Safe Execution of Work Is an Operational Responsibility: Challenging the Misconception that Safety Is the Responsibility of the HSE Function

Niyaz Ahmad Khan

doi:10.36948/ijfmr.2026.v08i04.86093

Safe Execution of Work Is an Operational Responsibility: Challenging the Misconception that Safety Is the Responsibility of the HSE Function

Author(s)	Dr. Niyaz Ahmad Khan
Country	India
Abstract	A persistent organizational misconception is that occupational safety and health (OSH) is primarily the responsibility of the Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) function because HSE professionals are specifically appointed to address safety matters. This perception can obscure a fundamental feature of work: safety is not a separate activity performed alongside operations; it is an inherent requirement of how work is planned, resourced, authorized, directed, supervised, controlled, and performed. International OH&S frameworks reinforce the integration of safety into organizational management and operational processes, with ILO-OSH 2001 explicitly identifying OSH as a line-management responsibility and ISO 45001 requiring OH&S requirements to be integrated into business processes (ILO, 2001; ISO, 2018). This article examines the relationship between responsibility for safe work execution and the specialist HSE function through an integrative analysis of international OH&S frameworks, regulatory guidance, and relevant safety literature. It argues that organizational actors who plan, resource, authorize, direct, supervise, control, and perform work retain responsibility for executing that work safely within their respective functions, authority, and control. HSE professionals, in contrast, generally contribute through specialist functions such as advice, assistance, training, monitoring, inspection, auditing, verification, investigation, reporting, and escalation (Hale, 1995; Provan et al., 2018; Rae & Provan, 2019). Depending on organizational and legal arrangements, HSE may also possess specific approval or intervention authority. The article proposes a Non-Transfer Principle: the appointment, presence, involvement, or specialist authority of HSE does not, by itself, transfer responsibility for safe operational execution from those who control and perform the work. The Function–Authority–Control (FAC) Framework is used as a supporting analytical approach for identifying responsibility by examining what an organizational actor is expected to do, what authority accompanies that function, and what relevant decisions or conditions the actor can control or influence. The article concludes that organizations should distinguish clearly between responsibility for safely executing work and responsibility for performing specialist HSE functions. Recognizing this distinction can strengthen operational and line-management responsibility, reduce inappropriate dependence on HSE, clarify accountability, and improve both preventive safety management and incident investigation.
Keywords	occupational safety and health, HSE, operational responsibility, line management, safe work execution, safety responsibility, accountability, Function–Authority–Control, FAC Framework, Non-Transfer Principle
Published In	Volume 8, Issue 4, July-August 2026
Published On	2026-08-19
DOI	https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2026.v08i04.86093

View / Download PDF File

About IJFMR Fees & Payment Current Issue Publication Archive	Submit Research Paper Track Submission Status Publication Guidelines Publication Ethics Peer Review & Plagiarism	Join as a Reviewer Editors & Reviewers Reviewer Referral Program Get Reviewer Membership Certi.	Website/Journal Policies Usage Policy Content Policies Privacy Policy

Contact Us		+91-9687-828-838	editor@ijfmr.com

International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research

A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal

Safe Execution of Work Is an Operational Responsibility: Challenging the Misconception that Safety Is the Responsibility of the HSE Function

Share this