Effective leadership and governance in health, safety and environmental management depend on understanding risk, not just recording activity. Action tracking systems generate large volumes of data, but too often that data is used only to answer a narrow question: are actions closed or overdue? While completion rates have a place, they offer limited insight into whether risk is actually being reduced. Managers and senior leaders can gain far more value by using action tracking data to identify patterns, systemic weaknesses and priorities for intervention.
Look beyond the data
At a basic level, action tracking provides assurance that issues raised through incidents, audits, inspections or observations are being addressed. For leaders, this visibility supports governance by demonstrating that the organisation has mechanisms in place to respond to identified risks. However, focusing solely on whether actions are closed can create a false sense of security. An organisation may show high completion rates while underlying hazards, behaviours or system weaknesses remain unchanged.
Meaningful leadership use of action data starts with understanding where actions come from. Clusters of actions arising from the same type of event, location or activity often point to deeper issues. For example, repeated actions related to permit compliance, isolation failures or contractor supervision suggest that existing controls are not effective or not being applied consistently. Leaders who look beyond individual actions and ask why similar issues keep recurring are better placed to drive real improvement.
Quality is a critical indicator
Action quality is another critical governance indicator. Vague actions, poorly defined responsibilities or unrealistic deadlines often indicate weak problem definition or insufficient ownership. Senior leaders reviewing action data should pay attention to how actions are written and verified, not just whether they are marked complete. Poor-quality actions tend to result in superficial fixes, which allow risk to re-emerge. Consistently strong actions, by contrast, usually reflect a more mature approach to risk management and learning.
Action lifecycles tell a story
Action tracking data can also highlight organisational capacity and resource constraints. A growing backlog of overdue actions, particularly in certain departments or sites, may indicate competing priorities, insufficient competence or under-resourcing. Rather than treating overdue actions as individual failures, leaders can use this information to make informed decisions about where additional support, training or investment is required. This shifts the conversation from blame to capability.
Another important leadership insight comes from understanding action ageing and dependency. Actions that remain open for long periods often involve complex changes, multiple stakeholders or high-risk interfaces. These actions can represent residual risk that remains unmanaged for extended periods. By reviewing long-running actions and their dependencies, leaders can identify where decision-making is stalled or where cross-functional coordination is breaking down. Intervening at this level is often more effective than pushing for faster closure across the board.
Trend analysis across time is particularly valuable for governance. Improvements should be reflected not only in fewer actions, but in changes to the types of actions being raised. A shift from reactive actions following incidents towards proactive actions arising from risk assessments or safety observations may indicate a strengthening safety culture. Conversely, an increase in actions linked to repeat incidents or regulatory findings may signal declining control. These trends help leaders assess whether strategic HSE objectives are being met in practice.
All actions are not created equal !
Action tracking data also supports prioritisation of risk. Not all actions carry the same significance, yet they are often treated equally in reporting. Senior leaders should encourage classification of actions by risk, criticality or potential consequence. This allows attention to be focused where it matters most and prevents high-risk issues being lost among large volumes of low-impact actions. Governance discussions then become centred on risk exposure rather than task management.
Action data and lessons learned
There is also an important link between action tracking and learning. Actions associated with investigations and reviews should feed back into standards, procedures and training where appropriate. Leaders can use action data to test whether lessons are actually being embedded or whether the organisation is repeatedly addressing symptoms rather than causes. When the same corrective actions appear again and again, it is often a sign that learning is not being effectively translated into systemic change.
For senior leaders, visibility of action data across the organisation provides a powerful tool for consistency. Differences in action volumes, quality or closure performance between sites or business units may reflect varying levels of maturity or leadership engagement. Used constructively, this information supports targeted leadership attention and sharing of good practice, rather than simplistic comparisons or league tables.
Leadership is key
Leadership behaviour shapes how action tracking is perceived throughout the organisation. When leaders focus only on numbers and deadlines, action tracking becomes a compliance exercise. But when they ask thoughtful questions about trends, causes and effectiveness, action tracking becomes a learning and risk management tool. The questions asked signal what really matters.
Effective use of action tracking data also strengthens accountability at the right level. Rather than holding individuals to account for isolated overdue actions, leaders can hold management teams accountable for addressing systemic weaknesses that generate actions in the first place. This aligns accountability with control and influence, which is fundamental to good governance.
In mature organisations, action tracking supports strategic decision-making. It provides evidence to justify investment in engineering controls, organisational change or capability development. It helps leaders balance operational pressures with long-term risk reduction. It also connects day-to-day issues raised on the frontline with board-level oversight of risk.
If it is used well, action tracking is a rich source of intelligence about how an organisation manages risk. Managers and senior leaders who move beyond completion rates and engage with the underlying story in the data are better equipped to identify systemic issues, prioritise resources and demonstrate effective HSE leadership and governance.
