What is a Near Miss?
A Near Miss (also called a close call or "free lesson") is an unplanned event that did not result in injury, illness, or property damage but had the potential to do so. Often described as incidents where the chain of events leading to an accident was initiated but interrupted by luck, timing, or the last-minute effectiveness of a recovery control, near misses are critical safety indicators that reveal system failures before actual harm occurs.
Understanding the Near Miss Concept
According to AS/NZS ISO 45001, a near miss is an incident where no injury or ill health occurs. What distinguishes a near miss from a serious injury is often a matter of millimetres or seconds. The mechanism of failure remains identical; only the outcome differs.
Consider this example: a 5kg hammer falls from a scaffold and lands on the ground. This is a near miss. Had a worker been standing one metre to the left, the same event would likely have resulted in a fatality. The root cause—an unsecured tool—is exactly the same in both scenarios.
This principle is why near misses matter so profoundly. They share the same underlying root causes as actual incidents, providing organisations with the opportunity to identify and correct system failures before someone gets hurt. In the Australian work health and safety context, managing near misses is not merely best practice—it is a key component of due diligence and, in specific high-risk circumstances, a legal reporting requirement.
Distinguishing Near Misses from Related Concepts
To properly identify and report near misses, it's essential to understand how they differ from hazards and incidents. A hazard is a static condition—a source or situation with the potential to cause harm. An incident is an event that results in actual harm or damage. A near miss sits between these two: it's the moment when a hazard is realised but harm is avoided.
| Term | Definition | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Hazard | A source or situation with the potential to cause harm | An oil spill on a workshop floor (static condition) |
| Near Miss | An event where the hazard was realised but harm was avoided | A worker slips on the oil but regains balance without falling |
| Incident | An event resulting in actual harm or damage | A worker slips on the oil, falls, and fractures a wrist |
The Australian Regulatory Context: Dangerous Incidents
While "near miss" is the common industry term, Australian workplace safety legislation uses specific terminology with legal implications. Under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (WHS Act), certain high-risk near misses are classified as "Dangerous Incidents" and must be reported to regulators.
Section 37 of the WHS Act defines a dangerous incident as an incident that exposes a worker or any other person to a serious risk to health or safety from an immediate or imminent exposure to specific hazards. These include uncontrolled escape, spillage, or leakage of a substance; uncontrolled implosion, explosion, or fire; electric shock; the fall or release from a height of any plant, substance, or thing; and the collapse or failure of an excavation or structure.
Crucially, dangerous incidents are notifiable incidents under Section 35. This means the Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking (PCBU) must notify the state regulator—such as SafeWork NSW or WorkSafe Victoria—immediately after becoming aware of it. Failure to report these specific types of near misses is an offence. Not all near misses are dangerous incidents, but all dangerous incidents are near misses that require urgent regulatory notification.
Make it easy for workers to report near misses with mobile-friendly incident reporting that takes less than two minutes.
Why Near Misses Matter: The Economic and Safety Case
The economic and human cost of ignoring near misses is significant. Safe Work Australia data indicates that work-related injury and illness cost the Australian economy approximately $28.6 billion annually. Proactive near miss reporting offers organisations a way to reduce this burden while protecting their workforce.
Near misses function as leading indicators. Unlike injury rates, which measure past failures (lagging indicators), a high volume of near miss reports can indicate a proactive safety culture where workers are engaged in finding problems before they cause harm. They reveal where critical controls—such as isolation procedures or machine guarding—are being bypassed or failing in real-world conditions. Most importantly, they provide the data needed to fix root causes without the trauma of injury, the legal costs of prosecution, or the financial burden of workers' compensation claims.
This is why near misses are often called "free lessons." They deliver all the information needed to prevent future incidents, but without the human or financial cost of an actual accident.
High Potential (HiPo) Events
Not all near misses carry the same level of risk. Safety professionals distinguish between low-consequence near misses—such as a minor trip hazard—and High Potential (HiPo) events. A HiPo is a near miss that, under slightly different circumstances, could realistically have resulted in a fatality or serious injury.
HiPos warrant rigorous investigation equivalent to that of an actual serious accident. The depth of investigation should always be proportionate to the potential consequence of the event, not the actual outcome. Asking "What could have happened?" rather than "What did happen?" is the key to identifying events that deserve deeper analysis.
Investigation Methodology: Moving Beyond Blame
Reporting a near miss is only the first step; the value lies in the investigation. In Australia, the Incident Cause Analysis Method (ICAM) is widely used to conduct incident investigations, including near misses. ICAM moves beyond blaming the individual to identify systemic failures—the organisational and procedural factors that allowed the near miss to occur.
To ensure comprehensive investigations, safety professionals use the PEEPO framework to gather data across five dimensions. People factors include physical and mental state, training, fatigue, and supervision. Environment factors cover lighting, weather, noise, and housekeeping. Equipment factors examine maintenance, design, guarding, and failure modes. Procedures assess the existence and clarity of Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) or permits. Organisation factors investigate safety culture, production pressure, rostering, and resource allocation.
Using PEEPO prevents "tunnel vision" where an investigator might focus solely on a broken machine while missing the fact that the operator was fatigued due to organisational rostering issues. This systematic approach ensures that root causes are identified and addressed, not just superficial symptoms.
Overcoming Reporting Barriers
Under-reporting is a common challenge in Australian workplaces, with significant percentages of incidents going unreported across various industries. The primary barrier is often fear of blame. Workers who believe they will be punished for reporting near misses will remain silent, depriving organisations of critical safety data.
To build a reporting culture, organisations should adopt a Just Culture approach. This means distinguishing between honest errors—which should be supported and learned from—and reckless violations, which require discipline. If a worker reports a near miss caused by their own honest mistake, they should be thanked for providing valuable data, not punished. This creates psychological safety that encourages future reporting.
Making reporting easy is equally important. Replacing complex paper forms with mobile apps or QR codes that allow workers to report a near miss in under two minutes significantly increases participation. The quickest way to stop reporting is silence—workers need to know that their reports lead to action. Organisations should ensure workers are told what action was taken as a result of their report, even if it's as simple as "You reported the loose carpet; we replaced it today."
Turn near miss data into actionable insights with automated pattern analysis and trend reporting.
Best Practices for Implementation
Effective near miss programmes require thoughtful design. Not every near miss needs a panel inquiry or extensive investigation. Organisations should use a risk matrix to determine whether a simple "fix and close" is sufficient or if a full ICAM investigation is required. This triage process ensures resources are allocated appropriately while still capturing the learning from lower-risk events.
Feedback loops are essential. Workers need to see that their reports matter. Regular communication about actions taken, trends identified, and improvements made reinforces the value of reporting. Track these through your action register to ensure visibility and accountability. When workers see tangible results from their near miss reports, they become more engaged in hazard identification and more likely to report future events.
It's also important to recognise that a high number of near miss reports doesn't necessarily mean a workplace is unsafe. A sudden increase in near miss reports often indicates a positive shift in culture—it means workers are more aware of hazards and trust the system enough to report them. Conversely, a workplace with zero near miss reports is statistically improbable and likely indicates a culture of fear or suppression rather than a genuinely hazard-free environment.
References
- Safe Work Australia (2024). Work-related injury and disease statistics. Retrieved from safeworkaustralia.gov.au
- Standards Australia (2018). AS/NZS ISO 45001:2018 Occupational health and safety management systems. SAI Global.
- Australian Government (2011). Work Health and Safety Act 2011. Retrieved from legislation.gov.au
- Incident Cause Analysis Method (ICAM). Investigator Guide. Retrieved from Australian Government publications on incident investigation methodologies.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a near miss the same as a dangerous incident?
No. All dangerous incidents are near misses, but not all near misses are dangerous incidents. A "dangerous incident" is a specific legal term under the WHS Act covering events such as electric shock, uncontrolled explosions, or collapse of scaffolding that must be reported to the regulator immediately. A worker stumbling on a flat surface is a near miss but likely not a notifiable dangerous incident.
Can I report a near miss anonymously?
Most organisations allow anonymous reporting to encourage participation. However, confidential reporting—where the safety team knows who you are but protects your identity—is often more effective. It allows investigators to ask follow-up questions to understand the root cause, which is impossible with fully anonymous reports. The key is establishing trust through a Just Culture approach where honest mistakes are not punished.
Does a high number of near miss reports mean our workplace is unsafe?
Not necessarily. A sudden increase in near miss reports often indicates a positive shift in culture—it means workers are more aware of hazards and trust the system enough to report them. Conversely, a workplace with zero near miss reports is statistically improbable and likely indicates a culture of fear or suppression rather than genuine safety. What matters is the trend and the actions taken in response to the reports.