November 2002

Protecting People Through Innovative Training

Mind Over Management: When the Truth You Tell is a Great Big Lie

Rogers Group achieves stellar safety results after customizing DuPont’s training program

By Therese Dunphy

In recognition of his efforts to improve safety at Rogers Group, Ed Elliott (right) was recently presented with the Safety & Health Professional of the Year Award from the National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association. Jim Sharpe (left) presented the award.

Improving safety is typically an evolutionary process, not a revolutionary one. In the case of Rogers Group, Inc., however, the company found that a significant culture change was necessary to take its safety program to the next level. During the last two years, the company has implemented Rogers Safety System Training. As a result, the company has achieved a 40-percent reduction in injuries, recorded one of the lowest Injury Incident Rates (IIR) in the aggregates industry, and generated significant insurance savings.
Through the program, Rogers looks beyond previous parameters such as lost-time injuries, personal injuries, and property damage to focus on the most important element of safety — people.
“About five years ago, we started to trend where our (safety statistics) were flat and getting a little worse. We needed to find something that approached safety a little bit differently,” said Ed Elliott, safety director for Rogers Group. “We needed to find someone who was world class in safety who could tell us how to become world class in safety.”
After a board member suggested DuPont Safety Resources as a potential resource, Rogers invited the group in to make a presentation and explain its approach. In the summer of 2000, DuPont presented its analysis to senior managers and the development process began. From the highest levels within the company, a commitment was made to manage safety like any other part of the business. “It’s not looked at like mom and apple pie,” said Elliott. “Safety is looked at like margins and costs and capital expenditures.”
The safety program certainly impacted Rogers’ balance sheet, just not in the way many would anticipate. In terms of costs, Rogers spent approximately $300,000 to complete safety training throughout the company. “They did not hesitate (at the cost). That takes one heck of a personal commitment to caring about people,” said Elliott.
The investment didn’t just pay off in terms of safety statistics. It also added $700,000 to the bottom line. Rogers achieved major savings from its safety program by lowering its experience modification rate (EMR). For example, in Tennessee operations, Rogers reduced the EMR from 0.74 in 1999 to 0.68 in 2002. The reduction in EMR allowed Rogers to lower its cost for workers’ compensation insurance. As a self-insured company, the company also achieved savings on internal insurance costs.

Core components
According to Elliott, DuPont didn’t tell Rogers how to run its safety program. Instead, it provided information on the key elements to a program’s success. Elliott said that he blended elements from DuPont’s program and existing Rogers initiatives to create a customized safety culture. Rogers Safety System Training is based on core beliefs such as: a commitment from management; line responsibility for safety; safety training; injury/incident investigation and analysis; internal and external audits; safety committees; job safety analysis with local rules; local safety communications; and employee involvement.
“First and foremost on the list is management commitment. Don Williamson, president and chief executive officer, along with Rich Warden, chief operating officer, were instrumental in integrating this program into the Rogers way of doing business in such a rapid fashion,” said Elliott. “DuPont told us to focus on people and the other things would take care of themselves. I think that’s the thing that’s been the most important to our success.”
That success has been considerable. At press time, Rogers’ injury rate was 1.32 — the lowest rate achieved since the company began measuring it. During the program’s first complete year, Rogers Group, Inc., which is comprised of 1,700 employees in five states, reduced injuries by approximately 40 percent. It is on track to achieve similar reductions in 2002.
Rogers has been able to achieve these results despite the somewhat far-flung nature of the company and a safety staff of three. Making safety everyone’s responsibility is one reason why Rogers has achieved such remarkable results, said Elliott: “The involvement of all employees from the newest to the most senior has contributed to our dramatic improvement.”
Also, each executive and supervisor is required to complete a minimum of one safety audit per month. Mandating line responsibility for safety is essential, he explained. “At Rogers, safety is run by operations, not a safety group,” said Elliott. “Operations people are held accountable for safety by the president of the company.
“Our audits focus on people and how they do their work: what behavior they have, what kind of habits they’ve developed,” he noted. “When you share habits, you develop a culture. We want to develop a culture that values these elements.”
According to Elliott, developing that culture means educating workers who were raised with the World War II mentality that it was okay to take risks or lose your life in order to get a job done. “From a safety standpoint, you were thought of as tough if you could do a job and take risks,” he said. “That’s permeated operations for 50 years. With the Baby Boom generation filtering out of the industrial system in the next 10 years, we have a tremendous opportunity to make that paradigm shift.”
That long-term outlook is also inherent to Rogers’ approach to safety. The company is not just looking for short-term results, but rather long-term improvements. Elliott said that while they are approaching safety goals aggressively, they want to ensure sustainability.
To do so, Rogers Group uses leading, current, and trailing indicators to assess their status (see “Rogers Group Safety Program”) and stay on track. The leading indicators, which can have the greatest impact on improving safety, are based upon the program’s core values.
“Our goal is zero injuries, and we’re going to achieve it,” said Elliott. “The most important thing about this is that fewer people are getting hurt at Rogers Group than in the past. Employees feel like they can come to work and not have to worry about doing something that puts them at risk.”

Rogers Group Safety Program
Leading Indicators	Current Indicators	Trailing Indicators
Management Commitment Line Responsibility Safety Training Audit Process Quality Safety Committees Job Safety Analyses (JSA) Process Near Miss Reporting and Investigation Employee Involvement	Safe and Unsafe Acts Indices Training Records and Effectiveness Quality of Safety Meetings and Training Injury/Incident Investigation Reporting and Analysis Quality Safety Audit Findings Serious Potential Injury Frequency Occupational Medical Visits Action on Past Employee Perception Surveys (safety)	Injury Incidence Rate Lost Time Injury Rate Number of Worker’s Compensation Claims Worker’s Compensation Costs Including Disability Costs Property Damage Costs Motor Vehicle Damage Costs and Liability Costs Liability Costs Litigation Costs are Included in Claims Costs.

Therese Dunphy is editorial director for AggMan.