Making Safety an Ongoing Part of the Construction Process Through ...

ISBN 1-886431-09-4.
© Copyright 1999-2005 IeJC. All Rights Reserved.
Trends and Current Best Practices in Construction Safety and Health.
Published 31 st August, 2005
MAKING SAFETY AN ONGOING PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION
PROCESS THROUGH PRE-TASK PLANNING
by Jimmie Hinze
In recent years, there has been a greater involvement of construction workers in the safety
process. This has been done successfully through several means, but very possibly the
most effective is pre-task safety planning, more commonly known as pre-task planning.
As the name implies, pre-task planning meetings are held immediately prior to
performing a specific task. Since tasks will vary in duration, it is possible for a crew to
have only one pre-task planning meeting on one day but to have four or five such
meetings on another day. These meetings are held at the crew level, generally led by the
foreman of the crew. The crew discusses the work to be performed and the hazards that
are likely to be encountered. The crew then modifies the work plan to try to eliminate
hazards or means are discussed by which the hazards can be avoided, possibly through
guards or the use of personal protective equipment. Research results have shown that
projects employing pre-task planning throughout the construction process have better
safety performances. This method, more than perhaps any other approach, brings the
workers into the decision-making process that directly impacts their own safety
performances.
Key Words: pre-task planning, safe work, worker involvement
Introduction
For many years the occurrence of injuries in the construction industry was considered to
be a natural part of constructing facilities. There have been accounts whereby it was
assumed that there would be a construction worker fatality for every storey of a high-rise
building to be constructed, for every mile of highway to be constructed, or every 1,000
feet of tunnel to be dug. These bear testimony to the way that safety was viewed in the
first half of the twentieth century, essentially that worker injuries and fatalities were
simply an accepted cost of the construction process. That view has fortunately vanished
to a great extent.
As an industry, safety was addressed to a limited extent in the 1970s, with the more
proactive firms conducting toolbox meetings on a regular basis and possibly promoting
safety incentive programs. Many construction firms began to implement substance abuse
testing programs as early as the 1980s. Many innovative safety promotion programs
were introduced in the 1990s, including worker observation programs, worker safety

perception surveys, root cause analyses of near misses, pre-task planning, and a host of
other techniques. Of these, perhaps the most significant approach for improving safety
was pre-task planning.
What is a pre-task planning meeting?
Pre-task safety planning meetings, most commonly referred to as pre-task planning
meetings, have been known to be employed to a limited extent in the construction
industry for the past three decades, but the broader use of this technique began in the
early 1990s. The technique is in especially wide used on industrial construction projects,
with only a few instances of the use of pre-task planning on commercial building
projects.
As the name implies, pre-task planning meetings are meetings that are held before tasks
are actually performed. It is common for such meetings to be attended by all members of
a particular work crew. Before the crew begins to perform a particular task, a pre-task
planning meeting will be held. These meetings are generally conducted by the first-line
supervisor or foreman, but the meeting might also be conducted by a lead person or a
crew member who has more authority and experience.
The initial purpose of the meeting is to review the work plan. This is done to ensure that
all of the crewmembers have a consistent view of how the work will be performed. This
will ensure that each of the workers has the same expectation of how the particular task
will be undertaken. Note that this type of discussion is also important for productivity, as
all workers must have the same view of how the work will be done and they must all
know how the work assignments will be distributed among the crewmembers.
After the general work plan has been discussed, it is then important to consider the safety
and health aspects of the task to be performed. This is when it is vital to identify the
major hazards that might be inherent in the proposed work or hazards that might arise if
certain events take place. To identify the hazards or potential hazards, it is important for
each of the workers to ask, “How might someone be injured with the proposed procedure
of performing the work task?” This question must be answered with due regard to such
variables as the materials being used, the tools/equipment being used, the knowledge of
the crew, location of the work, the conditions of the worksite, the cohesiveness of the
crew, and a host of other conditions that might pose potential hazards.
All of the hazards that the crewmembers can identify are discussed at the pre-task
planning meeting. The crew will then try to devise ways of eliminating the hazards
whenever possible. This may be done by changing the basic approach to performing the
work or by rearranging the sequence of performing the work activities. Different tools
and equipment might also be utilized to reduce or eliminate the hazards. When the
hazards cannot be eliminated, safeguards must then be considered. This might include
the erection of guardrails if work is performed at elevation. It may also mandate the use
of personal protective equipment when certain hazards cannot be eliminated. The key
issue in the pre-task planning meetings is that every member of the crew must carefully

consider all the potential hazards that might be encountered when performing a particular
task.
By having the crewmembers carefully thinking through the work procedure, it will be
easier for the crew to become aware of the major hazards, and in most cases to
satisfactorily address them in some manner. This meeting of the minds of the workers
will then serve as a means of guiding the workers in the performance of the planned task.
After the task is performed, the crew will then be faced with the next task. Regardless of
the length of time required to perform the task, the crew will eventually be faced with a
subsequent task to perform. This is also when it will be necessary for the crew to again
convene a pre-task planning meeting. The same basic procedure is followed for each task
that is to be performed by the crew. As a result, a crew might have a single pre-task
planning meeting in a work day or the crew might have several pre-task planning
meetings in a single day.
Pre-task Planning Forms
It is common to document the contents of the results of pre-task planning meetings.
There are no universal standardized pre-task planning forms in the construction industry,
but some features appear on most of the many forms that are used in the industry. For
example, it is common for the form to consist of a many items that can simply be checked
off. This reduces the paperwork burden for the scribe who documents the pre-task
planning meetings. Most forms will contain information regarding the date, the identity
of the individual completing the form, and the task to be performed as described in a brief
narrative.
The form may also ask for information about the materials needed to perform the task
and the equipment or tools that will be needed to install the materials. The materials may
be inherently dangerous and this can generally be ascertained by reviewing the material
safety data sheet (MSDS) for each material being installed. The tools and/or equipment
may also be dangerous if precautions are not taken. The narrative of the work procedure
must also be examined to identify any significant hazards that are inherent in the
proposed work plan. Some forms will include a list of various hazards that are
commonly encountered. Since the types of hazards will vary for different types of
projects, it is understandable that the forms for firms performing different types of work
will reflect those differences. The form should serve as a guide on how to identify safety
concerns.
After the crew has identified the hazards, the crew must try to devise alternative
approaches that will be safer means of accomplishing the planned work. If the hazards
are significant and they cannot be readily reduced, the crew members must consider
alternative approaches for performing the work. In other words, can the work be
performed in another manner that does not expose the workers to serious hazards? The
crew might consider using different materials, equipment or tools that do not pose the
same hazards.

After the crew has devised its final version of the work plan, it must then address the
residual risks that are associated with the work to be done. Engineering solutions will be
among those considered. For example, hazards associated with elevated work might be
diminished with the installation of guardrails, covers might be placed over floor/roof
openings, etc. After these modifications have been made, there may still be hazards
which cannot be eliminated. For these, it may be necessary to provide personal
protective equipment (PPE) to protect the workers.
Once there is full agreement on how to safely perform the work, all the participating
individuals will sign the form. Generally, this form is then posted in the work area prior
to beginning to execute the task. This posting is done so the form can be examined by
any project personnel, including the project manager, job superintendent, and safety
manager,. Since the pre-task form is posted, it is generally made of heavy stock paper to
ensure greater durability.
A sample pre-task planning form is shown in Figure 1. This form is fairly extensive in
the type of information that it captures. Most forms that are in use today are shorter and
perhaps simpler in format. The form that is shown was developed by examining various
pre-task planning forms that are currently being used by various contractors.
Role of Pre-Task Planning During Task Execution
While there may be an inclination to regard the process to be completed after the pre-task
planning form is posted, this is not the case. When the pre-task plan was developed,
some basic assumptions were made about the conditions that would be existent during
task performance. As the task is being performed, there should be a reassessment about
the validity of the initial assumptions. If there are significant deviations from the
assumptions, there should be an immediate “stand down” of the task operations until a
thorough evaluation has been made. In some instances, it may be necessary to alter the
pre-task plan. Some pre-task planning forms contain space to address minor changes in
the work plan. Naturally, if the initial assumptions were accurate, the work can proceed
without interruption.
The Post-Task Assessment
After the task is completed, there should be an evaluation of the pre-task plan. That is, it
is important to document any lessons learned. If any incidents (injuries or near misses)
occurred, these should be carefully documented. Preventative approaches should also be
described in the event that a similar task is performed in the future. If better procedures
are recognized, these should also be documented (see Figure 2).
After the task is completed and a post-task evaluation is documented, the pre-task
planning forms are filed. The information may still have lasting value, even if the task
has been successfully completed. For example, after a few months on a project, several
hundred pre-task planning forms may have been accumulated. It may be of some value
to evaluate the aggregate pre-task planning forms. For example, certain hazardous
materials may be identified in several different forms or there may be repeating notes
about improper tools or equipment. When there is a consistent recurrence of these types,

some consideration might be given to avoid them in the future. Any comments about
lessons learned might also be consolidated to see if there are any consistent patterns that
might provide valuable insights.

Pre-Task Planning Form
Prepared By: _______________________
Supervisor: ___________________________
Task/ Activity:_________________________
Project: __________________________________
Date: _____________
Location:_________________________________
Potential Hazards Present
Excavations / Trenches Hazardous Materials Vehicles / Equipment
Elevated Work: Falls Water Confined Space
Elevated Work: Public Exposure Open to Below
Leading Edge Air Quality / Vapors Chemicals (Burns, Inhalation,etc.)
Fire / Heat Lighting Temperature
Flying Particles / Debris Electricity Noise
Other
Hazard Elimination
Protective Clothing Head Protection Eye / Face Protection
Ear Protection Respirator Safety Lanyard / Harness
Fire Protection Slope / Shore / T- Flagmen / Audible Warning
Adequate Eyewash / Shower Restrict Area
Additional Lighting Floatation Device Toeboards / Barricades / Rails
Other
Items To Be Verified
PPE Present MSDS First-Aid Kit
Emergency Plan Reviewed Supervision Present First-Aid Training
Permitting Obtained Lockout / Tagout Immidiate Response
Safety Equipment Present Safety Guards Others Informed
Other
Figure 1. Example of a Pre-Task Planning Form

Description of procedure to perform task: ______________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Scope of work communicated to each worker: Yes No
All known hazards have been addressed in task plan: Yes No
Conflict with other trades addressed: Yes No
Proper safety equipment on site and available: Yes No
Proper tools and materials on site and available: Yes No
Applicable permits have been issued: Yes No
excavation confined space Hot work (welding)
crane lockout/tagout
Other: ____________________________
Nature of work communicated to others in the area: Yes No
Persons responsible for actions are assigned: Yes No
Comments:
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Signatures of persons performing the work
(By signing this form, crew members indicate that they understand the task plan and feel
fully prepared to proceed to perform the work safely.)
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Prominently post the pre-task plan in work area as the task is being performed
Figure 1. Example of a Pre-Task Planning Form (continued)

Post-Task Completion Review
Date: ________ Time: _______
Task is completed Yes No
Work area has been cleaned up: Yes No
Locks and tags have been removed: Yes No Not Applicable
Permit has been turned in: Yes No Not Applicable
Comments (if any an answer above is “No”, please comment):
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Did any incidents occur? Yes No
If yes, describe: ___________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
What should be done differently, if this task is repeated?
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Lessons learned: _________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Completed Form Submitted by: ________________________________
(Signature)
____________________________________________________________________
Figure 2. Example of Information Contained in Post-Task Review Forms

Maintaining Close Monitoring of the Process
Pre-task planning meetings can be effective if all the crewmembers regard the process as
an important component of maintaining jobsite safety performance. Despite the best
intentions of companies, there may be a temptation by some workers to use shortcuts
without going through the formal pre-task planning process. This might occur when the
task is one that the foreman has seen performed many times. There are instances where
foremen have simply photo-copied pre-task planning forms. When this occurs, the
foremen have clearly compromised the process. This is to be avoided as the safety of the
workers is at stake.
One safety professional recounted an instance in which he was walking the jobsite and
came upon a worker in the lunch area. The lunch hour had passed, and this one worker
was busily performing some paperwork. When he approached the worker, he could see
that he was completing a pre-task planning form. He was doing this by copying from
another pre-task planning form that had been used the prior week. In fact, he had several
blank forms that were being filled out in this manner. This was being done in response to
direct instructions from the worker’s foreman.
Another safety professional indicated that it is important to review the pre-task planning
forms that are posted. He had encountered situations in which it was clear that the forms
were “pencil whipped,” meaning that the forms were filled out without actually
conducting a serious meeting of the crew. This was apparent because the form had items
checked off that were not relevant. For example, for a hand excavation task for a small
concrete pad, the form had checked off that the fire extinguisher was properly positioned.
For this task, there was no need for fire protection and there was, in fact, no fire
extinguisher in the area. It was apparent that items had been checked off without actually
considering their relevance to the task being performed.
How can abuses of the pre-task planning forms be avoided? First of all, the first step is to
fully inform the foremen and the crewmembers about the importance of thoroughly
adhering to the pre-task planning process for every task that is to be performed. Second,
a no tolerance attitude should be exhibited when abuses are noted, and this may result in
drastic decisions being made on some occasions. Of course, if the foremen are informed
about the value of the information and that it is reviewed after the tasks are completed,
there may be a greater adherence to the process. The best motivator should be that the
well being of the workers will be ensured when the pre-task planning is taken seriously
for every task that is performed.
Pre-Task Planning Impacts Safety Performance
The essential concept behind the use of pre-task planning is that the workers become
directly involved in the safety process. The workers are placed in a position of being
responsible for their own well-being. Since every task is preceded by a pre-task planning
meeting, the issue of safety is continually be stressed and emphasized. This eventually
has the effect of making safety an integral part of the work being performed. In other
words, safety becomes a natural component of performing the work.

How much does pre-task planning impact safety performance. Results of recent research
studies in construction safety indicate that the impact is significant. Those projects
reporting that pre-task planning meetings are implemented on site reported better safety
performances than those projects without such practice (see Figure 3). Because of
findings such as these, it has been alleged that pre-task planning meetings are among the
most important safety techniques that can be implemented on construction sites.
7
6
Study of Large Projects
Study of Shutdown Projecs
5
Relative RIR
4
3
2
1
0
Yes
No
Is pretask planning a regular part of the project planning?
Figure 3. Pretask Planning and Safety Performance (Source: Hinze 2002, Hinze and Godfrey
2002)
Summary and Conclusions
The pre-task planning meetings have been proven to be effective in reducing workplace
injuries. While there are many variations of conducting pre-task planning meetings, the
principles that are to be followed are quite similar. The fundamentals about conducting
pre-task planning meetings are that the workers conduct a systematic assessment about
the task to be performed, decide on how the work will be done, identify the hazards that
might be encountered in the process, and devise means by which the hazards can be
minimized or eliminated. According to this general concept, when these steps are
consistently followed, the work procedure will be performed in a safe manner.
Recommendations
The success that construction firms have had with implementing pre-task planning
meetings demonstrates that this is a process that should be adopted more widely. Since

the early 1990s, pre-task planning has been adopted more aggressively by construction
firms in the industrial sector and to a lesser extent on commercial construction projects.
All sectors of the construction should recognize the value of pre-task planning and
aggressively adopt the process on their construction projects.
References
Hinze, J. 2002. “Safety Plus: Making Zero Injuries a Reality” Construction Industry
Institute, Research Report 160-11, The University of Texas at Austin.
Hinze, J. and R. Godfrey. 2002. “Making Zero Injuries a Reality: Focus on Shutdowns,
Turnarounds, and Outages,” Construction Industry Institute, Research Report 160A-11,
The University of Texas at Austin.