Most of our action tracking system customers work with other companies - in either a client or subcontractor role. This often means that actions are being allocated between organisations with supporting approval workflows which can involve several points of contact in each organisation. Making this process work smoothly can be tricky since contractors are often essential to delivering work, yet they may operate under different management systems, cultures and priorities.
Define clear expectations
Where expectations are not clearly defined or monitored, risk tends to increase, particularly at the interfaces between client and contractor operations. Shared action management plays a critical role in addressing these challenges by providing a structured, transparent way to set expectations, track performance and ensure issues are properly resolved.
Clear HSE expectations are the foundation of effective contractor management. Before work begins, clients typically define requirements through contracts, prequalification processes, method statements and inductions. However, expectations are only meaningful if they are reinforced during execution. Shared actions translate high-level requirements into specific, practical tasks that can be assigned, tracked and verified. For example, an expectation around safe lifting practices becomes a defined action to review lifting plans, train relevant personnel or inspect lifting equipment. When these actions are visible to both client and contractor, there is far less ambiguity about what is required and who is responsible.
Adopt a shared action framework
Shared actions also support consistency. In complex projects involving multiple contractors, it is common to see uneven application of standards. One contractor might address issues promptly while another struggles, leading to variable risk levels across the site. A shared action framework allows the client to apply the same approach to tracking observations and non-conformances across all contractors. This creates a common language and expectation around how issues are managed, without requiring every organisation to abandon its own internal systems.
Monitoring the close-out of safety observations and non-conformances is another area where shared actions add significant value. Safety observations, audit findings and incident investigations frequently generate actions that cross organisational boundaries. An unsafe condition identified by the client may require contractor input to resolve, while a contractor-led investigation may highlight changes needed in client procedures or site controls. Without a shared view of actions, these issues can fall into gaps between organisations, with each assuming the other is managing the problem.
A shared action process ensures that all parties can see the status of relevant actions, including what has been completed, what is overdue and what is awaiting verification. This visibility supports timely follow-up and reduces the likelihood of actions being forgotten once the immediate attention from an inspection or incident has passed. Importantly, it also reinforces accountability. When responsibilities are clearly assigned and visible, it becomes harder for actions to drift or be closed prematurely without proper resolution.
Define verification responsibilities
Verification is a critical but often weak point in action management. Actions are sometimes marked complete based on assumptions rather than evidence, particularly when multiple organisations are involved. Shared actions allow verification responsibilities to be clearly defined, ensuring that the party with the appropriate authority or competence confirms that the issue has been effectively addressed. This might involve the client verifying that a contractor has implemented agreed controls, or a contractor confirming that client-provided conditions have been corrected. This structured verification process helps ensure that actions genuinely reduce risk rather than simply creating the appearance of compliance.
Interface Management is key
Reducing risk at the interfaces between client and contractor operations is perhaps the most important benefit of shared action management. Many serious incidents occur not because a single organisation failed, but because of misalignment between parties. Gaps in communication, unclear responsibilities or conflicting assumptions about who controls a particular risk can all contribute to accidents. Interface risks are particularly common during handovers, simultaneous operations, changes in scope or emergency situations.
Shared actions help manage these interface risks by making dependencies explicit. An action can clearly state that one party must complete a task before another can proceed, such as isolating equipment, providing access permits or confirming environmental conditions. When these dependencies are visible to all relevant parties, coordination improves and unsafe assumptions are less likely. This is especially important where work is dynamic and conditions change rapidly.
Improved visibility increases trust and accountability
Trust is another critical factor in client–contractor relationships, and shared action management supports its development. When contractors can see that actions raised against them are fair, clearly defined and consistently applied, perceptions of bias or unfair treatment are reduced. Equally, when clients can see contractors taking ownership of actions and providing evidence of close-out, confidence in contractor capability increases. This mutual visibility helps move the relationship away from adversarial oversight towards collaborative risk management.
At the same time, shared actions must be supported by appropriate access controls. Not all information should be visible to all parties, particularly where commercial sensitivity or personal data is involved. Effective systems allow organisations to share what is necessary for safe and compliant operations while protecting confidential information. This balance is essential for maintaining trust and meeting legal obligations, especially in multi-contractor environments.
Shared data provides clarity and insight
Shared action data also provides valuable insight for continuous improvement. By analysing trends in observations and non-conformances across contractors, clients can identify recurring issues, weaknesses in induction or supervision, or systemic problems in planning and coordination. This information can then be used to improve contractor selection, training and engagement strategies, rather than repeatedly addressing the same issues through reactive actions.
For contractors, shared actions offer clarity and structure. They provide a clear record of what has been raised, what is expected and how success will be measured. This can reduce rework, prevent misunderstandings and support more efficient use of resources. Contractors that actively engage with shared action processes are often better positioned to demonstrate their HSE performance and professionalism, strengthening their relationship with clients.
Ultimately, shared action management is not about shifting responsibility or increasing administrative burden. When designed and applied effectively, it is a practical tool for aligning expectations, strengthening communication and managing risk where it is most complex. By providing a transparent, structured approach to managing safety observations, non-conformances and improvement actions, organisations can significantly reduce the likelihood of issues falling through organisational gaps.
In environments where clients and contractors work side by side, risk does not respect organisational boundaries. Shared actions acknowledge this reality and provide a mechanism for managing it. By using shared action tracking to set clear expectations, monitor meaningful close-out and address interface risks, organisations can improve HSE performance not just within individual companies, but across the entire operational system
