibility in dynamic environments where pre-determined controls may not address unforeseen risks.

Human Operational Performance Theory (HOPT)

HOPT examines behavioral, psychological, and cognitive aspects of workplace safety. It assumes human error is a normal part of operations and focuses on understanding interactions between individuals, tasks, and environments.
Key elements include:

• Cognitive Load: The mental effort required to learn and perform tasks that affect decision-making under stress.
• Error Prevention: Identifying root causes of mistakes, such as poor task design, inadequate training, or lack of information.
• Feedback Mechanisms: Providing real-time performance data to workers for continuous improvement and accountability.

Unlike controls, which rely on external interventions, HOPT considers human capabilities and limitations. It encourages an adaptive safety approach, integrating safety culture into evolving operations.

Advantages:

• Recognizes workers as integral to safety, optimizing their performance through understanding and feedback.
• Offers flexibility, allowing organizations to adapt to new or unforeseen risks.
• Reduces errors through improved training and decision-making frameworks.

Challenges:

• Requires expertise in psychology and ergonomics for effective implementation.
• Demands a cultural shift, moving away from blaming individuals toward systemic improvements.

Comparison and Integration

Controls implementation and HOPT take distinct approaches to safety. Controls seek to eliminate human error by preventing incidents, while HOPT aims to enhance human performance to reduce mistakes.

In practice, these strategies complement each other. Organizations can integrate both methods. For example, in manufacturing, robots perform hazardous tasks under human supervision. If a worker enters a danger zone, emergency controls halt the machine and trigger an alarm. These systems provide real-time feedback, helping operators refine responses to hazards and improve efficiency.

While controls provide structured, predictable risk reduction, they may lack adaptability. HOPT fosters a deeper understanding of human performance but requires careful integration. The most effective safety strategies balance both approaches, integrating controls with human-centered safety measures. Organizations that embrace both will be better positioned to manage risks and prevent accidents.