{"id":7629,"date":"2026-01-16T14:12:44","date_gmt":"2026-01-16T13:12:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.c2dprevention.com\/?p=7629"},"modified":"2026-02-10T01:08:16","modified_gmt":"2026-02-10T00:08:16","slug":"why-are-your-safety-indicators-good-but-your-results-poor","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.c2dprevention.com\/en\/blog-en\/why-are-your-safety-indicators-good-but-your-results-poor\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Are Your Safety Indicators Good\u2026 but Your Results Poor?"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

This paradox highlights a frequent disconnect: official figures appear excellent, yet serious accidents continue to occur in both industrial and service organisations.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

Why Are Safety Indicators Good but Accidents Still Occur?<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

In many organisations, everything seems to be under control. The accident frequency rate remains below 27 per 1,000 employees, as reported by the CNAM in 2024. Incident severity is under control, ISO 45001 audits are validated, quality of working life programmes are in place, and procedures are regularly updated.
Yet reality is harsher. In France, just over 500,000 workplace accidents occur each year, around 750 of them fatal. Recurrent incidents, non compliance with rules in the field, silence following events, and a significant increase in psychosocial issues such as stress and fatigue are also observed.
So what do these indicators really tell us? And more importantly, what do they leave unsaid?<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

The Limits of Traditional Safety Indicators<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

These indicators, often referred to as lagging or retrospective, are based on what has already happened: reported accidents, measurable outcomes, and compliance with formal rules. They help us look in the rear view mirror, but they do not allow us to anticipate future problems. Studies such as those conducted by FONCSI show that their correlation with serious accidents is weak. In short, a good past result does not predict a safe future.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Analysis\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

The Seven Blind Spots of Safety Indicators in Organisations<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Recent research by INRS, FONCSI and Eurogip converges on one key point: a large share of risks escape traditional indicators, particularly those related to human and organisational dimensions.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

1. Underreporting of Incidents and Near Misses<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Underreporting is the first major pitfall. When rates become performance targets, teams hesitate to report minor incidents or near misses. Eurogip\u2019s work shows that in some countries and sectors, only a fraction of accidents are actually recorded, meaning many events remain off the radar.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

2. Mental Factors Invisible in Statistics<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Mental factors such as fatigue and stress affect a large proportion of employees. Recent surveys indicate that around 64 percent of employees report feeling stressed at work at least once a week. These factors reduce vigilance without leaving any trace in accident statistics, while significantly increasing risk exposure.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

3. Lack of Psychological Safety<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Safety culture is also an issue. When employees fear blame or do not feel able to say \u201cstop\u201d, they remain silent. This lack of psychological safety, a key concept popularised by Amy Edmondson, hinders reporting and prevents essential information from being shared.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

4. The Gap Between Prescribed Work and Real Work<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Actual work often differs from what is prescribed on paper. Teams improvise in response to unforeseen events or pressure, but these adaptations are invisible in indicators. Ergonomic studies and accident analyses by INRS highlight the role these gaps play in the genesis of incidents.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

5. Weak Signals and the Gradual Decline in Vigilance<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Weak signals are more subtle. Everything appears stable until a sudden breakdown occurs. After good results, vigilance naturally declines, as noted in FHOS analyses, delaying the detection of drifts before an accident happens.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

6. Managerial Biases<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Managerial biases also come into play. A form of complacency can set in, or production may implicitly take precedence over safety, influencing daily decisions without being visible in indicators.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

7. Organisational Gaps and Governance Failures<\/h3>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Finally, organisational gaps represent a major blind spot. Conflicting objectives, implicit trade offs, or insufficiently monitored subcontractors create risk zones that traditional indicators fail to capture.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

When Good Safety Indicators Increase Real Risk<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Ironically, positive indicators can create a false sense of security. Several studies show that good indicators can significantly reduce field audits and vigilance. Conversely, when management encourages listening and feedback, the reporting of safety related information increases markedly. Behavioural analyses confirm that the vast majority of accidents, often more than 80 to 90 percent, could be avoided through better practices and anticipation.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

How to Complement Safety Indicators to Better Prevent Accidents<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

High performing organisations complement these indicators with leading or forward looking measures: field observations, anonymous safety culture surveys, open discussions, and analyses of human and organisational gaps. Behavioural analyses show that most accidents could be avoided through better behaviours. When managers provide meaning, lead by example, and create a climate of trust, employees report risk situations more readily because they feel safe to speak without fear of sanction.<\/p>

see: COMPREHENSIVE SUPPORT<\/a> \/ MENTAL HEALTH WORKSHOP<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

Why Does Mental Health Directly Influence Workplace Safety?<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

In 2025, the link can no longer be ignored. Fear of speaking up is a risk in itself. Mental overload triggers errors, and chronic stress undermines vigilance. Physical safety therefore depends on mental well being and overall organisational design, now integrated into the Single Occupational Risk Assessment Document.<\/p>

Reassuring indicators do not guarantee a safe organisation. They can sometimes reveal organisational silence.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

Our Contribution<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

At C2D Pr\u00e9vention, we support industrial and service organisations in overcoming this paradox. We deploy cultural diagnostics through validated questionnaires, management focused training programmes, and hybrid dashboards integrating psychosocial risks and weak signals. Our interventions help reduce blind spots by creating secure spaces for dialogue. Contact us !<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

Key Takeaways<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t