Indicators, and how they get used, can have unintended consequences both good and bad. Existing indicators and proposed ones alike should be examined for the way the organization will adapt to, or respond to, each, and how that response can produce unintended effects. Factors that could deter workers from reporting an incident, hazard, risk or other situation should be identified, since reporting might bring negative consequences for individuals or groups, and should recognise that under-reporting, over-reporting and other inaccurate reporting produce misleading results and weaken its ability to manage OH&S. Documented information in support of evaluation should be no more than the organization needs, since excess documentation overloads users. Unintended consequences can stem from the choice, the definition or the use of an indicator: lack of worker participation, misalignment with strategy, a focus only on the most frequent incidents, poor communication with interested parties, complicated indicators, universal indicators applied without regard to local context, selection on cost, and financial or other incentives that distort results or confine reporting to a limited group (Table 5). The standard's examples are a PPE stock target that burdened large projects without improving safety, and a gas leak response-time indicator that encouraged crews to speed.
The graph holds this control, the 0 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.