Skip to the main content.
Talk to an expert
Talk to an expert
Featured Offer
Ambitious 50 →
6 months of Hire and Engage free for businesses under 50 people.

Hey Compono!

A coach that actually gets you.

Get 10 minutes free, then $15 a month. Cancel anytime.

Get Started ≫
Free tools for HR leaders

Safety
awareness performance review phrases

24 phrases across four rating bands, for managers, coaching conversations and self-evaluations. Filter, copy, print. Free, no sign-up.

Start with the rating band that matches the person, then pick the voice you are writing in. Copy a phrase, then change the specifics so it names the real project, the real quarter, the real thing that happened. A comment that could describe anyone is the thing you were trying to avoid.

How these were written, and the five steps to a review that holds up ↓
Rating:
Voice:
24 showing
Exceeds expectations

Stops work when something is not safe, including when it is inconvenient and somebody senior is watching.

Manager to employee

Reports near misses rather than only incidents, which is what makes the data worth anything.

Manager to employee

Coaches others on safe practice in the moment, without it becoming a lecture.

Manager to employee

Worth a formal role in the safety process rather than doing it informally.

Coaching

Ready to lead the risk assessment work rather than contribute to it.

Coaching

I stopped [task] when the setup was not right, which was awkward at the time and correct.

Self-evaluation
Meets expectations

Follows safe work procedures consistently, including when unobserved.

Manager to employee

Reports hazards and incidents promptly and accurately.

Manager to employee

Keeps their tickets, licences and inductions current without being chased.

Manager to employee

Reliable on their own safety. The next step is saying something when somebody else takes a shortcut.

Coaching

Worth reporting near misses as well as incidents. The near misses are the free information.

Coaching

I started reporting near misses rather than only incidents, which surfaced a recurring hazard nobody had logged.

Self-evaluation
Needs development

Procedures are followed inconsistently when work is running behind.

Manager to employee

Hazards are noticed but not reported.

Manager to employee

Personal protective equipment use is inconsistent in [area].

Manager to employee

Time pressure is exactly when the procedure matters. If the procedure makes the timeframe impossible, that is a conversation to have out loud.

Coaching

Report the hazard even when you have worked around it. Your workaround is not available to the next person.

Coaching

I cut corners on procedure when we are running late, which is precisely the wrong time to do it.

Self-evaluation

I notice hazards and fix them for myself without logging them.

Self-evaluation
Unsatisfactory

Safety procedures have not been followed on multiple occasions after being raised in [month].

Manager to employee

A reportable incident or near miss was not reported in line with the requirement.

Manager to employee

This is not a performance conversation in the usual sense. The standard is not negotiable and it needs to be stated that way, in writing.

Coaching

If production pressure is making safe work feel impossible, I need to hear it now, because that is a serious problem and it is not yours.

Coaching

I have not followed procedure consistently. I want retraining and a check-in rather than assuming I have corrected it.

Self-evaluation
No phrases match those two filters together. Clear one of them.
How do you write about safety in a performance review?

Directly. Safety findings should not be softened into development language, because the record may matter later and the standard is not negotiable.

How these were written

Written, not calculated. Each phrase names a situation, an observable behaviour and its effect on the work or the people around it. Bands run from exceeds expectations to unsatisfactory across three voices: a manager writing about somebody, a manager coaching, and a person writing their own self-evaluation.

Assumptions
  • Phrases are starting points. Drop in the real situation or the comment reads as filler.
  • The four bands assume a four-point scale. On a three or five-point cycle the band is a sorting device, not a score.
  • Written for Australian workplaces and Australian English.
  • Check the constraint before rating the person. Workload, authority, tooling and what happened to the last person who tried shape most of what gets written up as an individual failing.
  • Unsatisfactory-band comments assume a dated record already exists and the issue has been raised before.
Sources

What to do about it

Good phrasing rescues a review that was already done properly. It cannot rescue one where nobody wrote anything down until the week it was due.

1

Start from your notes, not from this list

Open what you recorded during the year, pick what really happened, then find the wording. The other order produces a fluent review that says nothing.

2

Name the situation in every comment

The real project, the real quarter, the real result. Only one person could have earned it.

3

Match the band to your evidence, not the conversation you want

A generous rating on somebody you privately consider a problem is how next year's difficult conversation ends up looking like it came from nowhere.

4

Pair every development comment with a support step

Training, a pilot, a pairing, a cadence. Criticism without a path forward produces defensiveness and reads badly to anyone reviewing the file later.

5
Where a tool helps

Read your reviews as a set

If the same competency is the gap across a function, that is a capability gap in how the team was built rather than a dozen development plans.

Near misses are
free information.

Compono Assure tracks competency, credentials and currency, so tickets, inductions and verifications are visible before an audit or an incident makes them visible for you.

Step 5 asks what your reviews say together. That is very hard to answer from a folder of review documents and straightforward to answer from capability data.

See how it works
Compono Assure
$34M
saved by VicRoads over two years

Common questions

What are examples of safety feedback?

Stopping work when the setup is not right, reporting near misses rather than only incidents, keeping tickets and inductions current without being chased.

How do you address a safety breach in a review?

In writing, with the specific incidents and the standard stated plainly. Also check whether production pressure is making the procedure impossible.

Can I use these phrases word for word?

Yes, and in this competency especially, keep them direct.

These phrases are starting points, not finished comments. Change the specifics so each one is true of the actual person and the actual situation, because a comment that could describe anyone is the thing you were trying to avoid. Review comments can later be read as evidence in an employment matter, so anything you take from the unsatisfactory band should match a dated record you already hold. Last reviewed July 2026.

Next step

HR Glossary

Competency framework

The bands above are competency ratings. This is what a competency framework is, and how the levels are meant to work.

Read the definition →Related tool

Psychosocial risk assessment tool

Reviews name the gap one person at a time. This one sizes it across the team.

Run it next →Buying

Requirements builder

Score the platforms you are looking at against the two risks, must-haves first.

Build the scorecard →Talk to us

Bring us your review cycle

A conversation about what your reviews are telling you as a set, not a demo script.

Talk to us →