OH&S Recruiting - Consultant Support

I am sad to say that some recent interactions with professional recruiters, both 3^rd party and with organizations has left me both frustrated and disappointed. It’s frustrating as I am searching for employment, I also feel sorry for others in the same boat. I do feel though that it’s as equally disappointing for businesses looking for stellar H&S professionals and likely missing out on people who could and would make a difference.

I am not in any way holding recruiters’ feet to the coals! This is not a frustrated dig! Many have done their homework and ask relevant introductory questions. Lots however really are struggling. A good question business leaders should be asking is, are these stellar candidates walking away due to recruiters, who through no fault of their own, are poorly prepared or just lack experience.

I also see similar issues with job posts. Many asking for all sorts of qualifications (often irrelevant) including degrees, masters, CRSP etc, and then either not giving a salary guide or offering a salary figure that’s low. Have any of you seen fairly junior H&S posts asking for CRSP? A clear interpretation of many job posts is that they are looking for just another supervisor or manager albeit without their authority. Are you looking for an SME with the title ‘safety’ to come in and tell your SMEs how to do they job safely? If you are then you are a tad misguided or clearly have some sort of issue in your business!

We often see the quote reference the definition of stupidity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Are we doing this when recruiting? Are you focused on years of experience and allowing perhaps a very well-spoken but ineffective safety professional through your doors?

What are the most vital traits of an effective H&S Professional? Knowing regulatory standards verbatim is impressive. It certainly can impress employees when you can quote them straight from the lip. But, can they ensure they are understood? Most importantly are they being executed and not just when there are eyes on them?  

We often discuss hazard identification being a vital requirement of the role. I won’t argue that! My question is that if your dedicated safety person is spending a lot of time identifying hazards, why weren’t they identified in the first place? Do you not have workers capable of identifying hazards? Supervisors, managers and more senior leaders?

I am not trying to be too negative on the skills above. Both are indeed important, and if you are a growing business then they may indeed take higher precedence.

Many businesses want their H&S people on the floor. I have heard that term so many times before along with I don’t want my safety people in the office, at their desk or in front of their computer. I have seen it written in job posts! I totally agree that time must be spent at the workplace with the workers. But doing what exactly? We all agree we shouldn’t be policing the workers. Nobody should, but do we understand the difference between policing and effective supervision? Have you set the standards of expectation ref time on the floor, data entry, reviewing programs, processes and procedures etc? Have you made this clear in your job posting or is your recruiter / hiring manager going to disclose this at some stage during the interview process? I recently discussed a role of director H&S where it was clear after speaking with the 3^rd party recruiter that they wanted someone on site @ 80% of the time with the other 20% of the time ensuring documentary compliance. When I asked for a rough assessment of where they were ref compliance the recruiter seemed to think it was non-existent (her words not mine). If I could determine the potential employer was looking for someone to influence change it would certainly warrant discussion. Unfortunately, even the recruiter agreed they were looking for that person to come and tell them how to work safely.

The ability to conduct a risk assessment is vital. We should however remember that this is not solely down to your safety person. It must be a team effort with the correct SMEs participating without distraction. If your safety person can pull this together and deliver a solid RA then a big thumbs up to them. If they are pulling one from a memory stick or calling in a favour from a friend then you have an issue. It might look impressive and if it’s a one off then ok, but if it sets a precedent then it will likely end in an eventual failure. If your safety person is really good, they will investigate why your teams are too busy to deliver RAs.

Incident investigation should also not be solely down to the safety person. They should have the ability to lead and / or participate but again if they deliver this on their own then you have a problem. Do you want someone capable of driving an investigation that identifies initial and root causes and can then assign SMART corrective actions? One risk is you may well have candidates with several years’ experience delivering incident exonerations rather than investigations. How do you identify that during interview?

What is important is the ability to identify gaps in programs and processes. Having several years of previous similar experience can help. What can be more effective is a safety person that can engage the SMEs and identify gaps. Whether its gaps between regulations and your standards or just gaps in your processes. Being able to analyze and trend is vital and knowing what to analyze and trend is key.  Communication is another key skill with the ability to ask pertinent questions and then carefully listen to the answers but this seems to be often overlooked.

There is quite a lot of verbiage popular at the minute stating leading indicators are the key to success. I have read that lagging indicators are not as important can give false positives. Actually both leading and lagging indicators can be subject to false or under reporting. This really is another article but good solid analysis and trending may well identify gaps in areas such reporting or even gaps in processes / procedures, training and even PPE types or usage.

To summarize: Would you rather have a skilled practitioner who can, lead, effectively communicate (verbal and written at all levels from workforce to leadership), trend, analyze and influence but limited experience in your operation, or someone with a solid background who maybe could be considered an SME but they struggle to analyze and trend, spot gaps or struggle to get the required corrective actions over the line? A question that we must ask is are their skills and knowledge transferable?

My advice to all is ensure your job posting is well written and clearly defines sensible responsibilities and requirements. KISS! If you are hunting for a manager or higher, then you must assess their ability to manage. Whether they are sole H&S and managing your program or, if they need to manage a team then their skills and ability to manage their team. Behavioral questions can prove valuable in assessing their ability to lead or manage although some hypothetical questions can also allow interviewees the opportunity of showing their knowledge. Employing a dedicated safety resource can be expensive. Taking some time and making the effort during selection is a ‘no brainer’.

If you have high turnover of safety people, your safety team is new, or you are just super busy, then I advise you to seek specialist support when recruiting. Whether internal, if available or external. High turnover may well mean you aren’t recruiting the right people? Specialist recruitment companies may have recruited for many safety roles, but did they really select the best and what did they turn away? A consultant can actually save you both $$ and stress by supporting your recruiting process. If you end up with a person who knows the process inside out but cannot manage the program, continually looks for hazards rather than gaps and celebrates your 100% leading indicators then you haven’t got a real safety professional. Many are great at applying the sticking plaster but the lacerations keep coming!

Reach out as failing to ask for assistance. What a consultant can offer can be very cost effective!

Phi Evison

www.goldstandardsafety.ca

250-939-8990