Beyond Injury Rates: Understanding Leading vs. Lagging Indicators

Many organizations rely heavily on injury rates and incident statistics to measure safety performance. While these lagging indicators—such as recordable injuries, lost time incidents, and claim frequency—provide important information, they only reflect what has already occurred. By the time these metrics change, an incident has already happened. Relying solely on lagging indicators limits an organization’s ability to proactively manage risk and prevent future incidents.

Leading indicators, on the other hand, focus on activities and behaviors that help prevent incidents before they occur. These may include safety observations, near-miss reporting, training participation, safety audits, hazard corrections, and employee engagement in safety programs. Tracking leading indicators provides insight into how well safety systems are functioning and whether risk controls are being actively applied in day-to-day operations. When used consistently, these metrics help organizations identify emerging risks early and take corrective action.

An effective safety performance program balances both leading and lagging indicators. Lagging indicators help measure outcomes, while leading indicators guide prevention efforts and continuous improvement. Organizations that shift their focus beyond injury rates and invest in meaningful leading indicators are better positioned to reduce incidents, improve safety culture, and achieve sustainable safety performance over time.