Action planning

Analysis and consultation matter only if they translate into change. An action plan turns priority hazards and focus group insights into specific, owned, time-bound commitments - and documents the due diligence that workers and regulators expect.

Stop. Have you run focus groups - or an alternative consultation? Survey data tells you what is elevated; consultation tells you why. Without that, actions may address the wrong root cause. Return to Focus Groups & Contextual Inquiry →

Principles for effective action planning

Prioritise by the hierarchy of controls

Elimination and substitution - redesigning the work to remove the hazard - should be the first consideration, not the last. Training and policies supplement structural change; they don't replace it.

Assign clear ownership

Every action needs a named person - not a team, not a role. The owner is the person who will be asked at the next review why it isn't done, which may not be the person doing the work. Managers own actions even when delivery is delegated.

Set realistic timeframes

Short actions within 30 days build momentum and demonstrate good faith. Longer structural changes need milestones, not just a due date. If an action has no timeline, it has no urgency.

Be aware of sequencing

Some actions depend on others - you can't train managers in wellbeing conversations before the content is scoped, or restructure a role without a confirmed business case. Map prerequisites before setting target dates. Parallelise where possible; forcing artificial sequencing stalls the plan.

Communicate the plan back

Workers who took part in the survey and focus groups should hear what actions are being taken, by whom, by when. Silence after consultation erodes trust faster than no consultation at all.

Review progress at a fixed interval

Build in a 90-day review. What's done? What isn't, and why? What's the revised timeline? Treat the plan as a live document, not a one-off compliance exercise.

Hierarchy of controls

The WHS Codes require applying the hierarchy of controls. It maps cleanly onto three tiers - prevent, ameliorate, respond - and the controls that prevent harm at its source do the heavy lifting.

PrimaryPrevention - change the work itself

Eliminate. Remove the hazard source entirely - e.g. redesign a role to remove chronic overload by redistributing tasks, not adding resources.

Substitute. Replace a high-risk practice with a lower-risk one - e.g. swap always-on communication expectations for defined response windows.

Isolate. Separate the hazard from those it affects - e.g. rotate emotionally demanding client contact to limit cumulative exposure.

Engineer. Change work systems - e.g. workload management tools, better scheduling, clearer escalation pathways.

Removes or reduces the hazard at its source so harm doesn't occur. The most effective controls, and where the leverage is.

SecondaryAmelioration - reduce the impact, build capacity to cope

Administrative. Policies, procedures, training - e.g. a psychosocial risk policy, manager training to recognise and respond to distress, grievance and early-response processes.

Helps people deal with hazards that remain, and catches problems early. Supplements primary control; it does not replace it.

TertiaryReactive response - support those already affected

Individual supports. EAP, counselling, resilience programs, wellbeing apps, return-to-work support.

A necessary safety net for harm that has already happened - but it does not change the conditions that caused it.

Quick wins build momentum - but they can't be the whole plan. Secondary and tertiary controls are fastest to implement and typically dominate the first 90 days. Use them deliberately - they show workers that consultation was real. But sustained change needs primary, prevention-level action. A plan of only a new policy and a resilience program won't satisfy a regulator, and won't move the dial on your next survey.

Prevention / amelioration / response framing after LaMontagne, A. D., Keegel, T., & Vallance, D. (2007). Protecting and promoting mental health in the workplace: developing a systems approach to job stress. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 18(3), 221-228. doi.org/10.1071/he07221

Action plan structure

Capture each action in a simple, owned, time-bound table - the "contributing factor" column is where your focus group analysis connects in.

See the structure and a worked example (click to expand)
HazardContributing factor (from focus groups)ActionControl levelOwnerBudget ($)Target dateStatus
Role overloadTask allocation decisions made without visibility of individual workloadImplement team workload visibility board in weekly stand-upEngineeringTeam LeadNil30 days-
Supervisor supportManagers unsure how to have wellbeing conversationsDeliver 2-hour manager upskilling sessionAdministrativeP&C Manager~$80045 days-
Change consultationDecisions announced rather than discussedPilot team input sessions for next two structural changesSubstituteGM OperationsNil60 days-

Example rows only - replace with your organisation's actions. An anonymised worked example will be added in a future update.

Interventions library

Browse evidence-based controls while you plan; when a model is loaded in Data Analytics, they're sorted so the hazards most linked to your priority factors appear first.

Open the interventions library (click to expand)

Loading interventions library…

Template download

An action plan template pre-formatted with the fields above, plus a hierarchy of controls reference and 90-day review checklist.

A combined Excel workbook (action plan + focus group notes) is planned for a future update. Your WHS regulator's website has additional templates and jurisdiction-specific guidance.

The 90-day review is included on the final page of the action plan template.