JOB ANALYSIS STUDY FOR CERTIFIED SAFETY PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATIONS

BCSP Technical Report 2001-1 February 2001

Board of Certified Safety Professionals 208 Burwash Avenue Savoy, IL 61874 with assistance from Columbia Assessment Services, Inc. Research Triangle Park, NC

CONTENTS Purpose and Background Methods Results Conclusions Examination Blueprints Implementation Appendices A. Survey Questionnaire B. Final Examination Blueprint 1 3 7 19 20 23

Purpose and Background The purpose of this study was to update the blueprints for the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examinations which the Board of Certified Safety Professionals (BCSP) use to evaluate the knowledge and skills of professional safety practitioners prior to awarding them the Certified Safety Professional (CSP) designation. The purpose of this report is to provide a summary document which explains the procedures used, results obtained and the resulting examination blueprints. Peer operated certification boards set standards for the practice for which certification is awarded and evaluate candidates against those standards. Most often, certification boards set three types of standards: education or training, experience, and demonstrated knowledge and skills through examinations. When testing candidates for a certification, the examination must cover that subject material which is relevant to the practice for which certification is awarded. This is called content validity. Examination must be fair for certification candidates. Testing standards published by national peer certification accreditation bodies and the American Psychological Association specify that content validity be verified periodically to ensure that certification examinations are current with practice. The standards and psychometric literature also cover methodologies which are appropriate. Since the inception of the Certified Safety Professional designation in 1969 and the initial examinations which began in 1972, the Board of Certified Safety Professionals has relied on psychometricians and recognized firms providing psychometric services to lead content validity studies relating to professional safety practice. The results have provided a basis for the Certified Safety Professional examination blueprints. During the period from 1990 to 1992, BCSP conducted studies to update the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examination leading to the CSP designation. BCSP also completed validation studies at that time for specialty examinations which candidates could choose as an alternate to the Comprehensive Practice Examination when pursuing the CSP. Those specialty examinations covered the same subjects as the Comprehensive Practice Examination, but differed in the portion of the examination questions devoted to each subject and in the contexts included in some questions. The current study was initiated in 1998 and was completed late in 1999. Results were evaluated by the BCSP Board of Directors and final examination blueprints were approved in November 1999 so that question banks could be updated in preparation for implementation of new editions of the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examinations. This study involved a major change in blueprint structure for the CSP examinations. Content validity studies can be organized around subjects relevant to practice or establish the functions and 1

tasks which practitioners perform and then define the subjects or knowledge and skills applicable to each function and task. Today, the trend is to define what people do and the applicable knowledge and skills for job tasks when developing examination blueprints. Until this study and the examination editions which will result from it, BCSP had used a subject-based outline for its examination blueprints. This study followed procedures which result in a functional-based examination blueprint. In conducting this study BCSP relied on the psychometric staff of Columbia Assessment Services to conduct most of the tasks necessary to complete the study. Board of Certified Safety Professionals staff assisted with some of the tasks. The Board of Certified Safety Professionals is especially grateful to the many professional safety practitioners who volunteered their time to serve on the panel of experts and to complete validations surveys.

Method The study involved three phases. The first was a job analysis study. The second was a pilot survey. The third was a comprehensive survey. Phase 1. Job Analysis BCSP selected a panel of sixteen experts in professional safety practice to participate in a three-day job analysis workshop conducted in the Chicago, IL area in November 1998. Psychometricians from Columbia Assessment Services, Inc. led the workshop. The group initially defined the major functions (domains) which make up professional safety practice. Then the group developed tasks statements (responsibilities) to define what practitioners do to accomplish the functions. Finally, the group developed statements which detail the knowledge and skills required to perform the tasks (responsibilities). The process moved at a deliberate pace, since the workshop leaders required the group to reach consensus at each stage. The process was a modified nominal group technique. After developing domain and responsibility statements, the panel of experts rated each domain and responsibility on three characteristics: importance in practice, frequency of performance, and criticality (the degree to which inability to perform the responsibility would cause harm to the client, public, etc.). The ratings were used to verify that the domains and responsibilities were significant for professional safety practice. The rating scales for each of the three evaluations appear in the table below. Importance 1. Not important 2. Somewhat important 3. Important 4. Very important 5. Extremely important Frequency 1. Never 2. Rarely 3. Infrequently 4. Frequently 5. Repetitively Criticality 1. No harm 2. Minimal harm 3. Moderate harm 4. Significant harm 5. Extreme harm

The job analysis provided a description of the responsibilities critical to competent performance of professional safety work. The resulting knowledge and skills link the responsibilities to the examination questions developed around the knowledge and skills. The examinations then evaluate whether candidates have the knowledge and skills necessary to competently perform the responsibilities of professional safety practice. The group considered whether there were differences between those entering professional safety practice and those with at least four years of experience. The expert panel could find no significant differences in the domains, responsibilities, knowledge and skills applicable to the two groups of practitioners, those with qualifications required for the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive 3

Practice Examinations, respectively. The resulting blueprint defines practice for the two groups. The model qualifications are an accredited bachelors degree in safety for Safety Fundamentals Examination candidates and holding such a degree plus having four years of professional safety experience beyond a bachelors degree in safety for Comprehensive Practice Examination candidates. The sixteen experts who participated on the panel represented a cross section of practice. They varied in educational background, job roles, gender, type of employer, geographic location and other factors. They represented construction, mining, aerospace, government, healthcare, education, insurance, process industry, transportation, utilities, manufacturing, labor, consulting, and other employment settings. They lived in locations scattered across the United States. Participants had degrees at differing levels and from a variety of fields. Phase 2. Pilot Survey In this phase of the study, Columbia Assessment Service psychometricians developed a survey instrument consisting of two major sections. The first included demographic questions. The second section covered ratings of domains and responsibilities. The ratings were similar to those applied by the job analysis panel of experts, addressing importance, frequency and criticality. The survey questionnaire also contained definitions and descriptions for reference by respondents. There were actually two versions of the questionnaire, one for individuals holding the Associate Safety Professional (ASP) designation and one for those holding the Certified Safety Professional (CSP) designation. The importance ratings included the following choices: Performance of tasks in this domain is not essential to the job performance of the minimally competent safety professional. 2. Somewhat Important Performance of tasks in this domain is minimally essential to the job performance of the minimally competent safety professional. 3. Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is moderately essential to the job performance of the minimally competent safety professional. 4. Very Important. Performance of tasks in this domain is clearly essential to the job performance of the minimally competent safety professional. 5. Extremely Important Performance of tasks in this domain is absolutely essential to the job performance of the minimally competent safety professional. The criticality ratings included the following choices: 1. No harm 2. Minimal Harm Inability to perform tasks in this domain would have no adverse consequences. Inability to perform tasks in this domain would lead to error with minimal adverse consequences. 4 1. Not Important.

3. Moderate Harm 4. Significant Harm. 5. Extreme Harm

Inability to perform tasks in this domain would lead to error with moderate adverse consequences. Inability to perform tasks in this domain would lead to error with major adverse consequences. Inability to perform tasks in this domain would definitely lead to error with catastrophic consequences.

The frequency ratings asked respondents to estimate the percent of time safety professionals spend performing duties associated with each performance domain. The portions were to sum to 100% of the respondents time. Some demographic information allowed for analysis to verify that the survey respondents represented all major practice settings, geographic regions, and experience levels. Columbia Assessment Services sent the pilot surveys to 225 CSPs and 175 ASPs. Columbia Assessment Service received 139 questionnaires from CSPs, a 61.8% response rate, and 59 from ASPs, a 33.7% response rate. The responses were analyzed and used to improve readability and to provide additional explanatory information for parts of the survey. Phase 3. Comprehensive Survey Because the job analysis workshop panel of experts may not perceive professional safety practice the same way as other practitioners, the validation ratings were collected from a wide range of practitioners with varying backgrounds. The validation survey produced ratings from practitioners which could be compared to the expert panel and to establish the examination blueprint. After making some modifications to the survey questionnaire used in Phase 2, Columbia Assessment Services sent copies to a much larger group of ASPs and CSPs than in Phase 2. 350 ASPs and 1725 CSPs received the surveys. 994 CSPs (58%) and 128 ASPs (37%) returned completed questionnaires. The final survey instrument appears in Appendix A. There were actually two editions, one for CSPs and one for ASPs. Only one is reproduced, since differences were relatively minor. The survey sample included individuals from all geographic regions of the United States, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The sample also represented a variety of practice settings. The sample included individuals with varying levels of education and years of experience. The questionnaire data from ASPs was analyzed separately from CSP data. Data from the pilot study was not included in the analysis of comprehensive survey data. Most demographic information was analyzed using simple frequency tables. Some demographic data allowed for computation of means. Columbia Assessment Service analyzed the validation scales for reliability using Cronbachs Alpha procedure. The purpose was to determine how well the responsibilities consistently measured the 5

domain of interest. The reliability assessment measures the degree to which responses on the scales are internally consistent and coefficients can range from 0 to 1. Coefficients above 0.7 meet minimum standards of acceptability. Mean scores for importance, frequency and criticality ratings were computed from individual ratings. Mean scores were computed for each of the two groups of respondents and for a number of demographic characteristics. Columbia Assessment Services also computed recommended allocation (in percentages) of test questions to each domain and responsibility. The procedure involved multiplying importance and criticality ratings and then adding frequency ratings. These percentages are used to determine the number of questions from the entire examination which should appear in any domain or responsibility. The method ensures a strong link between the job analysis study and the test blueprint. The computed recommendations were modified somewhat by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals Directors to arrive at the final examination blueprint (see Appendix B). The Directors approved reducing the portion of the examination devoted to Domain 4 (Professional Conduct and Ethics), thus reallocating some of the examination that was recommended for Domain 4 to the other domains. The decision was based on the recognition that Domain 4 was given an overly large value in light of the ability to prepare questions which are suitable for assessing Domain 4.

RESULTS Phase 1. Job Analysis Workshop The result of the job analysis workshop was an outline of professional safety practice involving three levels of statements: Domains (main job functions) Responsibilities (primary tasks comprising the domains) Knowledge statements which represent what one should know in order to be effective in performing a responsibility Skills statements which represent what one should be able to do in order to be effective in performing a responsibility The complete outline appears in Appendix B, but does not include the recommended percentages of the examination questions to be allocated to each responsibility. The four domains are as follows: Domain 1. Domain 2. Domain 3. Domain 4. Safety, Health and Environmental Management. Safety, Health and Environmental Engineering. Safety, Health and Environmental Information Management and Communication. Professional Conduct and Ethics.

A key result of this phase was a recognition on the part of the expert panel that there were no significant differences between domains and responsibilities for someone qualifying to take the Safety Fundamentals Examination compared to someone qualifying to take the Comprehensive Practice Examination. To qualify for the Safety Fundamentals Examination and achieve the interim designation as an Associate Safety Professional (ASP), one must either present the model safety bachelors degree (an accredited safety bachelors degree from a regionally accredited U.S. college or university) and no experience or present a combination of another acceptable associate or bachelors degree and acceptable professional safety experience. To qualify for the Comprehensive Practice Examination, one must hold the ASP (or certain equivalents) and have four years of acceptable professional safety experience not used to qualify for the Safety Fundamentals Examination. The key difference in qualifying for the Comprehensive Practice Examination is four years of acceptable professional safety experience. As a result, the outlines for both examinations are identical. Another result in this phase and ultimately in the final examination blueprints is a shift from subjectbased examination blueprints to functional-based examination blueprints. The subjects defining knowledge and skills still appear, but occur within each responsibility. The subjects which appeared in previous examination blueprints are likely to be distributed across domains and responsibilities, rather than being grouped together as in a subject-based blueprint.

Phase 2. Pilot Survey The results of the pilot study are not reported here, since they were used to determine whether the survey instruments were functioning properly and to identify where changes should be made prior to completing the comprehensive survey. Phase 3. Comprehensive Survey After compiling validation survey data from the 994 CSPs and 194 ASPs, Columbia Assessment Services compiled demographic results for the demographic section of the survey. Then they checked responsibilities for internal consistency with domains using reliability scores. That was followed by comparing ratings of survey respondents to ratings of the expert panel with regard to importance, criticality and frequency. The goal was to validate the expert panels ratings. Then, ratings were evaluated for a range of demographics to ensure that there were no significant impacts of demographics on domains and responsibilities. Finally, the recommended distribution of examination questions was computed. Demographic Results The tables which follow provide the key results for each question included in the demographic section of each survey questionnaire. The tables include separate results for CSPs and ASPs. 1. Gender Male Female 2. Age (years) Range Mean CSP 90% 10% CSP 27-79 46.4 ASP 89% 11% ASP 23-58 34.0 CSP 47 ASP 38

3. State of Residence # states and territories

4. Years Certification Held CSP ASP Range 0-39 0-6 Mean 9.5 2.0

5. Examination Used to Achieve the CSP CSP Not applicable, I hold the ASP --Waiver (CIH, PE, etc.) 3.5% Comprehensive Practice 65.4% (Incl. single level exam) Management Aspects 24.0% Engineering Aspects 2.5% System Safety Aspects 2.1% Construction Safety Aspects 2.3% Product Safety Aspects 0.1% 6. Since achieving certification as a CSP, which of the following BCSP examinations have you passed? CSP None 94.9% Comprehensive Practice 3.8% Management Aspects 0.8% Engineering Aspects 0.2% System Safety Aspects 0.1% Construction Safety Aspects 0.1% Product Safety Aspects 0.1% 7. Besides ASP or CSP, which of the following professional credentials do you hold? (Select all that apply.) CSP ASP CPSM 0.7% 0.0% ALCM 5.2% 0.8% CRSP 0.2% 0.0% ARM 10.0% 1.6% EMT 2.8% 8.6% CFPS 0.6% 0.8% State Bar 0.7% 0.0% CHCM 3.1% 0.8% MD License 0.0% 0.0% CHP 0.5% 0.0% OHST 2.7% 10.2% CHSP 0.6% 1.6% PE 11.6% 1.6% CHST 0.6% 3.1% QEP 0.1% 0.0% CIH 16.2% 0.8% REA 1.2% 1.6% COHN 0.1% 0.0% RN 0.2% 0.0% CPCU 2.7% 0.0% None 35.9% 39.8% CPE 0.8% 0.8%

8. Please select the best description for your employers business from the list of SIC codes below. CSP ASP Manufacturing and Production 30% 49% Construction 4% 8% Government 9% 6% Insurance 26% 14% Transportation 0% 2% Utilities 4% 6% Other 27% 15% 9. What is your highest level of education? CSP ASP High school 0.2% 0.0% Some college 2.8% 7.0% Associate degree 3.0% 6.3% Bachelors degree 48.8% 53.9% Masters degree 40.8% 31.3% Doctorate degree 3.6% 1.6% 10. How would you describe your satisfaction level as a safety professional? CSP ASP % Cum % % Cum % Very Satisfied 44.3 44.3 37.5 37.5 Satisfied 44.0 88.3 51.6 89.1 Neither 9.0 7.8 Dissatisfied 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.6 Very dissatisfied 0.7 2.7 1.6 3.2 11. If you provide consulting services, identify the two primary sources by which the majority of your clients hear about your service. (Check only two.) CSP ASP Previous clients 40.7% 24.1% Professional associations 8.9% 13.8% Other safety professionals 10.5% 6.9% Do not know 2.2% 3.4% Other 37.7% 51.7%

10

12. How did you prepare for the CSP/ASP Examination? (Please check all that apply.) CSP ASP I did nothing special to prepare. 1.8% 0.8% I studied on my own. 79.3% 83.6% I studied with one or more friends or colleagues. 22.9% 14.1% I attended a local, volunteer-operated preparation course. 12.6% 7.0% I attended a college/university preparation course. 4.6% 1.6% I attended a preparation course sponsored by a professional society 30.4% 33.6% I attended a preparation course operated by a private company. 16.6% 26.6% I purchased 1-5 books from the CSP reference list. 27.5% 28.9% I purchased 6 or more books from the CSP reference list. 7.1% 4.7% I purchased one or both CSP Self Assessment Examinations. 13.9% 35.2% I purchased commercial study/review publications. 18.5% 29.7% I purchased commercial study/review software. 12.0% 27.3% I purchased study/review publications by a professional society. 12.9% 8.6% Other 2.6% 1.6% 13. How long have you been employed in the safety and health profession? CSP ASP Range 1-53 years 1-28 years Mean 19.2 years 6.14 years 14. Do you work as a safety professional on a full-time or part-time basis? (Please check only one.) CSP ASP Full-time 94.2% 96.1% Par-time 5.8% 3.9% 15. Please indicate the level of support you have received from your employer for Certification and Continuance of Certification (Please check all that apply.) CSP ASP Not applicable, I am self-employed. 8.2% 2.3% None; my employer does not provide support for certification or Continuance of Certification. 8.1% 2.3% My employer reimbursed me for the application fee. 57.2% 67.2% My employer reimbursed me for examination preparation course(s). 43.0% 60.2% My employer reimbursed me for books and other review materials. 36.1% 57% My employer allowed time away to attend preparation courses. 33.3% 46.9% My employer allowed time away to sit for the examination(s). 35.5% 53.9% My employer reimburses me for annual renewal fees. 64.2% 64.8% My employer reimburses me for COC activities (conferences, seminars). 62.7% 53.9%

11

16. What is your annual income? Mean Less than $10,000 $10,00 to $19,999 $20,000 to $29,999 $30,000 to $39,999 $40,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $59,999 $60,000 to $69,999 $70,000 to $79,999 $80,000 to $89,999 $90,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $109,999 $110,000 to $119,999 $120,000 or more

CSP $75,634 0.5% 0.6% 0.5% 1.3% 4.8% 16.3% 22.0% 18.7% 15.3% 6.4% 5.8% 1.0% 6.7%

ASP $51,133 0.0% 0.8% 0.8% 10.9% 33.6% 29.7% 13.3% 4.7% 3.1% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

17. How many employees do you supervise? CSP ASP None 49.6% 57.5% 1-5 29% 22.8% 6-10 9.8% 6.3% 11-20 6.3% 3.1% 21-50 2.5% 5.5% >50 2.8% 4.7% 18. How many Safety/Health/Environment/Ergonomics professionals/technicians do you supervise? CSP ASP None 56.3% 69.3% 1-5 28.3% 23.6% 6-10 8.8% 3.9% 11-20 3.5% 2.4% 21-50 2.0% 5.5% >50 2.8% 4.7% 19. How did you enter the field? Bachelors degree in safety, IH, fire protection or health physics Masters degree in safety, IH, fire protection or health physics Job assignment Learned about and sought job in field Other CSP 24.6% 13.7% 21.1% 26.5% 14.1% ASP 42.2% 18.0% 13.3% 21.1% 5.5%

12

20. What percentage of your professional time is spent on safety, health, environmental, and ergonomics responsibilities? CSP % Cum % 2.7 2.7 1.1 3.8 1.5 5.3 0.7 6.0 1.6 7.6 2.8 10.4 3.6 14.0 6.5 20.5 12.6 33.1 66.9 100.0 ASP % 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.8 2.4 3.1 3.9 6.3 11.0 69.3 Cum % 0.0 1.6 3.2 4.0 6.4 9.5 13.4 19.7 30.7 100.0

<10% 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% 41-50% 51-60% 61-70% 71-80% 81-90% 91-100%

21. What percentage of your professional time is spent on each of the following areas? (the data below relfects the average percentage for each area.) Safety responsibilities Health responsibilities Environmental responsibilities Ergonomic responsibilities Other SHE-related responsibilities Non-SHE responsibilities CSP 50.8% 17.0% 8.1% 8.2% 7.6% 12.0% ASP 56.7% 15.3% 10.1% 7.2% 4.7% 13.5% CSP 68.0% 43.7% 53.8% 62.5% 3.6% 1.2% 15.4% 21.7% 18.7% 15.8% 11.6% 7.0% ASP 60.2% 37.5% 22.7% 60.9% 4.7% 0.0% 6.3% 5.5% 12.5% 9.4% 3.9% 23.4%

22. How has achieving the CSP/ASP benefitted you? (Check all that apply.) It has increased my self-esteem. I have received greater recognition from my boss. I have received greater recognition from my clients and those I serve. The CSP/ASP process increased my knowledge of the safety field. The CSP/ASP process caused me to pursue a safety or related degree. The CSP/ASP process caused me to pursue a degree in another field. I received a one-time bonus from my employer when I achieved the CSP/ASP. I obtained a higher pay rate because I achieved the CSP/ASP. I was promoted to a higher position because I achieved the CSP/ASP. I was promoted to a more responsible position because I achieved the CSP/ASP. Nothing has changed (pay, recognition, responsibility) since I achieved the CSP/ASP. I received other benefits. 13

23. Are CSP specialty examinations needed? CSP ASP Yes 52.4% 39.5% No 18.3% 19.4% Undecided 29.3% 41.1% 24. How likely are you to pursue a specialty certification in any of the following areas if they are offered? CSP ASP Will Will Will not Will Will Will not Pursue Consider Pursue Pursue Consider Pursue Ergonomics 11.8% 37.0% 51.2% 8.3% 45.9% 45.9% Construction Safety 7.4% 30.6% 62.6% 15.2% 26.8% 58.0% System Safety 3.4% 19.8% 76.8% 6.4% 31.8% 61.8% Health Care Safety 3.6% 14.7% 81.7% 5.4% 20.7% 73.9% Safety Management 9.3% 40.2% 50.5% 34.7% 46.6% 18.6% Mining Safety 1.6% 6.9% 91.5% 1.8% 11.0% 87.2% Environment 7.1% 34.5% 58.3% 12.3% 38.6% 49.1% Industrial Hygiene 10.6% 31.9% 57.6% 21.7% 45.2% 33.0% Fire Protection 8.5% 30.2% 61.3% 14.9% 61.3% 38.6% Other 11.5% 11.5% 77.0% 20.0% 0.0% 80.0% 25. If a comprehensive Safety/Health/Environment/Ergonomics credential were to be established, which of the following options is best in your opinion? CSP ASP BCSP should establish its own comprehensive SHE credential, building on recognition for the CSP. 37.7% 37.55 BCSP should partner with other quality certification bodies and build on recognition for the CSP. 56.7% 56.3% A new certification body should be formed, but recognition should be given to the CSP. 5.6% 6.3% 26. Is there a need for a technician/technologist certification in safety? Yes, I can think of one or more individuals who could benefit from this. No, I know of no one who could benefit from a technician/technologist certification. CSP ASP

36.8% 65.1% 63.2% 34.9%

14

27. In light of the way work is organized today, is there a need for a safety certification for first line supervisory level employees or safety leaders in work groups? CSP ASP There is a definite need. 28.3% 25.8% There is some need. 41.7% 46.1% There is little need. 19.0% 16.4% There is no need. 10.9% 11.7%

15

Validation Ratings Results The validation ratings relating to importance, frequency and criticality formed the basis for the major analysis of the study. Columbia Assessment Services analyzed these three rating for reliability, to establish their individual means scores and to compare ratings of the expert panel to practitioners, to check for consistency based on particular demographics, and, finally, to develop the recommended examination blueprints or test specifications. There was a great deal of homogeneity between the ratings of the expert panel and the survey respondents. The overall correlation between the expert panel and survey respondents is 0.977 for ASPs and 0.987 for CSPs, thus demonstrating a great deal of similarity in ratings. Reliability of Validation Scales The following reliability scores resulted, testing on how well the responsibilities consistently measured the domain of interest. A score of 0.7 is the acceptable minimum score on a possible range from 0 to 1. CSP ASP Domain Importance Criticality Frequency Importance Criticality Frequency 1 .857 .890 .892 .934 .922 .921 2 .862 .832 .825 .935 .878 .918 3 .931 .935 .940 .961 .960 .955 4 .917 .925 .931 .909 .919 .914 Importance Ratings The table below lists the mean ratings by response group. Domain 1 2 3 4 ASP Panelists Respondents 4.0 3.94 4.0 3.41 3.81 3.91 4.37 4.91 CSP Panelists Respondents 4.81 3.9 4.18 3.79 4.37 3.82 4.56 4.24

Both panelists and survey respondents rated all domains in the important to very important range. In general, the panelists rated domains a little higher than did the survey respondents, but that generalization is not true in all cases.

16

Criticality Ratings The table below lists the ratings of the expert panel and survey respondents on the criticality scale. Domain 1 2 3 4 ASP Panelists Respondents 3.81 3.61 4.25 3.86 3.43 3.42 4.0 3.66 CSP Panelists Respondents 4.37 3.62 4.68 4.22 3.87 3.51 4.18 3.86

The ratings by the expert panel and survey respondents on criticality are highly consistent. Both groups of raters considered all domains to be moderately to significantly critical. The inability to perform tasks in any of these domains could have major adverse consequences. Frequency Ratings The table below lists the mean ratings of each group in terms of the portion of their time devoted to each domain. Domain 1 2 3 4 ASP Panelists Respondents 32.4% 36.1% 29.2% 22.6% 26.0% 29.2% 12.3% 13.3% CSP Panelists Respondents 38.0% 33.6% 24.8% 27.7% 26.3% 28.6% 10.9% 12.8%

There is a great deal of consistency in ratings of frequency between the expert panel and the survey respondents. The least amount of time is spent on Domain 4, Professional Conduct and Ethics. There appears to be some difference in practice between CSPs and ASPs with regard to Domain 3 (Safety, Health and Environmental Engineering). Demographic Analysis Columbia Assessment Services performed analysis on subgroup responses to determine whether there was any need to modify the examination specifications for any particular subgroup. The detailed mean ratings by domain for each subgroup are not published in this report. The following subgroups were analyzed for importance, criticality and frequency for both CSPs and ASPs:

17

Gender (male, female) Work experience (1-10, 11-15, 16-20 and >21 years) Level of education (some college, associate, bachelors, masters and doctorate) Practice setting (Mfg & production, insurance, construction, government, utilities, other) Geographic region (NW, NE, SW, SE portions of the U.S.) Analysis of the ratings determined that no adjustments in examination specifications were necessary based on subgroups, since ratings within each subgroups were consistent.

18

Conclusions Several conclusions were drawn from this study. 1. All of the four domains ranked highly in regard to importance and relevance to professional safety practice. Similarly, all domains are considered critical to competent professional safety performance. Practitioners spend about the same amount of time on each of the first three domains and less on the fourth domain. As a result, the description of professional safety practice resulting from this study reasonably represents competent practice and can form the foundation for an examination assessing professional safety practice. 2. Because tests of subgroups found no significant difference within the subgroups in ratings of domains, there is no requirement to adjust the practice description for these subgroups. 3. While the difference between the practice of ASPs and CSPs was very small, these groups accomplish the required responsibilities at different cognitive levels. The ASP responds primarily with recall and basic application of factual knowledge and the CSP generally responds to tasks with advanced application that relies on a greater knowledge base. Compared to the ASP, the extended experience of the CSP enhances the ability to deal with decision-making and situational analysis. As a result, there is a difference between the content that results for the Safety Fundamentals Examination compared to that for the Comprehensive Practice Examination. 4. Because of the consistency in ratings, the domains and responsibilities developed by the subject matter experts constitutes an accurate description of both the CSP and ASP and, therefore, provide a sound basis for the examination contents. 5. The validation data collected from practitioners for each domain and responsibility may be used to derive the examination blueprints for the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examinations. 6. Analysis of the knowledge and skills developed for each responsibility by Columbia Assessment Services support the use of a written, multiple-choice examination format for both the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examinations based on practical considerations, such as cost, objectivity in scoring and the types of knowledge and skills included in the study results.

19

Examination Blueprints This aspect of the study develops a recommendation on the portion of examination questions which should be covered by each domain and responsibility. After recommended allocations of questions, practical considerations weigh in the final decisions about question distributions. Practical considerations include such things as the ability to prepare questions and whether the computed allocations appropriately represent practice. The Directors of the Board of Certified Safety Professionals considered the computed allocations and made one significant adjustment. The Board recognized that Domain 4 (Professional Conduct and Ethics) was given an overly large relative value and that preparing suitable questions for this domain is difficult. Many question writers have experienced the fact that professional conduct and ethics questions deal with behavior which is judged as right or wrong and four-choice questions are difficult to prepare for such behaviors. As a result, the Board approved limiting Domain 4 to five percent of the questions on both the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examinations. This required that some questions which would have occurred in this domain be apportioned to the other three domains. The final examination blueprints by domain and responsibility appear in the table below. The complete examination blueprint with domain, responsibility, knowledge and skill statements is included in Appendix B.
Domain, Responsibility D1. Safety, Health and Environmental Management R1. Design comprehensive management systems by defining requirements and developing policies, procedures, and programs in order to protect people, property and the environment. R2. Implement policies, procedures, and programs through management systems in order to protect people, property and the environment. R3. Determine the effectiveness of management systems by measuring and evaluating performance indicators in order to ensure continuous improvement in the protection of people, property, and the environment. R4. Implement risk management strategies by using the results of hazard identification and risk analyses in order to eliminate and/or reduce harmful exposure to people, property and the environment. R5. Apply sound business practices and economic principles by efficient use of resources in order to increase the value of the safety profession. R6. Encourage participation through communication and other methods to insure that all stakeholders (e.g., employees, managers, vendors, contractors) have an understanding and active role in the formulation and implementation of safety processes. Safety Fund. 37% 7% 7% 5% 7% 5% Comp Practice 34% 6% 7% 5% 6% 4%

6%

6%

20

Domain, Responsibility D2. Safety, Health and Environmental Engineering R1. Evaluate facilities, products, systems, equipment, workstations, and processes by applying qualitative and quantitative techniques in order to identify the hazards and assess their risks. R2. Recommend controls through design, engineering, and specification in order to eliminate hazards and reduce the risks posed by safety, health and environmental hazards. R3. Evaluate controls by analyzing feasibility, effectiveness, reliability, and cost in order to achieve the best possible solution. R4. Obtain compliance certifications, listings, approvals or authorizations by identifying laws, regulations, and standards in order to ensure product, process, and facility safety.

Safety Fund. 25% 7% 7% 6% 5%

Comp Practice 31% 9% 9% 7% 6% 30% 5%

D3. Safety, Health and Environmental Information Management and Communications 33% R1. Develop effective training programs by establishing learning objectives in order to impart knowledge and facilitate an understanding of hazards and controls. 5% R2. Deliver effective training programs by using media and methods appropriate to the audience in order to maximize understanding of the subject matter. 5% 5% R3. Evaluate training programs through performance assessments and various forms of feedback in order to assure that training is effective. 4% R4. Present technical information, both verbally and in writing, in order to effectively communicate with employees, management, customers, contractors, public relations officials, vendors, and the public. 4% R5. Communicate hazards, risks, and control measures to empl0yees, management, customers, contractors, vendors, and the public by preparing and delivering appropriate information in order to educate an organization or the community. 5% 5% R6. Develop ongoing relationships with the community by interacting with outside organizations in order to foster a mutual understanding of the profession and community needs with regard to safety issues. 3% R7. Maintain a record keeping and data capture and retrieval system by using appropriate data management systems in order to acquire, analyze and distribute accurate data. 4% R8. Develop/maintain proficiency in the use of standard business technologies by continuing personal education in order to retain and expand abilities to communicate professionally. 3%

3% 4%

2% 3% 3%

21

Domain, Responsibility

Safety Fund.

Comp Practice 5% 1.1% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% 0.8%

D4. Professional Conduct and Ethics 5% R1. Hold paramount the protection of people, property and the environment by persistently working with management and government agencies until the identified hazard has been eliminated or minimized. 1.1% R2. Adhere to standards of professional conduct by limiting practice to areas of competence and avoiding conflicts of interest in order to minimize the potential for harm. 0.8% R3. Accept responsibility to promote safety by providing technical counsel and advice on issues related to the safety profession in order to protect people, property and the environment. 0.8% R4. Conduct professional activities by following organizational protocol in order to assist in making positive, balanced, and effective decisions. 0.8% R5. Improve technical competency through continuing professional and self development in order to increase knowledge and skills. 0.6% R6. Foster accurate accountability for injuries/illnesses and other types of occurrences by identifying root and contributing causes in order to assure that proper controls are implemented. 0.8% 0.8%

22

Implementation The final examination blueprints which result from this study are used by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals to develop questions and place them in question banks sufficient to construct new editions of the Safety Fundamentals and Comprehensive Practice Examinations. The Board of Certified Safety Professionals then draws from the question banks to meet the distributions by domain and responsibilities defined by the examination blueprints.

Appendices Appendix A. Survey Questionnaire Appendix B. Final Examination Blueprint

APPENDIX B. APPROVED EXAMINATION BLUEPRINTS FOR THE CSP EXAMINATIONS

Domain 1. Safety, Health and Environmental Management

(SAFETY FUNDAMENTALS - 37%

COMPREHENSIVE PRACTICE - 34%)

Responsibility 1. Design comprehensive management systems by defining requirements and developing policies, procedures, and programs to protect people, property, and the environment.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowledge Statutory and case law regulating safety, health and the environment Operational process to design/develop safe work practices Material process flow Safety, health and environmental sciences Design of hazard control systems (i.e. fall protection, scaffolding) Design of record keeping systems that allow for collection, storage, interpretation, and dissemination 7. Mathematics and statistics 8. Methods and techniques for achieving safety through design 9. Methods and techniques for accident investigation 10. Property protection (physical and intellectual) and security 11. Organizational theory and behavioral science Skills 1. Interpreting and applying regulations 2. Applying inspection and control methods for potentially hazardous exposure 3. Mathematical and statistical analysis 4. Analyzing production process hazards 5. Designing safe work practices for systems, facilities, and equipment 6. Interpreting and applying safety, health and environmental science data for process improvement 7. Interpersonal communication 8. Problem solving in incident investigation 9. Integrating safety system into the organizational culture 10. Designing effective training programs with emphasis on employee behavior

Responsibility 2. Implement policies, procedures, and programs through management systems to protect people, property, and the environment.
1. 2. 3. 4. Knowledge Organization theory and behavioral science Education and training methods Basic sciences: chemistry, biology, physics, physiology and anatomy Safety, health, and environmental sciences Skills 1. Interpersonal communication 2. Teaching and training in safety, health, and environmental science areas and how they apply to the management system 3. Utilizing basic science to explain safety, health and environmental issues 4. Developing systems to track implementation 5. Ensuring that delegation of authority and responsibility are in compliance with the management system design

Responsibility 3. Determine the effectiveness of management system by measuring and evaluating performance indicators to ensure continuous improvement in the protection of people, property, and the environment.
Knowledge 1. Quantitative and qualitative performance indicators 2. Mathematics and statistics 3. Basic sciences: chemistry, biology, physics, physiology and anatomy 4. Safety, health and environmental issues 5. Management and behavioral sciences 6. Laws, standards and regulations 7. Safety management systems 8. Education and training methods 9. Auditing techniques and management systems reviews Skills 1. Applying safety, health and environmental knowledge to determine system effectiveness 2. Mathematical and statistical analysis 3. Applying management and behavioral science to determine system effectiveness 4. Interpreting regulations to ensure a compliant and effective system 5. Using interpersonal communication 6. Utilizing accepted system safety techniques to compare system to industry/consensus systems 7. Sampling and making observations 8. Improving policies and procedures

Responsibility 4. Implement risk management strategies by using the results of hazard identification and risk analyses to eliminate and/or reduce harmful exposure to people, property and the environment.
Knowledge 1. Laws, standards and regulations 2. Processing operations (e.g., critical inputs, assessment and inventory) 3. Mathematics and statistics 4. Insurance practices (types and premium calculations) 5. Industrial hygiene including chemical, physical and biological agents 6. Safety engineering 7. Safety management 8. Fire prevention and protection including life safety 9. Construction safety 10. Education and training methods 11. Ergonomics program management 12. Transportation/fleet safety management 13. Workers compensation and case management 14. Risk management concepts 15. Crisis management 16. Post incident and loss mitigation 17. Behavior modification 18. Safety through design process Skills Interpreting laws, standards and regulations Mathematical and statistical analysis Analyzing process flow, management of critical paths/systems Quantifying loss data and trends Analyzing sampling results and other data to support decision making and prioritizing control recommendations 6. Organizing the results and recommendations into an effective training program 7. Managing safety through the design processes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Responsibility 5. Apply sound business practices and economic principles for efficient use of resources to increase the value of the safety processes.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowledge Business regulations and laws Economics, accounting, and statistics Process management, material flow, and procurement Personnel development techniques Insurance practices (types and premium calculations) Drug/alcohol programs including Employee Assistance Programs 7. Capital budgeting and long range planning Skills 1. Writing job descriptions which include safety accountability as a line item 2. Quantifying the economic value of the safety process 3. Determining the most appropriate drug and alcohol testing programs 4. Acquiring, allocating, and controlling human and material resources 5. Using performance evaluations to quantify the effectiveness of employee programs 6. Applying project controls (budgeting, scheduling, estimating) to maximize system efficiency 7. Using capital budgeting techniques, activity-based cost accounting and cost-benefit analysis

Responsibility 6. Encourage participation through communication and other methods to ensure that all stakeholders (e.g., employees, managers, vendors, contractors) have an understanding and an active role in the formulation and implementation of safety processes.
Knowledge 1. Communication and presentation techniques 2. Organizational theory and behavioral science 3. Laws, standards and regulations which require employee participation 4. Economics and budgeting 5. Management principles 6. Employee participation committees 7. Labor relations, including union/management committees Skills Communication and presentation Organizational development Interpreting and applying laws, standards and regulations Problem solving Behavior modification techniques Using capital budgeting techniques, activity-based cost accounting and cost-benefit analysis 7. Implementing employee participation committees 8. Working with unions and management 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

(SAFETY FUNDAMENTALS - 25%

Domain 2. Safety, Health and Environmental Engineering

COMPREHENSIVE PRACTICE - 31%)

Responsibility 1. Evaluate facilities, products, systems, equipment, workstations, and processes by applying qualitative and quantitative techniques to identify the hazards and assess the associated risks.
Knowledge 1. Methods and techniques for evaluation of facilities, products, systems, equipment, workstations and processes 2. Methods and techniques for measurement, sampling, and analysis 3. Specifications and drawings 4. Laws, standards and regulations 5. Risk assessment techniques 6. Characteristics and hazards of materials 7. Basic sciences: chemistry, biology, physics, physiology, and anatomy 8. Applied engineering sciences: electronics, mechanics, thermodynamics, materials, structures, plant layout, etc. 9. Industrial hygiene, including chemical, physical and biological agents 10. Fire protection and prevention, including life safety 11. Environmental protection and pollution prevention 12. Construction safety 13. System safety 14. Product safety 15. Behavioral sciences 16. Education and training methods 17. Ergonomics and human factors 18. Process safety 19. Physical and chemical characteristics of hazardous materials 20. Equipment and facility safety requirements Skills 1. Applying methods and techniques for hazard identification, hazard evaluation, risk assessment and control 2. Using analytical equipment: monitoring and sampling equipment 3. Interpreting plans, specifications and drawings 4. Interpreting laws, standards and regulations 5. Consulting with subject-matter experts 6. Consulting with equipment manufacturers/suppliers and construction contractors to assure safety control compliance 7. Benchmarking with other companies in same industry for safety equipment/facility design, engineering and controls

Responsibility 2. Recommend controls through design, engineering, and specification to eliminate or reduce the risks posed by safety, health, and environmental hazards.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowledge Laws, standards and regulations Risk management Record keeping, data collection and retrieval systems Materials Basic sciences: chemistry, biology, physics, physiology and anatomy Applied engineering sciences: electronics, mechanics, thermodynamics, materials, structures, plant layout, etc. 7. Industrial hygiene, including chemical, physical and biological agents 8. Fire protection and prevention, including life safety 9. Environmental protection and pollution prevention 10. Construction safety 11. System safety 12. Product safety 13. Behavioral sciences 14. Education and training methods 15. Ergonomics and human factors 16. Process safety 17. Ventilation system 18. Procurement Skills 1. Interpreting laws, standards and regulations 2. Applying methods and techniques for hazard identification, hazard evaluation, risk assessment and control 3. Using data collection, retrieval and analysis systems 4. Eliminating or controlling exposure to identified hazards by substitution, engineering or using PPE 5. Consulting with subject matter experts 6. Communicating risks that are present and appropriate control measures to management

Responsibility 3. Evaluate controls by analyzing feasibility, effectiveness, reliability, and cost to achieve the optimal solution.
Knowledge 1. Laws, standards and regulations 2. Methods and techniques for evaluating feasibility, effectiveness, reliability and cost-benefit 3. Risk assessment 4. Specifications and drawings 5. Data management 6. Industrial hygiene, including chemical, physical and biological agents 7. Fire protection and protection, including life safety 8. Environmental protection and pollution prevention 9. Construction technology 10. Inspection and auditing techniques 11. System and occupational safety Skills 1. Interpreting laws, standards and regulations 2. Applying methods and techniques for evaluating feasibility effectiveness, reliability and cost-benefit 3. Applying economics analysis 4. Interpreting plans, specifications and drawings 5. Performing compliance and conformance inspections and audits 6. Consulting with subject matter experts 7. Using data collection and retrieval systems 8. Interpreting analytical results 9. Testing and maintaining fire detection and suppression systems

Responsibility 4. Obtain compliance certifications, listings, approvals or authorizations by identifying and meeting applicable national and international laws, regulations, and standards in order to ensure product, process, and facility safety.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowledge Laws, standards and regulations Data management Quality assurance and control Documentation protocol Certification requirements Appropriate entities to contact for forms, approval and certifications 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Skills Interpreting data Interpreting laws, standards and regulations Performing quality assurance audits and inspections Using document processing protocols Managing the approval process Consulting with subject matter experts Meeting with federal, state, and local officials

Domain 3. Safety, Health and Environmental Information Management and Communications

(SAFETY FUNDAMENTALS - 33% COMPREHENSIVE PRACTICE - 30%)

Responsibility 1. Develop effective training programs by establishing learning objectives to impart knowledge and facilitate an understanding of hazards and controls.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Knowledge Adult learning Group dynamics Technical content Needs analysis Testing and measurement Presentation media and technologies Graphic design Skills 1. Applying appropriate lesson plans that include interactive learning (e.g., small exchange, case studies, experience sharing) 2. Item/question writing and test construction 3. Using presentation technology: hardware and software 4. Conducting audience needs assessments 5. Facilitating group interactions to maximize learning 6. Making effective graphics 7. Providing an effective learning environment (e.g., classroom layout, lighting, minimal distraction, etc.) 8. Organizing presentation

Responsibility 2. Deliver effective training programs by using media and methods appropriate to the audience to maximize understanding of the subject matter.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowledge Presentation media Adult learning Target audience background and informational needs Group dynamics Active learning techniques Conflict resolution techniques 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Skills Using presentation technology: hardware and software Using lesson plans Soliciting audience feedback Resolving conflicts Encouraging participation Communicating effectively using verbal and nonverbal skills Integrating critical thinking processing into presentations

Responsibility 3. Evaluate training programs through performance assessments and various forms of feedback in order to assure that training is effective.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Knowledge Testing and measurement Sampling techniques Statistical analysis Item writing and test construction Methods for obtaining feedback 1. 2. 3. 4. Skills Item/question writing and test construction Using sampling techniques to assess performance Mathematical and statistical analysis Gathering feedback

Responsibility 4. Present technical information, both verbally and in writing, to effectively communicate with employees, management, customers, contractors, public relations officials, vendors, and the public.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Knowledge Graphic design Group dynamics English and grammar Format for various types of media Protocols for public announcements Risk assessment techniques Legal aspects of communication Skills 1. Using graphics, illustrations and other media 2. Audience dynamics 3. Communicating effectively using verbal and nonverbal skills 4. Formatting of technical papers and other media 5. Writing and delivering public announcements 6. Applying risk communication strategies 7. Writing procedures, policies, Standard Operating Procedures, etc.

Responsibility 5. Communicate hazards, risks, and control measures to employees, management, customers, contractors, vendors, and the public by preparing and delivering appropriate information to educate an organization or the community.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Knowledge Legal aspects of communication Labeling requirement for products, materials, and equipment International symbols Symbology (colors, wording, format, presentation) Cultural norms and their relationship to communication 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Skills Creating labels and warnings Applying international warnings and symbols Applying proper format: color, lighting, placement, etc. Integrating cultural norms into communications Delivering the information in the language and media appropriate for the audience

Responsibility 6. Develop ongoing relationships with the community by interacting with outside organizations to foster a mutual understanding of the profession and community needs with regards to safety issues.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Knowledge Governmental entities and responsibilities Mutual aid agreements Emergency response planning and communication Standards development Sphere of influence 1. 2. 3. 4. Skills Establishing and working within mutual aid agreements Planning and implementing emergency response activities Providing input during standards development Negotiating with political entities

Responsibility 7. Maintain a record keeping and data capture and retrieval system by using appropriate data management systems to acquire, analyze, and distribute accurate data.
Knowledge 1. Record keeping and recording requirements (e.g., OSHA, EPA, workers compensation, hazardous waste permitting and manifesting requirements, DOT) 2. Statistical analysis 3. Computers, data transfer and storage hardware options 4. Data logging and monitoring equipment 5. Business software (e.g., database software) 6. Report development (e.g., training records, accident report forms, inspection forms) 7. Record retention requirements and management protocols (confidentiality, etc.) 8. Data analysis and presentation 9. Chain of custody regard to incident investigation Skills 1. Managing record keeping (e.g., OSHA, EPA, workers compensation, hazardous waste permitting and manifesting requirement requirements, DOT) 2. Mathematical and statistical analysis 3. Using computers, data transfer and storage hardware 4. Using data loggers and monitoring equipment 5. Construction reports and data collection forms 6. Complying with confidentiality requirements 7. Complying with record retention protocols 8. Maintaining data integrity 9. Preserving chain of custody for evidence in incident investigation 10. Calculating accident and incident rates

Responsibility 8. Develop and maintain proficiency in professional communication through continuing personal education in the use of business technology.
Knowledge 1. Computer software concepts (databases, spreadsheets, word processing) 2. Internet resources 3. Information transfer and storage technologies 4. Information acquisition (data logging) technologies 5. Telecommunications technology 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Skills Using standards business software Exchanging information via the internet Using information transfer and storage techniques Using data acquisition equipment Using teleconferencing, email, and other electronic media

(SAFETY FUNDAMENTALS - 5%

Domain 4. Professional Conduct and Ethics

COMPREHENSIVE PRACTICE - 5%)

Responsibility 1. Hold paramount the protection of people, property, and the environment by persistently working with management and governmental agencies until the identified hazard has been eliminated or minimized.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowledge BCSP Code of Professional Conduct Organizational protocol Conflict resolution techniques Formal and informal presentation techniques Negotiation procedures Laws, standards and regulations Skills Applying BCSP Code of Professional Conduct Following organizational protocol Resolving conflict Communicating effectively using verbal and nonverbal skills Negotiating compliance issues with government and other entities or affected parties 6. Using laws, standards and regulations as benchmarks 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Responsibility 2. Adhere to standards of professional conduct by limiting practice to areas of competence and avoiding conflicts of interest to minimize the potential for harm.
Knowledge BCSP Code of Professional Conduct General business ethics Conflict resolution techniques Personal and professional limitations Methods of facilitating teamwork Competencies of other technical professionals with whom the safety professional interacts 7. Consequences of professional errors or omissions 8. Elements of a conflict of interest policy 9. Laws relating to conflict of interest 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. Skills Applying BCSP Code of Professional Conduct Applying team building and interpersonal techniques Resolving conflicts through negotiation Selecting consultants and outside resources and providing adequate support

Responsibility 3. Accept responsibility to promote safety by providing technical counsel and advice on issues related to the safety profession to protect people, property and the environment.
Knowledge 1. BCSP Code of Professional Conduct 2. Sources safety, health and environmental literature and other information 3. Job authority, responsibility and accountability 4. Professional liability issues 5. Conflict resolution Skills 1. Applying BCSP Code of Professional Conduct 2. Avoiding errors and omissions 3. Resolve conflict

Responsibility 4. Conduct professional activities by following organizational protocol to assist in making positive, balanced, and effective decisions.
1. 2. 3. 4. Knowledge BCSP Code of Professional Conduct General business ethics Organizational protocol Management principles of accountability and responsibility Skills 1. Applying BCSP Code of Professional Conduct 2. Following organizational protocol 3. Applying management principles of authority, responsibility and accountability

Responsibility 5. Improve technical competency through continuing professional and selfdevelopment in order to increase knowledge and skills.
Knowledge 1. BCSP Code of Professional Conduct 2. Recent technical issues and advances in the safety, health and environmental profession 3. Continuing education sources in the safety, health and environmental profession (e.g., conferences, professional seminars, networking, textbooks, magazines, professional journals) 4. Specialty certification opportunities Skills 1. Applying BCSP Code of Professional Conduct 2. Selecting appropriate professional development opportunities

Responsibility 6. Foster accurate accountability for injuries/illnesses and other types of occurrences by identifying root and contributing causes in order to assure that proper controls are implemented.
1. 2. 3. 4. Knowledge BCSP Code of Professional Conduct Conflict resolution techniques Methods of identifying accident causation Management principles of authority, responsibility and accountability Skills 1. Applying BCSP Code of Professional Conduct 2. Performing incident investigations, including root cause analysis 3. Interviewing people 4. Negotiating acceptance and/or ultimately assigning responsibility 5. Applying management principles of authority, responsibility and accountability