Leading Indicators Predicting Reductions in Workplace Injuries in Ontario’s Construction and Manufacturing Sectors: A Data-Driven Synthesis

Workplace Safety Leading Indicators

I. INTRODUCTION

Overview

Workplace injuries in Ontario’s construction and manufacturing sectors remain a significant concern, with substantial human, economic, and social costs. While COR (Certificate of Recognition) certification and OHSA (Occupational Health and Safety Act) compliance are foundational for safety management, there is increasing recognition of the value of leading indicators—proactive measures that predict and prevent injuries before they occur. This report synthesizes data from recent research to identify which leading indicators, such as worker engagement, psychological safety, and near-miss reporting, most strongly predict reductions in workplace injuries in these sectors.

Context

Traditional safety management has relied heavily on lagging indicators (e.g., injury rates, lost time incidents), which reflect outcomes rather than causes. Leading indicators, by contrast, focus on organizational behaviors, worker perceptions, and proactive safety activities that precede and predict injury events. Understanding which leading indicators are most effective is critical for targeted interventions and continuous improvement in workplace safety, especially in high-risk sectors like construction and manufacturing.

II. DATA SYNTHESIS

Data Trends and Key Findings

A review of the provided references reveals several key leading indicators associated with reductions in workplace injuries.

These include:

• Safety Management Systems (SMS) and Safety Programs

• Worker Engagement and Participation

• Psychological Safety

• Near-Miss Reporting and Accurate Incident Reporting

• Leadership Style and Senior Management Commitment

• Training, Communication, and Ergonomic Risk Recognition

  
  

The following dynamic table summarizes the strength of association between these leading indicators and reductions in workplace injuries, based on quantitative findings from the references.

Table 1. Leading Indicators and Their Predictive Strength for Injury Reduction

Leading Indicator	Sector(s)	Quantitative Impact / Association	Key Data Points / Findings	Reference(s)
Safety Management Systems (SMS)	Construction	1-point SMS increase: 34% lower odds of recordable case rate >0 (OR=0.66); 28% lower odds of DART (OR=0.72)	SMS scores consistently predict lower injury rates; Safety programs less consistent	(Manjourides & Dennerlein, 2019)
Worker Engagement & Participation	Construction, Manufacturing	Participatory risk assessment: 2/3 reduction in injury rate, 73% cost reduction, 43% duration reduction	Engagement in risk assessment teams leads to substantial reductions in injury rates	(Carrivick et al., 2002)
Psychological Safety	General	Strong association with improved attitudes, behaviors, team info sharing, and performance	Psychological safety enables risk reporting, innovation, and proactive safety behaviors	(2018)(Ramkissoon et al., 2019)
Near-Miss & Incident Reporting	Construction	Underreporting linked to higher injury rates; accurate reporting essential for prevention	Projects with accurate reporting have fewer injuries; fear and normalization hinder reporting	(Al-Aubaidy et al., 2019)(Taylor Moore et al., 2013)
Leadership Style (Task/Relational)	Construction, Manufacturing	Task-oriented leadership: strongest contributor to safety; relational-oriented also important	Leadership style explains significant variance in safety outcomes; change-oriented less predictive	(Lyubykh et al., 2022)(Sparks, 2018)
Training & Communication	Manufacturing	Identified as key themes in injury reduction strategies	Communication and training are central to effective safety culture and injury reduction	(Sparks, 2018)
Ergonomic Risk Recognition	Construction	MSDs = 26% of injuries; only 3/152 trainings on lifting; 45% controls for MSD risks	Ergonomic hazards under-recognized; improved surveillance and training needed	(Dale & Evanoff, 2017)

III. ANALYSIS

Detailed Analysis of Leading Indicators

1. Safety Management Systems (SMS)

Safety Management Systems are robust predictors of lower injury rates in construction. Each incremental improvement in SMS scores yields a substantial reduction in both recordable case rates and DART rates. Specifically, a one-point increase in SMS is associated with a 34% reduction in the odds of having any recordable injury and a 28% reduction in the odds of injuries involving days away, restricted, or transferred (Manjourides & Dennerlein, 2019). This effect is consistent and statistically significant, highlighting SMS as a critical leading indicator.

2. Worker Engagement and Participation

Participatory approaches, such as workplace risk assessment teams, have demonstrated dramatic reductions in injury rates—up to two-thirds—along with significant decreases in injury-related costs and lost work time (Carrivick et al., 2002). Engagement in safety activities empowers workers, improves hazard identification, and fosters a culture of shared responsibility.

3. Psychological Safety

Psychological safety is strongly associated with positive safety outcomes, including increased reporting of hazards, innovative problem-solving, and proactive risk management (2018)(Ramkissoon et al., 2019). Environments where workers feel safe to speak up without fear of reprisal are more likely to identify and address risks before they result in injuries.

4. Near-Miss and Incident Reporting

Accurate reporting of near-misses and incidents is essential for effective safety management. Underreporting is linked to higher injury rates and undermines prevention efforts (Al-Aubaidy et al., 2019)(Taylor Moore et al., 2013). Common barriers to reporting include normalization of minor injuries and fear of negative consequences. Addressing these barriers is crucial for leveraging near-miss data as a leading indicator.

5. Leadership Style

Meta-analytic evidence shows that task-oriented and relational-oriented leadership styles are the most important contributors to workplace safety, surpassing change-oriented (transformational) leadership in predictive strength (Lyubykh et al., 2022). In manufacturing, transformational leadership combined with strong communication and training is associated with reduced injury rates (Sparks, 2018).

6. Training, Communication, and Ergonomic Risk Recognition

Training and communication are repeatedly identified as central themes in injury reduction strategies (Sparks, 2018). In construction, ergonomic risks such as musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are under-recognized and under-addressed, despite accounting for a significant proportion of injuries (Dale & Evanoff, 2017). Enhanced ergonomic surveillance and targeted training are needed to close this gap.

Table 2. Barriers and Facilitators to Leading Indicator Implementation

Leading Indicator	Key Barriers Identified	Facilitators / Solutions Proposed	Reference(s)
Near-Miss Reporting	Fear of reprisal, normalization of minor injuries	Addressing fear, promoting open reporting culture	(Al-Aubaidy et al., 2019)(Taylor Moore et al., 2013)
Worker Engagement	Lack of participatory structures	Risk assessment teams, shared responsibility	(Carrivick et al., 2002)
Ergonomic Risk Recognition	Focus on traumatic injuries, lack of training	Integrate ergonomic surveillance, targeted training	(Dale & Evanoff, 2017)
Psychological Safety	Poor communication, lack of trust	Leadership commitment, standardized assessment	(2018)(Ramkissoon et al., 2019)
Leadership Style	Overemphasis on change-oriented leadership	Focus on task- and relational-oriented leadership	(Lyubykh et al., 2022)(Sparks, 2018)

IV. DISCUSSION

Contextualizing Data

The data synthesized above indicate that leading indicators beyond COR certification and OHSA compliance play a decisive role in predicting and achieving reductions in workplace injuries. Safety Management Systems, worker engagement, and participatory risk assessment are consistently associated with lower injury rates. Psychological safety and accurate near-miss reporting are foundational for proactive hazard identification and prevention.

Leadership style emerges as a critical factor, with task-oriented and relational-oriented approaches outperforming change-oriented models in predicting safety outcomes. Training and communication are essential for embedding these leading indicators into organizational culture.

Ergonomic risk recognition is notably under-addressed in construction, despite its significant contribution to injury rates. Integrating ergonomic surveillance and targeted training into safety programs is a promising strategy for further injury reduction.

Gaps and Areas for Further Research

While the evidence is robust for several leading indicators, there are gaps in standardized measurement and reporting, particularly for psychological safety and near-miss reporting. Future research should focus on developing validated tools and frameworks for these indicators, as well as exploring sector-specific nuances in Ontario’s construction and manufacturing industries.

V. CONCLUSION

Summary of Key Findings

• Safety Management Systems (SMS) are the strongest quantitative predictor of reduced injury rates in construction, with each point increase yielding up to 34% lower odds of recordable injuries (Manjourides & Dennerlein, 2019).

  
  

• Worker Engagement and Participatory Risk Assessment lead to dramatic reductions in injury rates, costs, and lost time (Carrivick et al., 2002).

  
  

• Psychological Safety is strongly associated with proactive safety behaviors and improved reporting (2018)(Ramkissoon et al., 2019).

  
  

• Accurate Near-Miss Reporting is essential for prevention, with underreporting linked to higher injury rates (Al-Aubaidy et al., 2019)(Taylor Moore et al., 2013).

  
  

• Task-Oriented and Relational-Oriented Leadership styles are the most important contributors to workplace safety (Lyubykh et al., 2022)(Sparks, 2018).

  
  

• Training, Communication, and Ergonomic Risk Recognition are critical but often under-implemented, especially in construction (Dale & Evanoff, 2017)(Sparks, 2018).

  
  

Direct Answer to the Research Question

Beyond COR certification and OHSA compliance, the leading indicators that most strongly predict reductions in workplace injuries in Ontario’s construction and manufacturing sectors are:

1. Safety Management Systems (SMS) Quality and Implementation

2. Worker Engagement and Participation in Safety Activities

3. Psychological Safety

4. Accurate Near-Miss and Incident Reporting

5. Task-Oriented and Relational-Oriented Leadership

6. Comprehensive Training, Communication, and Ergonomic Risk Recognition

   
   

Recommendations

• Prioritize SMS and participatory safety structures in contractor prequalification and ongoing safety management.

• Foster psychological safety through leadership commitment and open communication.

• Implement robust near-miss reporting systems and address barriers to accurate reporting.

• Shift leadership development towards task- and relational-oriented styles.

• Integrate ergonomic surveillance and targeted training into safety programs, especially in construction.

• Standardize measurement and reporting of leading indicators to enable benchmarking and continuous improvement.

  
  

By focusing on these leading indicators, organizations in Ontario’s construction and manufacturing sectors can proactively reduce workplace injuries and foster a culture of safety excellence.

References

Manjourides, J., & Dennerlein, J. T. (2019). Testing the associations between leading and lagging indicators in a contractor safety pre‐qualification database. In American Journal of Industrial Medicine (Vol. 62, Issue 4, pp. 317–324). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22951

Carrivick, P. J. W., Lee, A. H., & Yau, K. K. W. (2002). Effectiveness of a Workplace Risk Assessment Team in Reducing the Rate, Cost, and Duration of Occupational Injury. In Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (Vol. 44, Issue 2, pp. 155–159). Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). https://doi.org/10.1097/00043764-200202000-00010

(2018). Psychological Safety. In Management. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199846740-0154

Ramkissoon, A., Smith, P., & Oudyk, J. (2019). Dissecting the effect of workplace exposures on workers’ rating of psychological health and safety. In American Journal of Industrial Medicine (Vol. 62, Issue 5, pp. 412–421). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22964

Al-Aubaidy, N. A., Caldas, C. H., & Mulva, S. P. (2019). Assessment of underreporting factors on construction safety incidents in US construction projects. In International Journal of Construction Management (Vol. 22, Issue 1, pp. 103–120). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1613211

Taylor Moore, J., Cigularov, K. P., Sampson, J. M., Rosecrance, J. C., & Chen, P. Y. (2013). Construction Workers’ Reasons for Not Reporting Work-Related Injuries: An Exploratory Study. In International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (Vol. 19, Issue 1, pp. 97–105). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2013.11076969

Lyubykh, Z., Turner, N., Hershcovis, M. S., & Deng, C. (2022). A meta-analysis of leadership and workplace safety: Examining relative importance, contextual contingencies, and methodological moderators. In Journal of Applied Psychology (Vol. 107, Issue 12, pp. 2149–2175). American Psychological Association (APA). https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000557

Sparks, J. (2018). Leadership Styles Manufacturing Business Managers Use to Reduce Workplace Injuries.

Dale, A. M., & Evanoff, B. (2017). 0166 Mismatch between surveillance of risks and recorded injuries in construction: integration of ergonomics into a comprehensive safety program. In Oral Presentation (p. A50.1-A50). BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2017-104636.134