Today, in high-risk industries like construction, we collect more
safety-related data than ever before. Surveillance—the systematic observation or
monitoring of behavior and activity—is often embedded in digital forms, including
audits, Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking, and wearable devices. But here's a
dose of reality: no one does their best work under a microscope. Surveillance feels like
suspicion, not support. And while all this data promises to reduce risk, the outcomes
tend to remain flat or even degrade.
A key contributing factor remains true. Without dialogue and knowledge
transfer, accumulating data resembles surveillance. Surveillance alone rarely drives
consistent behavior change. For example, in response to builders risk subjectivities in
the multifamily wood frame insurance market, many construction firms were required to
utilize security surveillance camera systems instead of onsite security guards. While
both would be ideal, surveillance cameras became a subjectivity of builders risk
coverage. If a general contractor (GC) wanted the policy, they had to implement the
cameras. In many cases, the budget restraints required operations to make a cost-driven
decision—but not necessarily a risk-reducing one. The result? Theft wasn't necessarily
deterred. Materials and tools still went missing—caught on camera, but weren't stopped.
Surveillance captured the loss, but it did little to prevent it.
The real opportunity to reduce risk was never in the camera. It was in
the communication process. Operational planning and communicating expectations around
tool and material storage, planning for deliveries based on schedule, and building
accountability into field operations may deter and prevent theft. And it's no different
in safety.
Data without dialogue is just digital observation. It doesn't change
behavior. However, when data is used to spark discussion, reinforce priorities, and
inform decisions, it becomes a powerful tool for operational excellence. Dialogue is
what turns insight into action, and action is what prevents loss, drives performance,
and protects our people. Dialogue creates trust.
If the goal is prevention and resilient operations, we must stop
asking what we can track and start asking who we can
trust. And that begins by recognizing a truth many organizations overlook: the
front line not only executes the work, but they can shape and improve systems when they
are included in the conversation and heard.
The Fallacy of Safety Surveillance
There's a seductive logic in attempting to monitor our way to
better outcomes. When incidents occur, we instinctively ask, "What didn't we see?"
This leads to a tech stack focused on visibility: dashboards, heatmaps, camera
feeds, and automated alerts. But visibility alone isn't intelligence. And the belief
that more surveillance equals more control often erodes the very trust that
high-functioning teams depend on.
Construction is not alone in this class of problems. In companies
with heavy monitoring systems but weak engagement practices, frontline leaders learn
to "perform" safety rather than live it. Forms are filled out, checkboxes are
marked, and yet the same blind spots persist. Tracking often devolves into a task
rather than a tactic. What we are seeking is a discussion that influences and
reinforces positive behavioral outcomes, thereby preventing incidents by reducing
risk.
Operational Excellence Is Achieved Through Integration at
the Front Line
Operational excellence isn't achieved at the top—it begins at the
front line. When companies shift their focus from oversight to integration, they
unlock what drives performance: communication, clarity, and shared ownership. A
powerful example comes from SmartTagIt (factorlab.com), a platform that reimagined
the traditional job hazard analysis process into a video-based daily planning
system. SmartTagIt has analyzed over 1 million frontline construction conversations,
and the findings point to a fundamental truth: The
greatest indicator of jobsite performance isn't who filled out a form, it's what
was said.
These video-based conversations reveal more than task lists and
hazards. They expose the following.
Trust. Is the foreman
engaging or commanding?
Leadership. Are questions
being asked or orders being given?
Psychological safety. Do
crew members speak up or stay silent?
Clarity. Does everyone
understand the plan?
In one case, a contractor discovered that the most seasoned
supervisors didn't lead their highest-performing crews; they were led by foremen who
asked thoughtful questions, invited input, and created space for discussion. That
shift in leadership posture from dominating, low-support, and high-challenge
cultures to liberating high-support/high-challenge cultures led to measurable
improvements in the following.
Planning quality
Productivity goals
Hazard identification
Field morale
Overall incident reduction
This is the difference between checking a box and changing a
behavior.
When data is used not only to audit compliance but also to analyze
how people interact, it becomes a powerful tool for cultural transformation. And
when organizations empower their front line to speak, lead, and plan—not just follow
instructions—that's when operational excellence truly takes root.
The Safety Professional as a Broker of Culture and
Risk
In construction risk management, the insurance broker plays a
crucial role in aligning the needs of the construction company with risk transfer
options that align with the capabilities and appetite of the insurance market.
They're not just middle people—they must be trusted advisers, providing insurance
market access, program design expertise, and relationships that influence whether
the contractor gets the right coverage at the right price that fits their overall
risk appetite.
Let's break that down.
The client (GC) needs
coverage to meet the contractual demands of the project owner and secure the
financial mechanism to transfer the risk.
The carrier (insurer)
provides the financial backing, but only if the risk meets their risk profile
and appetite, and the client's processes are deemed acceptable and
well-managed.
The broker designs the
program, interprets needs, negotiates pricing, and ensures coverage matches
their clients risk exposure, contractual obligations, and risk appetite.
The broker's expertise, relationships, and trust are what align
the moving parts and ensure risk is transferred and managed effectively. When the GC
accepts the status quo with the wrong broker, market accessibility, coverage gaps,
premium increases, or underinsured risk can silently plague the profitability and
competitiveness of the company.
Now shift that lens to safety. The safety professional is the
"broker" of culture and operational risk—the connector between leadership,
operations, and the field. Like a broker, they do the following.
Bring field-level expertise to operational risk and
transform insight into informed action.
Translate strategic goals into tactical action that keeps
crews safe and productive.
Set the project up for success by identifying risks early,
setting up communication channels with the trade partners, and meeting the
owner's contractual expectations.
Serve as the catalyst for communication, providing the
bridge for communication and championing the intersection of safety, quality,
and productivity so that decisions are informed by true risk management, not
just assumptions and conjecture.
Just like an insurer relies on a broker to know the contractor's
risk profile, the construction teams rely on the safety professional to become their
trusted adviser, contributing to the creation of a culture of trust, communication,
and risk prevention and mitigation.
When executive leadership accepts the status quo for safety, the
whole system breaks down. If management ignores the safety "broker," they typically
focus on the wrong metrics, relying on historical data that is often manipulated,
and safety becomes a compliance checkbox instead of a strategic driver.
Building Systems of Involvement, Not Just
Compliance
When organizations design safety systems with their frontline leaders instead of for them, everything changes.
Safety processes become a space for ownership, not
obligation.
Observation programs become coaching moments, not
policing.
Insights from the field flow upward, informing how leaders
lead.
It's this kind of culture—where people at every level understand
their role in shaping outcomes—that separates static compliance cultures from
adaptive, high-performing ones.
Reframing the Question
When it comes to operational outcomes, the real question isn't how much data we're collecting—it's how much trust we're building. It's not about
increasing surveillance. It's about designing systems that make the data matter to
the people closest to the work.
The goal isn't to capture more
data—it's to capture the right data, in the right way, with the right people at the table. Data collection should never be a passive
activity. It should be a process that adds value to the field, fuels informed
decision-making, and drives action that matters.
When frontline teams see that the information they share actually
improves the plan, reduces rework, and protects their wellbeing, that's when
engagement shifts. That's when safety becomes a lever for performance, not a barrier
to progress.
Safety professionals who embrace this mindset don't just reduce
incidents; they reveal the cultural intelligence buried in the organization. And
that intelligence is what creates alignment, agility, and accountability—the
building blocks of operational excellence.
In the end, it's not surveillance that drives high
performance—it's synergy. Not compliance but connection. And the organizations that
get that right aren't just safer, they're more profitable, more resilient, and far
more prepared for whatever comes next.
Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney, accountant, or other qualified adviser.
Today, in high-risk industries like construction, we collect more safety-related data than ever before. Surveillance—the systematic observation or monitoring of behavior and activity—is often embedded in digital forms, including audits, Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking, and wearable devices. But here's a dose of reality: no one does their best work under a microscope. Surveillance feels like suspicion, not support. And while all this data promises to reduce risk, the outcomes tend to remain flat or even degrade.
A key contributing factor remains true. Without dialogue and knowledge transfer, accumulating data resembles surveillance. Surveillance alone rarely drives consistent behavior change. For example, in response to builders risk subjectivities in the multifamily wood frame insurance market, many construction firms were required to utilize security surveillance camera systems instead of onsite security guards. While both would be ideal, surveillance cameras became a subjectivity of builders risk coverage. If a general contractor (GC) wanted the policy, they had to implement the cameras. In many cases, the budget restraints required operations to make a cost-driven decision—but not necessarily a risk-reducing one. The result? Theft wasn't necessarily deterred. Materials and tools still went missing—caught on camera, but weren't stopped. Surveillance captured the loss, but it did little to prevent it.
The real opportunity to reduce risk was never in the camera. It was in the communication process. Operational planning and communicating expectations around tool and material storage, planning for deliveries based on schedule, and building accountability into field operations may deter and prevent theft. And it's no different in safety.
Data without dialogue is just digital observation. It doesn't change behavior. However, when data is used to spark discussion, reinforce priorities, and inform decisions, it becomes a powerful tool for operational excellence. Dialogue is what turns insight into action, and action is what prevents loss, drives performance, and protects our people. Dialogue creates trust.
If the goal is prevention and resilient operations, we must stop asking what we can track and start asking who we can trust. And that begins by recognizing a truth many organizations overlook: the front line not only executes the work, but they can shape and improve systems when they are included in the conversation and heard.
The Fallacy of Safety Surveillance
There's a seductive logic in attempting to monitor our way to better outcomes. When incidents occur, we instinctively ask, "What didn't we see?" This leads to a tech stack focused on visibility: dashboards, heatmaps, camera feeds, and automated alerts. But visibility alone isn't intelligence. And the belief that more surveillance equals more control often erodes the very trust that high-functioning teams depend on.
Construction is not alone in this class of problems. In companies with heavy monitoring systems but weak engagement practices, frontline leaders learn to "perform" safety rather than live it. Forms are filled out, checkboxes are marked, and yet the same blind spots persist. Tracking often devolves into a task rather than a tactic. What we are seeking is a discussion that influences and reinforces positive behavioral outcomes, thereby preventing incidents by reducing risk.
Operational Excellence Is Achieved Through Integration at the Front Line
Operational excellence isn't achieved at the top—it begins at the front line. When companies shift their focus from oversight to integration, they unlock what drives performance: communication, clarity, and shared ownership. A powerful example comes from SmartTagIt (factorlab.com), a platform that reimagined the traditional job hazard analysis process into a video-based daily planning system. SmartTagIt has analyzed over 1 million frontline construction conversations, and the findings point to a fundamental truth: The greatest indicator of jobsite performance isn't who filled out a form, it's what was said.
These video-based conversations reveal more than task lists and hazards. They expose the following.
In one case, a contractor discovered that the most seasoned supervisors didn't lead their highest-performing crews; they were led by foremen who asked thoughtful questions, invited input, and created space for discussion. That shift in leadership posture from dominating, low-support, and high-challenge cultures to liberating high-support/high-challenge cultures led to measurable improvements in the following.
This is the difference between checking a box and changing a behavior.
When data is used not only to audit compliance but also to analyze how people interact, it becomes a powerful tool for cultural transformation. And when organizations empower their front line to speak, lead, and plan—not just follow instructions—that's when operational excellence truly takes root.
The Safety Professional as a Broker of Culture and Risk
In construction risk management, the insurance broker plays a crucial role in aligning the needs of the construction company with risk transfer options that align with the capabilities and appetite of the insurance market. They're not just middle people—they must be trusted advisers, providing insurance market access, program design expertise, and relationships that influence whether the contractor gets the right coverage at the right price that fits their overall risk appetite.
Let's break that down.
The broker's expertise, relationships, and trust are what align the moving parts and ensure risk is transferred and managed effectively. When the GC accepts the status quo with the wrong broker, market accessibility, coverage gaps, premium increases, or underinsured risk can silently plague the profitability and competitiveness of the company.
Now shift that lens to safety. The safety professional is the "broker" of culture and operational risk—the connector between leadership, operations, and the field. Like a broker, they do the following.
Just like an insurer relies on a broker to know the contractor's risk profile, the construction teams rely on the safety professional to become their trusted adviser, contributing to the creation of a culture of trust, communication, and risk prevention and mitigation.
When executive leadership accepts the status quo for safety, the whole system breaks down. If management ignores the safety "broker," they typically focus on the wrong metrics, relying on historical data that is often manipulated, and safety becomes a compliance checkbox instead of a strategic driver.
Building Systems of Involvement, Not Just Compliance
When organizations design safety systems with their frontline leaders instead of for them, everything changes.
It's this kind of culture—where people at every level understand their role in shaping outcomes—that separates static compliance cultures from adaptive, high-performing ones.
Reframing the Question
When it comes to operational outcomes, the real question isn't how much data we're collecting—it's how much trust we're building. It's not about increasing surveillance. It's about designing systems that make the data matter to the people closest to the work.
The goal isn't to capture more data—it's to capture the right data, in the right way, with the right people at the table. Data collection should never be a passive activity. It should be a process that adds value to the field, fuels informed decision-making, and drives action that matters.
When frontline teams see that the information they share actually improves the plan, reduces rework, and protects their wellbeing, that's when engagement shifts. That's when safety becomes a lever for performance, not a barrier to progress.
Safety professionals who embrace this mindset don't just reduce incidents; they reveal the cultural intelligence buried in the organization. And that intelligence is what creates alignment, agility, and accountability—the building blocks of operational excellence.
In the end, it's not surveillance that drives high performance—it's synergy. Not compliance but connection. And the organizations that get that right aren't just safer, they're more profitable, more resilient, and far more prepared for whatever comes next.
Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney, accountant, or other qualified adviser.