Proactive vs Reactive Score & Report Calculator

For each statement below, select the answer that best reflects your experience with your current pre-employment screening provider.

Highly Reactive – Requires immediate improvement ( 9 – 22)
Health and safety systems are minimal and predominantly compliance-driven. There is limited engagement from leadership and workers, and interventions only occur after incidents happen. Early intervention and preventative strategies are absent or underutilised. Culture tends to focus on blame rather than learning. Immediate action is needed to reduce risk and improve safety performance
Transitional – Some strengths, but inconsistent application (23 – 31)
Some proactive elements exist, but application is inconsistent. There may be isolated initiatives or passionate individuals driving safety, but the organisation lacks system-wide integration. Early intervention may be available but is not widely adopted or promoted. Leadership support is sporadic, and employee involvement is limited.This is a critical growth phase — strategic planning, leadership alignment, and structured frameworks can drive major gains.
Mostly Proactive – Strong foundation, opportunities for refinement (32 – 39)
Safety systems are functioning well, with clear signs of prevention, leadership commitment, and employee engagement. Early intervention programs (such as onsite physiotherapy or wellness initiatives) are likely in place and accessible. Leading indicators are used, though there may be opportunities to further embed them into decision-making. Continuous improvement processes are occurring, but could be more data-driven or formalised.You’re on the right track — now focus on consistency, integration, and cross-departmental ownership.
Leading – Mature and high-performing safety culture with proactive systems (40 – 45)

Screening is likely poorly aligned with job demands and lacks reliability in identifying at-risk candidates. Significant gaps exist that could lead to preventable injuries and claims. Immediate action to review the process and changes to the screening strategy is strongly recommended.

Proactive vs Reactive Score & Report (Calculator) (1)

For each statement below, use the slider (1 = Reactive, 5 = Proactive) to rate how well it reflects your experience and views of your current pre-employment screening provider. Once you've made your selections, your results will appear below.

Leadership Commitment:

Do senior leaders consistently demonstrate visible commitment to health and safety and embed it into strategic decisions?(Required)

Hazard & Risk Management:

Do we proactively identify and control risks before they result in incidents or injuries?(Required)

Continuous Improvement:

Do we regularly review and improve safety systems using data, audits, and feedback?(Required)

System Integration

Is health and safety embedded into all core business processes (e.g. HR, procurement)?(Required)

Use of Leading Indicators

Do we monitor proactive indicators (e.g., near misses, observations) to improve safety?(Required)

Preventative Health Programs

Do we have a structured early intervention program (e.g., via onsite physiotherapy) aimed at preventing injuries and addressing issues before they escalate?(Required)

Training & Competency

Do employees receive regular, relevant, and practical safety training tailored to their roles?(Required)

Incident Management & Learning

Are incidents thoroughly investigated with lessons shared and changes implemented?(Required)

Employee Participation

Are employees actively involved in health and safety decisions, reporting, and improvements?(Required)

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Total Score

Your results:

Highly Reactive — Requires immediate improvement. Health and safety systems are minimal and predominantly compliance-driven. There is limited engagement from leadership and workers, and interventions only occur after incidents happen. Early intervention and preventative strategies are absent or underutilised. Culture tends to focus on blame rather than learning. Immediate action is needed to reduce risk and improve safety performance.

Your results:

Transitional — Some strengths, but inconsistent application. Some proactive elements exist, but application is inconsistent. There may be isolated initiatives or passionate individuals driving safety, but the organisation lacks system-wide integration. Early intervention may be available but is not widely adopted or promoted. Leadership support is sporadic, and employee involvement is limited. This is a critical growth phase — strategic planning, leadership alignment, and structured frameworks can drive major gains.

Your results:

Mostly Proactive — Strong foundation, opportunities for refinement. Safety systems are functioning well, with clear signs of prevention, leadership commitment, and employee engagement. Early intervention programs (such as onsite physiotherapy or wellness initiatives) are likely in place and accessible. Leading indicators are used, though there may be opportunities to further embed them into decision-making. Continuous improvement processes are occurring, but could be more data-driven or formalised. You’re on the right track — now focus on consistency, integration, and cross-departmental ownership.

Your results:

Leading — Mature and high-performing safety culture with proactive systems. Screening is likely poorly aligned with job demands and lacks reliability in identifying at-risk candidates. Significant gaps exist that could lead to preventable injuries and claims. Immediate action to review the process and changes to the screening strategy is strongly recommended.

Employ Health is dedicated to fostering safe, efficient, and healthy workplaces. Beyond tools like our calculator, we offer comprehensive programs and training to address workplace safety and wellness at its core.