“Boss, got a second? I have three interviews set tomorrow and Ineed some advice. They are on three completely different kinds ofaccidents. One is a meat cutter who cut his hand badly on a bandsaw, one was involved in a traffic collision, and one is asecretary who fell off a chair at work.”

“It sounds pretty straightforward. What can I do for you?”

“I want to maximize the amount of information I get from eachinterviewee, obviously, but I also want to maximize my efficiencyin obtaining that information. Can you give me some guidance tohelp me get the most information in the least amount of time?”

At first glance, these injuries would seem totally unrelated,and would require different approaches to the interviews. They allhave several traits in common, however.

In the early 1970s, the National Transportation Safety Boarddeveloped a guide for the investigation of accidents. NTSB foundthat all collisions and adverse events could be broken into threetime periods: pre-incident, incident, and post-incident. Allaccidents also could be divided into three causation factorcategories: human, vehicle, and environmental.

Causation Factors

Human factors include the drivers of all involved vehicles,operators of any machinery or equipment, pilots, secretaries whofall from chairs, and witnesses. Human factors encompass anyone andeveryone who has anything to do with the incident. This couldinclude supervisors, trainers, managers, and co-workers.

Device or vehicle factors pertain to the manner in which thedevice caused the event, be it a pipeline, railroad car, oraircraft. For a machine operator, this would include designfactors, safety devices, alterations to devices, interior contactpoints within vehicles, prior device failures, and repair andmaintenance histories, as well as how well the device reacted tothe event.

The third causation factor is the environment, which takes intoconsideration whether the area in which the event occurredcontributed to the event. For a slip and fall incident, forexample, the interviewer would want to know what the surface wasmade of. Was it clean, dry, level? When was it last serviced? For atraffic collision, what is the accident history of the area? Arethere traffic controls? Did they function? Were they necessary? Inwhat way was the area altered by the incident?

Time Periods

The pre-incident period starts with the design of the deviceinvolved in the injury, the initial training of the injured party,and the design of the workstation, and continues up to the momentat which the event became unavoidable. Questions an interviewermight ask to obtain information related to this time periodinclude:

Does the meat cutter have any formal food service training?Where did he receive it? When was the particular saw purchased andby whom? Had he ever used this kind of machine before? Had he everbeen cut before?

When did the driver first receive his license? What drivertraining had he received? When did he first buy the car and fromwhom? What damage did it have at the time? Had it been involved inany prior collisions? What traffic controls were present? Were theyfunctioning and visible?

How long had the secretary been using this chair? Was it a newchair or a replacement? How long had he been working at theparticular company, or in this assignment or at this workstation?Had he ever noticed anything irregular about the chair or thefloor? To whom did he report it, and when? Had he been injuredpreviously? How did those prior injuries occur? What were thelighting conditions?

An example of pre-event information would be a reference toFord's production of the Pinto in the 1970s. The Pinto developed areputation for being involved in numerous fires upon rear-endcollisions. During the ensuing litigation, it was found thatcertain design features might have contributed to the fires.

Of particular interest in automobile collisions are questionsabout prior collisions and damage, brake application prior toimpact, distance moved by both vehicles as a result of thecollision, and at-rest positions and separations of the involvedvehicles. For all claimants interviewed, questions should be askedregarding factors present at least in the 24-hour period prior tothe injury, including sleep patterns; drug and alcohol use, bothprescription and recreational; interpersonal relationships;financial situation; and work conditions.

The incident period is that immediately following the point ofno avoidance. That is, the moment at which the operator iscommitted to becoming involved in the event. For our injured meatcutter, it would be the time at which he no longer could pull hishand out of the path of the blade. For a driver of a vehicle, it isthe time at which he no longer has the ability to avoid thecollision by braking or turning. For our secretary, it is the timeat which he began to sit in the chair.

The incident period continues until the event stabilizes: whenthe meat cutter has sustained the maximum injury, when all damagehas occurred and the vehicles have come to rest, when the secretaryis on the floor.

The post-incident period is the time from the end of theincident phase, and continues until the situation is completelyreturned to its pre-event condition. This includes medicaltreatment, litigation, vehicle repair, claimant retraining orrehabilitation, device redesign, or operator retraining. This timeperiod could extend several years. In the event of a lifetimedisability, it could continue for decades.

Questions pertaining to the post-incident period would includewhen medical treatment first was sought, where treatment wasobtained, and who referred the claimant to the medical provider.Can the claimant describe the facility and the provider? When wastreatment discontinued? Was he released, or did he stop on hisown?

Together, these factors and time periods can be combined into anine-cell accident investigation matrix, as seen in Figure 1.Dividing the incident into three time periods allows an interviewerto focus and organize his questions. Breaking down the causationfactors and time periods enables the interviewer to conceptualizethe factors that led up to the incident and its subsequentevents.

The specifics of the interview are up to the imagination of theinterviewer. The more inventive and inquisitive the interviewerbecomes, the more information he will elicit. Use of the nine-cellmatrix provides interviewers with a tool to organize interviews,efficiently categorize questions, and maximize the informationobtained, while minimizing the time required to obtain theinformation. In any event, a thorough, in-depth interview canrequire an hour or more to conduct.

Organizing the interview keeps the information in an orderlyformat. Readers of the finished reports can find specificinformation quickly and decisions can be made more effectively. Theinterviewer is less likely to become sidetracked and omit relevantquestions, and the time spent conducting the interview isreduced.

Richard Rinker is an investigator for MJM Investigations,based in Raleigh, N.C.