Validating Closure of Action Plans
Closing an RCA action plan requires evidence that the actions were completed and that they produced the intended change in risk. Agree on the evidence in advance and assign responsibility for monitoring results.
THE IDEA
Validating Closure of Action Plans
There are two important points concerning how to validate the agreed actions after an RCA or inquiry has been effectively completed: (1) is there evidence to show that the agreed remediation actions have been completed and (2) have the actions resulted in the needed change in the risk profile in accordance with any specified risk appetite?
For the first point, good practice involves agreeing, upfront, the verification (or evidence) requirements that should prove an action has been completed, using SMART principles. That way, later, you should have a more straightforward, less contentious discussion about whether (i) action steps are on track and (ii) they have been completed.
For the second requirement, operate on something other than a ‘no news is good news basis’, which is what often gets organisations into trouble in the first place. Instead, think about the likely leading and lagging indicators that would tell you, actively, that the risk is now being managed to a better level and in accordance to the necessary tolerances specified by senior management, and ensure that there is an active process to monitor these measures, with agreed responsible and accountable roles.
Beyond this, it is essential to have an oversight process for key RCA action points, with timely management information.6 This should involve senior managers and – if necessary – the board, so they can understand progress against key milestones. Management information should always be presented based on the importance of each area being fixed; if three medium‐risk actions are on track, that usually won't compensate for one higher‐risk point that has stalled.
When to use it
Validating corrective actions after a workplace safety incident
Confirming that audit findings have been remediated and risk levels reduced
Ensuring project risk mitigation actions are completed and effective before moving to the next phase
Overseeing regulatory compliance action plans to demonstrate closure to regulators
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Verification of a corrective action after a safety incident
After a chemical spill, the action plan included installing a secondary containment system. The verification requirement was a signed inspection report with photos, completed within two weeks. Once the report and photos were submitted, the action was considered complete.
Monitoring risk reduction through leading indicators
A company introduces training to reduce hand injuries. It tracks completion and near-miss reports alongside later injury rates. Completion shows whether training was delivered, while near-miss reports may reflect both hazards and reporting behavior. The company needs to interpret these measures together when assessing risk reduction.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How can you define SMART verification criteria for an action plan before implementation begins?
Which leading and lagging indicators together would help you assess whether a risk mitigation action is working?
How might a 'no news is good news' approach lead to incomplete or ineffective closure of action plans?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Beyond the Five Whys Root Cause Analysis and Systems Thinking (James C. Paterson)