Why contractor prequalification fails on site

Most operators have a contractor prequalification process. A questionnaire goes out, the contractor returns a safety policy, a certificate list and its injury statistics, and someone scores the response. Contractors that pass are approved. Then the first crew arrives on site, and the site team finds out what the contractor is actually like.

In exploration and production, around six in ten work hours are worked by contractors, according to IOGP's safety performance data. When contractor selection rests on paperwork alone, a large share of an operator's real risk is decided by documents that say very little about behaviour.

The gap between paper and practice

A policy shows that a contractor knows what a policy should say. Injury statistics from small firms are often incomplete, and a low number can mean low reporting as easily as safe work. Certificates show that people attended training, not that they can do the task under pressure on an unfamiliar site.

Five questions that predict performance

In our audits and contractor programmes, these questions tell us more than any score:

1. Who will supervise the crew, and can we meet them? The supervisor sets the standard on site more than any document does.
2. Show us the last three toolbox talks. Real records reveal whether briefings happen and what they cover.
3. Tell us about your last near miss. A contractor that can describe one clearly is a contractor that reports.
4. How do you check a new worker's competence before day one? Look for a practical check, not only a certificate.
5. What would make you stop a job on our site? The answer shows whether stop-work authority exists in practice.

Where to start

You do not need to rebuild your system. Add a short interview with the proposed supervisor to prequalification, observe the first shift of every new contractor, and feed what you see back into the contractor's score. Over time the approved list starts to reflect performance rather than paperwork.