AHSANULLAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Department of Mechanical and Production Engineering

Course No. : HUM 2207

Course Title : Industrial Law & Safety Management

Topic Of Assignment : Theories of Accident Causation

Submitted By

Name I.D. Department Section

1.Md. Sakib Hasan 190108061 MPE(ME) B
2.Yousuf Hossain 190108066 MPE(ME) B
3. Abdullah Al Araf 190108074 MPE(ME) B
4.Md. Hadiuzzaman 190108088 MPE(ME) B
5.Md. Nahin Asef Kabir 190108096 MPE(ME) B
 Human Factor theory
Accidents is an event that injure people, damage property and equipment. They don’t come
suddenly from out of blue. Rather accidents are combination of events that cause potential
damage. According to National Safety Council an accident is an undesired event that results in
personal injury or property damage [1].The definition narrates two important factor. first one is
accidents are unavoidable and second one is the chance of an accident occurring is variable
which can be changed. Understanding the true cause of accident, we must follow the theory of
accident causation. There are several major theories of accident causation. In following, we will
discuss about “Human Factor Theory”
In human factor theory, Ferrell defines accidents in terms of being the result of an error by an
individual [1]. According this theory, human error is the main causes behind a series of events
which actually leads an accident.
In Human Factor Theory, there are three general cause of accidents. Each cause of accidents is
broad category that contain several more specific causes. Three main causes are,
► Overload
► Inappropriate Response
► Incompatibility

Overload:
Overload is simply means it is a situation where task is beyond capability of worker [2]. Though
it is most complex cause in Ferrell’s theory. This cause can breakdown into three subcategories.
First, the emotional condition of a worker is accounted as part of overload. This emotional state
includes condition for instance offended, troubled, agitated, unmotivated etc. Second, overload
refers the individual’s physical capacity and education background. Physical capacity includes
physical fitness, job related pressure and stress and some situational factor such as suddenly
sickness, medicine or drug taking. And if a worker had ordered to do a work which is beyond
his/her educational capability then it can also create overload towards the worker. Finally, load
of an individual’s also refer as overload. It can cause by difficult work, noisy or distracted work
environment or dangerous level of work.
Inappropriate Response:
It is simple and straight forward concept. Inappropriate response can be created by two kinds of
source. One, the worker simply didn’t know any better or he/she can’t recognize that this kind of
response can cause accident. Alternatively, worker know that his/her action may result an
accident, but deliberately take this risk. This type of accident mainly occurs, when safety
management knowing about hazards but do nothing, no safeguard installed or safeguard removed
and worker avoiding safety rules etc.[2]
Inappropriate Activities:
It encompasses two thins. First, an individual worker response incorrectly to a situation. Where if
the worker did response correctly then accident can be prevented. It is normally occurred when
there is no safety program run among workers and higher management authority has less
attention about safety of work environment. Alternatively, accident is caused because of subtle
work environment characteristics. For example, work station is incorrectly sized or supply chain
is disorganize.[1]

Reference:
[1] W. DeCamp and K. Herskovitz, “The Theories of Accident Causation,” Secur. Superv.
Manag. Theory Pract. Asset Prot. Fourth Ed., pp. 71–78, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-
12-800113-4.00005-5.
[2] “Work Zone Safety and Efficiency Transportation Center THEORIES OF ACCIDENT
CAUSATION.”
 The Domino Theory
The Domino Theory was developed by pioneer industrial safety experts H. W. Heinrich and
Alfred Lateiner. It was a graphical presentation of how industrial injuries can occur and be
avoided. ‘Industrial Accident Prevention: A Scientific Approach’ [1931], publication of H. W.
Heinrich ,was based on the analysis of large amounts of accident data. This theory was one of the
earliest developed.
Domino theory is a sequential accident model. It represents an accident sequence as a chain of
events, explained by dominos that tip in a chain reaction. The fall of the first domino leads to the
fall of the second, followed by the third and go on to last as illustrated in the figure below:

H.W. Heinrich shared theorems known as 10 axioms of industrial safety. Those are -

1. Injuries result from a series of preceding factors.

2. Accidents occur as the result of a physical hazard or
an unsafe act.
3. Most accidents are the result of unsafe behavior.
4. Unsafe acts and hazards do not always result in
immediate accidents and injuries.

5. Understanding why people commit unsafe acts

helps to establish guidelines for corrective actions.
10 Axioms of
Industrial Safety - 6. The severity of the injury is largely fortuitous and
H.W. Heinrich the accident that caused it is preventable.
7. The best accident prevention techniques are
analogous to best quality / productivity techniques.

8. Management should assume safety responsibilities.

9. The supervisor is the key person in the prevention

of industrial accidents.
10.Cost of accidents include both direct costs and
indirect costs.
 Heinrich saw this series is interrupted by the elimination of even one of the several factors that
comprise it, the injury will not occur, as illustrated in the figure below:

Accident prevention by interrupting the accident sequence, from the 1950 edition of the
book Industrial Accident Prevention: A Scientific Approach

Five factors were identified in the first version of this model:

• Factor 1: Ancestry and the worker’s social environment. The worker’s skills, beliefs and “traits
of character” and the way work are affected by it.

• Factor 2: Worker’s carelessness or personal faults. As a result, paying insufficient attention to the
task.

• Factor 3: Unsafe act or a mechanical/physical hazard. Such as a manmade error (standing under
suspended loads, starting machinery without warning) or equipment failure or less protected
machinery.

• Factor 4: The accident.

• Factor 5: Injuries or loss as consequences of accident.

Heinrich’s Domino Theory – Corrective Action Sequence (The three “E”s)

• Engineering – Hazards can be eliminated or reduced through product design or process
change.
• Education – Train workers about the safety issues and make management understand
that attention to safety has value.
 • Enforcement – Ensuring that workers and management following all rules, regulations,
and standard operating procedures.

Bird & Loftus presented the first update of the Domino Theory [ Heinrich et al, 1980;
Bird & Germain, 1986]. This update introduced;
• The influence of management and managerial error;

• Loss, as the result of an accident could be production losses, property damage or wastage of
other assets, as well as injuries.

Interpretation

• This model is easy to understand for its simplicity.

• It helped managements to find out underlying causal factors that could cause accidents.
• It is allowing the interruption of the accident factors helps to convince people to adopt the
corrective actions suggested by the accident investigation.

However, the model sees workers as generators of accidents, rather than as people who do their
best to run imperfect systems as well as possible given all the competing demands.

Criticism:
Too much simplicity of domino model makes it to be a useful tool to understand the causal
factors of accidents:

• It leads to simple view of the contribution of human performance to accidents, and to a focus on
training and procedural compliance rather than on system design, workload and incentives.

• It is about a purely linear and mechanical model of causality. It happens to be inappropriate in

complex systems where accidents are generally caused by many interacting, partially competing
and unpredictable factors.

-----------------------------------

Reference:

1. Heinrich, Herbert William. 1931. Industrial accident prevention: A scientific approach.

New York. McGraw-Hill.
 2. https://risk-engineering.org/concept/Heinrich-dominos

3. https://www.lakecountysafetycouncil.org/presentations/IncidentInvestigation052011.pdf

4. https://academic.csuohio.edu/duffy_s/Section_03.pdf

Epidemiological Theory
Epidemiological theory explains that the relationships between environmental factors and disease
can be used to understand causal relationships between environmental factors and accidents.

Key components
of epidemiology

Predisposition characteristics Situational characteristics

1.Peer pressure
1.Perception
2.Attitudes
2.Environmental factors
3.Prirorities of supervisor
3.Susceptibility of people
4.Risk assesment by individuals

Can cause or prevent accidents that a person liable to a given situation or condition if these two
key components work together.

Source:

1. https://academic.csuohio.edu/duffy_s/Section_03.pdf

------------------------------------------------------
 Energy Release Theory
Developed in 1970 by Dr. William Haddon Jr. which describes accidents in terms of energy
transference. It focuses on preventing energy to stores up in an uncontrolled way. Large amounts
of transfer of energy at rapid rates cause an effect on living and nonliving objects, causing injury
and damage. In a nutshell, an accident caused by energy when it is uncontrolled.
Dr. Haddon suggests that strategies can interrupt the chain of accident-causing events. Such as-
• Controlling the buildup of energy.
• Reducing the initial amount of energy by providing vent release mechanisms.
• Installing control methods to control release of energy.
• Separating the energy being released from the living or nonliving object by using space
(distance) and time. For instance, a fixed barrier guard separates workers or machinery to
reach a point of operation. It is called separation by space.
• Modifying release rate by other control techniques. Strengthening object which might
release energy to prevent such release. For instance, strength of slings used in hoisting is
tested to withstand two times there working load.

Source:
1. https://www.irmi.com/term/insurance-definitions/energy-release-theory

---------------------------------------------------------

Multiple Causation Theory

Multiple causation theory, name itself explains. Multiple factors combine in random order and
take place at same point to produce an accident.
For instance, a multiple causation theory example is 4Ms which are -

1.Man

2.Media
4.Management 4M's (environment)

3.Machine
Analysis of these factors are used to identify which combinations are most likely to bring
conditions together for injuries to occur.

Point to be noted that this theory is one of the first that recognizes the critical role that played by
management to execute the safety mission by providing leadership and support.

Putting emphasis on prevention of the negative event is the 3 E’s in Multiple Causation Theory:
1. Engineering
2. Education
3. Enforcement
Engineering principles for recognizing hazard and controlling it, is the application of safety
engineering. Studying of forces that are exerted on machines, men and control apparatus and the
action of such exerted forces is an important part of safety engineering.
The effects of forces are related to material strength and it’s ability.
Safety program, actions of management to set the prevention ideal into motion:
• Authorization- This occurs in top management to set plan of actions to identify and
eliminate hazardous conditions to make the environment safe as a part of safety program.
• Appropriation – It is the second needed element. Adequate resources are provided to
fulfill the safety mission.

To control hazards, needs to begin with hazard recognition. By eliminating or reducing the risk
of loss from the hazard that has been recognized is known as hazard control.
Hazard control processes are
1. Hazard recognition to control it. If it is not known, then how the actions can be taken.
2. Selecting suitable preventative measures among several options.
3. For monitoring and implementation, assigning responsibility of the selected control
technique.

Source:
1. https://riskwise.biz/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Theories-of-Accident-Causation.pdf
 The system theory of accident causation
This is a system model which views a harmony among person, machine, and environment. A
situation where accident can happen from interactions among person, machine, environment and
specially when someone/something interrupt the harmony by changing one of the components. As
the theory focusses on the harmony of multiple elements interaction among themselves, Changes
in the patterns of interaction might increase or decrease the probability of an accident. So, accident
might happen when either the elements are being changed or relation among the three elements is
changed, where chances of occurring accident is low.
Inside an environment when a person interacts with a machine, three actions take place:
1.At first, he collects information by observing and notes current circumstances
2.After that, the person estimates the risks and then decides if the tasks to be performed or not
3.And if the information is fit to be performed and the risk estimation is quite accurate, the
operation might be done without any accident
Moreover, to avoid unpleasant circumstances, system coordinator must consider some factors:
1.After estimating all risks, he must make a decision very wisely
2.He has to be well aware of the workers abilities as well as limitations
3.Recruit workers as the job requirement demands
4.Establish proper maintenance
5.Must have to be prepared for both pleasant and unpleasant circumstances. If anything goes wrong
must have an alternative plan to reduce losses.
 Accident/Incident Theory
There are lots of theories about accident causation. Accident/Incident theory is one of them. This
was given by Petersen. So, it can be called as Petersen's Accident/Incident theory. It says that
causes of accident or incident are because of human error or system failure. It is an extension
theory of Farrell's Human Factor theory. Ergonomic traps, decision to err and system failures are
major elements of this theory.

Ergonomic traps: Ergonomic traps is a component of a design that can cause an accident. These
are Incompatible work station tools and expectations.

Incompatible work station tools mean where inappropriate tools are used. For example, someone
is carrying something heavy but unable to carry properly because of not having appropriate tool.
And this tool can be called as incompatible work station tool.

Incompatible work station expectation is to expect inappropriately. Example, something that

needs to be carried by more than one person but making one person carry the same thing
expecting that one person can able to do that. This expectation is incompatible work station
expectation.

In both cases there is a high possibility of getting injured. And ergonomic trap is a failure of
management.

Decision to err: Doing something knowing that that is risky is decision to err. And it seems
logical for workers in some situation. For example, if a manger wants to increase production rate,
he or she has to pressurise workers and they might choose that option knowing that the approach
is unsafe. Misjudgement of the risk, unconscious desire to err and logical decision based on the
situation all are decision to err.

When workers think they are so experienced and believe that they will not have any accident that
is misjudgement of the risk.
Unconscious desire can happen because of psychological failings or mental problems. Suppose,
someone is doing something faster than usual because of his or her own desire.

When logic is applied to somewhere and this is clear that no one should not do the work but still
the work is done then that is logical decision based on the situation. For example: To work
without safety hardness while working on a high platform. Right decisions are taken primarily
for financial cost and temporal deadlines.

Decision to err happens for human error so this is personal failure.

System failure: System failure is inability of the organization to correct errors. policy,
responsibility, training, inspection, correction these all are part of system failure.

Policy can lead to a system failure that does not prevent an accident from occurring by a human.
Knowing about safety policy should be the first priority for a worker before joining in a work.

Company should have responsibility to assign safety officer and make sure to provide every
workers safety.

Lack of training can lead workers to get injured. Every worker needs to be trained properly
before starting their work.

Everything has to be inspected regularly for avoiding accident. For example, fire extinguishers
have to be inspected on a regular basis and replaced after using. And, lack of inspection is an
assistant failure.

When authority corrected something but failed to correct in perfect manner, it still lefts the
opportunity for error and accident.

System failure is totally a management error.

So, this is important to make sure every worker’s safety by authority and workers have to be
aware about their safety to prevent accident.