Psychosocial Risk Management: Put the Process into Your WHS System

Look at the conditions of work

Psychosocial hazards are aspects of work that can cause psychological harm. Examples include excessive demands, poor support, unclear roles, bullying and exposure to violence. Several hazards can interact. Start with how work is organised and experienced, rather than asking managers to diagnose workers or infer their health from productivity.

• Consider different roles, shifts, locations and periods of high demand.
• Check whether workers have a practical way to raise concerns, including concerns about a supervisor.
• Use the regulator guidance applicable to your location. National model guidance and Victoria’s OHS framework should not be treated as interchangeable legal instruments.

Consult workers and assess the pattern of exposure

Use suitable discussions, observations and existing information to understand the work. Involve affected workers and their health and safety representatives where applicable. Consider how often hazards occur, how long exposure lasts, how severe it is and how hazards combine. A survey may contribute information, but needs interpretation and follow-up.

• Ask about the work situation, when it occurs and what makes it better or worse.
• Offer ways to contribute that do not require a worker to discuss a sensitive concern in a group.
• Explain how information will be used, who will receive it and how the team will hear the outcome.
• Seek appropriate specialist assistance when the situation or assessment calls for it.

Choose controls that address the source of the risk

Consider changes to work design and organisation, including workloads, staffing, role clarity, supervision and support. Eliminate risks where reasonably practicable and otherwise minimise them so far as reasonably practicable under the applicable framework. Support services can help people, while the workplace conditions creating the risk also need attention.

Worked example: repeated last-minute changes

Illustrative example: a service team reports that same-day jobs are added without adjusting existing commitments. Workers receive competing instructions and cannot predict when they will finish. The manager gathers input privately and in agreed group discussions, reviews scheduling practices and identifies a recurring combination of high demands and unclear priorities.

• Agreed response: introduce a capacity check before accepting additional work and identify one person to resolve conflicting priorities.
• Implementation: explain the revised process, record who is responsible and test it on representative shifts.
• Review: seek feedback on whether the new arrangement works and examine whether conflicting instructions continue.
• Further action: if exposure remains, reconsider the workload and resources rather than closing the matter because a new procedure exists.

Keep a usable risk record and protect sensitive details

The following is a suggested operational record structure. Keep the control decision and follow-up understandable without spreading personal accounts or medical information through a general register. Decide who can access detailed reports, how they are stored and what may be shared for consultation or review.

Review effectiveness and keep the process connected

Review controls when circumstances change or there is reason to doubt they are effective, as well as at planned checkpoints appropriate to the work. Low reporting alone does not demonstrate low risk. Discuss whether people feel able to raise concerns and whether agreed changes have reached all affected groups.

• Connect the risk record to the agreed action and the evidence of implementation.
• Bring unresolved control or resource decisions to the appropriate manager.
• Use suitable access controls for records; verify the intended permissions before adding sensitive material to a system.
• Discuss how this process should fit your Blue Safe setup, including consultation, actions and reviews.