Advantages of Traditional Lockout/Tagout vs. Electronic Lockout/Tagout Procedures

The pros and cons of traditional LOTO procedures versus modern electronic LOTO systems, and how each method impacts safety, efficiency, and standards compliance.

• By Herbert Post
• Mar 14, 2025

When Wayne Rothering went to work at a large Wisconsin furniture factory in December 2020, he probably thought he’d perform the same routines he did for a while now and go home safe after a day at work. But that was not the case. Rothering was performing maintenance on a production line that glued laminating paper to fiberboard when he became caught in the machinery's adhesive rollers. Before the accident, Rothering stopped the conveyor but did not dislodge it — a lockout alternative that the company deemed enough to prevent accidents.

The devastating death of Wayne Rothering serves as a sobering reminder of why lockout/tagout (LOTO) procedures are critical for workplace safety. While some promote technological solutions as an assurance of safety, others maintain that traditional LOTO procedures remain essential. This article examines both traditional lockout tagout procedures and modern electronic LOTO systems, providing insights into how each approach impacts workplace safety, operational efficiency, and compliance with increasingly stringent safety standards.

Traditional Lockout Tagout Procedures

Traditional lockout tagout procedures involve physically securing energy isolation devices with locks and applying warning tags during maintenance or servicing of equipment. This time-tested method requires workers to identify energy sources, notify affected employees, shut down equipment, isolate energy sources, apply locks and tags, verify energy isolation, and perform necessary work before systematically restoring energy through a clear removal procedure.

Below are the major advantages of traditional lockout tagout procedures:

1. Physical Security and Visibility: The presence of physical locks and tags provides clear visual confirmation that equipment is secured and who is responsible for the lockout, making it immediately apparent when machinery is under maintenance.
2. Independence from Technology: Traditional LOTO systems continue to function regardless of power outages, software glitches, or system failures, ensuring safety measures remain intact even when other systems are compromised.
3. Direct Worker Control: Workers maintain personal control over their safety through individual locks and tags, promoting a sense of ownership and responsibility while ensuring equipment cannot be reactivated until their lock is physically removed.

But this procedure, although time-tested, still has limitations:

1. Time-Intensive Implementation: The manual nature of traditional LOTO procedures requires significant time for proper execution, including physically walking to different isolation points and applying individual locks and tags.
2. Documentation Challenges: Paper-based tracking systems can be cumbersome to maintain, making it difficult to ensure compliance, track procedure history, and maintain up-to-date records of LOTO activities.
3. Human Error Risk: The reliance on manual processes and multiple steps increases the potential for procedural mistakes, missed steps, or incomplete isolation of energy sources, particularly in complex systems with multiple energy points.

Electronic Lockout Tagout Systems

Electronic lockout tagout systems use digital technology, software platforms, and automated controls to manage the isolation and lockout of equipment. These systems typically integrate with existing machinery through programmable logic controllers (PLCs) and networked devices, allowing workers to initiate and monitor LOTO procedures through digital interfaces, while still maintaining physical lockout points for regulatory compliance.

Here are the major advantages of implementing electronic LOTO systems:

1. Enhanced Tracking and Documentation: Electronic systems automatically generate detailed audit trails and documentation of all LOTO activities, including timestamps, worker identifications, and procedural steps completed, making compliance verification and incident investigation more efficient.
2. Streamlined Workflow Management: Digital platforms guide workers through step-by-step procedures with electronic checklists, reducing the likelihood of missed steps and ensuring consistent application of safety protocols across the organization.
3. Real-time Monitoring and Alerts: The system provides immediate notification of LOTO status changes, unauthorized access attempts, or procedure violations, allowing supervisors to quickly respond to potential safety issues.

On the other hand, here are the system’s limitations:

1. Technology Dependence: System functionality relies on consistent power supply, network connectivity, and proper software operation, potentially creating vulnerabilities during power outages or system failures.
2. Initial Cost and Training Requirements: Implementation requires significant upfront investment in hardware, software, and comprehensive training programs to ensure all workers can effectively use the electronic system.
3. Resistance to Change: Workers accustomed to traditional LOTO procedures may resist transitioning to electronic systems, potentially leading to reduced compliance or incorrect usage if proper change management strategies aren't implemented.

Traditional LOTO vs Electronic LOTO

Now, let's examine how traditional LOTO and electronic LOTO procedures compare across three crucial dimensions: safety effectiveness, operational efficiency, and compliance with safety standards.

Safety Effectiveness. Traditional LOTO procedures have proven their safety effectiveness through decades of implementation. Their strength lies in their simplicity and physical nature – a locked-out machine cannot be accidentally restarted without deliberate removal of the physical lock. The visible presence of locks and tags serves as a constant reminder of ongoing maintenance work, promoting situational awareness among all facility personnel.

Electronic LOTO systems enhance safety through technological security and systematic enforcement of procedures. These systems can prevent common human errors by requiring sequential completion of safety steps before allowing work to proceed. The ability to integrate with equipment controls automatically verifies energy isolation before permitting maintenance activities. However, this reliance on technology introduces new potential failure points – a system malfunction could either prevent necessary maintenance or, more critically, fail to maintain proper isolation.

The tragic case of Wayne Rothering highlighted a critical point: any system, whether traditional or electronic, is only as effective as its consistent and proper implementation. Both approaches require a commitment to safety protocols and thorough training to ensure workers understand and follow prescribed procedures.

Operational Efficiency. Traditional LOTO procedures, while reliable, often impact operational efficiency through their time-intensive nature. The process of physically walking to multiple isolation points, applying individual locks, and maintaining paper documentation can significantly extend equipment downtime. In facilities with complex machinery requiring frequent maintenance, these delays can substantially affect productivity - something that employers want to avoid.

Electronic LOTO systems offer significant advantages in operational efficiency through automated documentation, streamlined procedures, and centralized management. Digital checklists and remote monitoring capabilities can reduce the time required for LOTO implementation while maintaining safety standards. The system's ability to track multiple lockouts simultaneously and coordinate complex group lockout procedures can be particularly valuable in large facilities.

However, the efficiency gains of electronic systems must be weighed against potential disruptions from technical issues. While traditional LOTO procedures continue unimpeded during power outages or network problems, electronic systems may require backup procedures or temporary reversion to manual methods, potentially creating confusion and delays.

Compliance with Safety Standards. Both traditional and electronic LOTO systems can achieve compliance with OSHA standards and other safety regulations, but they differ in how they facilitate this compliance. Traditional LOTO procedures benefit from well-established compliance frameworks and clear regulatory guidance. Their straightforward nature makes it easier for safety inspectors to verify proper implementation through direct observation.

Electronic LOTO systems excel in generating comprehensive compliance documentation and audit trails. Automated record-keeping captures detailed information about each lockout event, including timing, duration, and personnel involved. This digital documentation can streamline regulatory reporting and incident investigations.

However, organizations must ensure their electronic systems meet all regulatory requirements, including provisions for physical lockout capability and personal control of energy isolation. The implementation of electronic LOTO systems may require additional validation to demonstrate regulatory compliance, particularly in jurisdictions where safety standards have not been updated to explicitly address electronic safety systems.

Is Electronic LOTO the Better Option?

While electronic LOTO systems offer compelling technological advantages, Wayne Rothering's tragic story reminds us that the fundamental question isn't about choosing between traditional or electronic systems, but rather about encouraging a culture where everyone - both employees and employers are committed to safety. The best LOTO system is one that workers consistently use and trust - and this often means implementing a hybrid approach where electronic systems enhance rather than replace traditional physical lockouts, combining the psychological reassurance of tangible locks with the precision of digital oversight.

Looking ahead, the evolution of LOTO systems will likely be shaped by emerging technologies like biometric authentication, artificial intelligence for predictive maintenance scheduling, and augmented reality interfaces that can visualize hidden energy sources. However, these innovations must be implemented with the understanding that technology should serve as a safety enabler rather than a safety guarantee. If Rothering's employer had focused on cultivating a workplace culture where bypassing safety procedures was unthinkable — regardless of the system in place — the outcome might have been different.

This article originally appeared in the February/March 2025 issue of Occupational Health & Safety.