Homepage

Risk Ranking Analysis Process

The following Risk Ranking Analysis Process uses typical Severity, Likelihood, and Risk Rating definitions. The definitions and values are usually set by the individual company, can vary greatly from one company to another, and are a direct reflection of the company's tolerance to risk.

1. Rate the Severity of the potential fall hazard using to the typical Severity Definitions chart.

Typical Severity Definitions

1 - Very high	- Fatality - Public fatalities - Extensive property damage - Major environmental damage - Extended downtime (more than 2 days) - Customer Downtime
2 - High	- Lost Time Injury - Public injuries or public impact - Significant property damage - Environmental permit violation - Downtime (1 to 2 days)
3 - Medium	- OSHA Recordable Injury - Moderate property damage - Moderate environmental impacts - Downtime (4 to 24 hours) - Off spec product
4 - Low	- First Aid Injury - Minor property damage - Minor environmental impacts - Downtime (< 4 hours) - Quality variation
5 - Very Low	- No worker injuries - No property damage - No environmental impacts - Recoverable operational problem

2. Rate the Likelihood of the fall hazard using the following Likelihood Definitions Chart.

Typical Likelihood Definitions

1 - Very high	Possible to occur frequently (1/year)
2 - High	Possible to occur occasionally (1/5 years)
3 - Medium	Possible to occur under unusual circumstances (1/15 years)
4 - Low	Possible to occur over the lifetime of the facility (1/30 years)
5 - Very Low	Could occur however not likely over facility life (1/100 years)

3. Determine the Risk Rating of the fall hazard from the following Typical Risk Ratings. The combination of the various levels of severity and likelihood is then given a ranking which corresponds to the risk of each individual scenario. The levels chosen for the matrix are an indicator of the employer’s risk tolerance.

Typical Risk Ratings

SEVERITY

Likelihood	1	2	3	4	5
1	1	2	3	4	7
2	2	4	6	7	8
3	3	6	7	8	9
4	4	6	8	9	10
5	7	8	9	10	10

4. Determine the next steps and decision-making for the fall hazard based on the Risk Ranking.

Some employers have set up a priority system based solely on the resulting ranking. For example, they have set a priority as shown below:

Sample Decision-Making Rules for Risk Ranking

Ranking Levels	Description	Action Required
1	Very High	Must be mitigated with engineering and administrative controls before continued operation
2 or 3	High	Must be mitigated by engineering controls within six months
4	Medium	Must be mitigated by administrative controls within six months
5 or 6	Low	Mitigation is optional depending on cost-benefit
7	Very Low	No mitigation required

Generally, risk levels of 7 or better are low in priority for improvement. Risk levels of 1, 2 or 3, would suggest some urgency be reflected in the recommendation follow-up plan.

The analysis team may find that it is useful to also rank the severity and likelihood of outcomes from implementing the recommendations. If multiple recommendations yield similar risk ratings, then the project team may choose to implement the recommendations according to cost, ease of implementation, or other business criteria.