The Importance of Safety Governance and Steering Committees

Why Safety Governance and Steering Matters

When implementing a new safety program, process, or policy - do you have a formal governance and steering committee in place to review and approve prior to implementation? I argue you should! A well-structured safety governance committee is essential for a successful Safety Management System (SMS) program for several reasons. 

First, the safety program is being built for the entire organization, not just for the safety department, so it must be right-sized to align with the organization's size, complexity, risk appetite, and operational goals. To assist in achieving this, key leadership should be involved in the design, implementation, and continuous development of safety policies and procedures.

Second, a governance and steering committee approval will give you “top cover”. Implementing a new safety process or policy can be controversial at times or perhaps entail other non-safety leaders and teams to engage in additional work or adjust to new requirements. Having the backing and ultimate sign off of a safety governance committee prior to implementation, will make for a smoother roll out. You can legitimately say the executive leadership is in agreement and has approved.

Finally, including the Accountable Executive (AE) —typically the CEO—in these discussions is critical. The Accountable Executive is responsible for ensuring that safety initiatives receive the necessary resources and funding, as well as ensuring that risk controls are properly implemented. I often say, I build the safety program in the image of the Accountable Executive for the Accountable Executive. Therefore, the AE must be a participant in these foundational discussions about the safety program itself. 

By presenting new safety policies to a Safety Governance Committee for approval, you are able to communicate:

• That the executive leadership has approved and stands behind the new policy.

• That the change is necessary for maintaining operational and regulatory compliance.

• That there is alignment between safety and business priorities.

Having executive support streamlines implementation and reduces resistance from other departments.

Use Case: Issue Resolution & Corrective Actions

One of the foundational elements of any safety program is an Issue Resolution Process—essentially, a structured method for:

• Developing, assigning, and managing safety findings

• Ensuring corrective actions are created and completed

However, target completion dates for corrective actions will undoubtedly need adjustments. While some extensions are reasonable and necessary, other action owners may exploit the system, continuing to push the “can” down the road, leading to delays in safety improvements. So over time, some action owners may begin pushing deadlines indefinitely or may genuinely lack the resources to complete actions on time, either way, the important work on the safety actions will not be completed timely.

To manage this challenge, a structured escalation process can be introduced. For example, the initial extension requests are approved by a joint decision solely between the safety action owner and the responsible safety personnel of that action. However, subsequent extensions will require progressively higher levels of leadership approval, within that process owner department (the department of the safety owner)—ultimately escalating to the Accountable Executive for Safety in extreme cases.

As you could imagine, implementing such an escalation policy can be controversial and possibly be administratively burdensome or added bureaucracy—as it requires leaders to review actions, assess work priorities, and make formal approval decisions. However, I have been successful in multiple organizations implementing such an escalation process by first presenting it to a governance committee, ensuring leadership alignment on when escalation should occur - ie. do you immediately start escalation with the first extension or do you allow for a certain number of extensions at the action owner level before escalation.

Another Use Case: Prioritizing Safety Initiatives Within Limited Resources

Another use of the Safety Governance Committee is the review and ultimate approval of the safety program implementation plan and roadmap. As I am sure you are more than aware, most safety programs do not have unlimited budgets or staffing! This means not all safety initiatives can be implemented immediately (or even fully!) over a given amount of time and may create a situation where there is not adequate “coverage” of the safety program. 

Here, the Safety Governance Committee plays a crucial role in approving the prioritization and implementation plan by 1. Recognizing the elements of the program that will not be implemented or functioning and 2. Ensuring leadership alignment on how the safety team is using their resources. Using a safety governance committee ensures that leaders understand what can and cannot be accomplished within the safety program at any given time. Having formal approval also protects the safety team from unrealistic expectations—by documenting that certain initiatives cannot be implemented immediately due to resource constraints. For safety professionals, this can reduce the stress and anxiety of waiting for a major incident or regulatory violation to force action on an unfunded or unrealized program.

Safety Governance Committee Make-up

A Safety Governance Committee should be composed of both safety leaders and key executives and senior leaders who have direct influence over safety policies. Consider the following for inclusion:

• The Accountable Executive for Safety (often the CEO)

• Head of Operations (COO-Level Leadership) – Since they often implement and use safety programs

• Corporate Counsel/Chief Legal Officer – To help emphasize the importance of addressing regulatory and legal risks

• Head of Technology/Product Development

• Key Leadership that are Process Owners/Risk Owners (see my article on who owns the risk)

The right composition ensures that the committee has the authority to approve change while maintaining alignment with the organization’s broader goals, while also representing the use of the program changes downstream.

Governance Meeting Cadence

The frequency of meetings will depend on the maturity of the safety program. If building a new safety program from scratch → Meet biweekly or monthly for faster progress. For established programs → Quarterly meetings may be sufficient to provide oversight and approvals. As the safety program matures, meeting frequency can be adjusted to reflect the rate of program evolution and the volume of new safety policies being introduced.

Key Responsibilities of the Safety Governance Committee

The committee should be tasked with:

• Providing strategic direction for safety management

• Introducing a structured feedback mechanism to assess how safety initiatives are deployed

• Acting as a sounding board for senior leadership on safety program strategy

• Defining safety objectives and ensures alignment with operational goals

• Deciding which safety performance metrics should be tracked

• Reviewing and makes decisions on safety program resources

Governance Committee vs. Executive Safety Committee (SRB)

I want to make clear that a Safety Governance Committee is not the same as an Executive Safety Committee (also called a Safety Review Board, or SRB).

• The Executive Safety Committee reviews high-level safety risks, emerging risk trends, critical safety actions and risk controls, and overall safety program performance.

• The Safety Governance Committee, on the other hand, focuses on policy and program implementation priorities, specifics around changes to existing policy and programs, design of key safety performance metrics, resource allocation for the safety program and team and general health of the safety program.

The Safety Governance Committee manages HOW the safety program is developed, is performing and how it should be resourced, while the Executive Safety Committee reviews WHAT safety risks exist, how they are being managed, and monitoring specific metrics of safety performance.

Final Thoughts

If your organization does not yet have a Safety Governance Committee, consider establishing one. By providing a forum for discussion on the safety program priorities and make up, you ensure programs implementing are smoother and that the safety program is truly designed correctly for the organizational needs.

Does your organization have a governance committee for safety? If so, how has it improved your safety program? Share your experiences in the comments below!