Psychosocial hazards bowtie example: uncontrolled exposure to psychosocial hazards
A complete, worked bowtie analysis example: 6 threats, 5 consequences, and 36 controls — 19 of them critical — around the top event, each carrying effectiveness, degradation factors, and a performance standard.
Open it read-only in the real editor → No sign-in required.
Bowtie Risk Engine writes barriers as controls and the top event as the risk — same method, stricter bookkeeping.
Uncontrolled Exposure to Psychosocial Hazards
The newest discipline in the set, and the one WHS regulators are asking hardest about. Job demands, poor support, harassment, and organisational change as threats; psychological harm, turnover, and regulatory action as consequences — with controls that can actually be verified, not just asserted.
Area. Whole of workplace — office, field, client-facing, remote and FIFO work settings
Hazard. Work-related psychosocial hazards (excessive demands, low control, inappropriate behaviour, poorly managed change, isolation, traumatic exposure) causing psychological or physical harm
Activity. All work activities, work arrangements and workplace interactions, including working from home and work-related events
Top event. Uncontrolled Exposure to Psychosocial Hazards — the moment control of the hazard is lost, at the knot of the bowtie.
Threats and preventive controls
Built on the WA Code of Practice for psychosocial hazards in the workplace — WHS duty-of-care terms.
| Threat | Control | Criticality | Effectiveness |
|---|---|---|---|
| Excessive or sustained work demandsFast pace, time pressure, excessive workload, extended hours, long runs of consecutive days, shift rotation and high emotional labour exceeding what workers can sustainably absorb. | Workload and staffing-level review | Critical | High |
| Fatigue-managed rostering and breaks | Critical | High | |
| Good work design at the source | Standard | High | |
| Protected time for indirect work | Standard | High | |
| Low job control and unclear rolesTightly prescribed or machine-paced work, little say over pace, breaks or methods, exclusion from decisions, and unclear or conflicting role expectations. | Position descriptions and role-clarity reviews | Standard | High |
| Autonomy designed into how work is done | Critical | High | |
| Consultation and HSR engagement | Critical | High | |
| Inappropriate or unreasonable behaviourBullying, harassment (including sexual and racial harassment), aggression, discrimination and interpersonal conflict — in person or through technology. | Behaviour standards and code of conduct | Critical | High |
| Visible leadership commitment and modelling | Critical | Medium | |
| Behaviour and conflict-resolution training | Standard | Medium | |
| Impartial complaint and grievance procedure | Critical | High | |
| Poorly managed organisational changeRestructures, downsizing, new technology or role changes handled without structure, communication or consultation, creating sustained uncertainty. | Structured change-management process | Critical | High |
| Change communication and feedback loop | Standard | High | |
| Post-change workload and role review | Standard | Medium | |
| Remote, isolated or FIFO workWork with limited access to support and communications, long commutes and time away from home, accommodation constraints, and few opportunities to escape work issues. | Reliable communications and scheduled contact | Critical | High |
| Accommodation and roster standards for time away | Standard | High | |
| Support networks and reintegration | Standard | Unverified | |
| Exposure to traumatic events or materialDirect exposure to death, serious injury or threat; repeated exposure to other people's trauma (vicarious trauma); or sudden secondary trauma from distressing material and investigations. | Exposure planning and informed preparation | Standard | High |
| Exposure rotation and dosage limits | Critical | High | |
| Trauma-response skills and psychoeducation | Standard | Medium |
Consequences and recovery controls
If the top event happens anyway, these are the controls that limit how bad it gets.
| Consequence | Control | Criticality | Effectiveness |
|---|---|---|---|
| Psychological injuryAnxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress or sleep disorders requiring treatment and time off work — the primary harm pathway of unmanaged exposure. | Early-detection monitoring | Critical | High |
| EAP and confidential counselling | Standard | Medium | |
| Recovery-at-work and return-to-work programs | Critical | High | |
| Fatigue-related error or incidentExhaustion degrading judgement and reaction time, leading to mistakes, near misses or physical injury — fatigue is both a hazard and an outcome of exposure. | Fitness-for-work and fatigue reporting | Critical | High |
| Task rotation and recovery breaks in high-demand periods | Standard | High | |
| Supervision and cross-checks on safety-critical tasks | Critical | High | |
| Burnout and chronic stress absenceChronic work-related stress progressing to burnout — exhaustion, detachment and reduced capacity — with rising absenteeism and turnover. | Workload rebalancing and case triage | Critical | High |
| Peer support and debriefing | Standard | High | |
| Burnout recognition and early intervention | Standard | High | |
| Recovery-at-work and return-to-work programs | Critical | High | |
| Acute psychological crisisSevere distress requiring immediate response — panic, breakdown, or risk of self-harm — occurring at work or connected to it. | Crisis response plan and referral pathway | Critical | High |
| Mental health first aid capability | Standard | High | |
| Immediate removal from exposure and safe duties | Critical | High | |
| Regulatory action, claims and costWorkSafe WA notification and scrutiny, workers' compensation claims, organisational disruption, turnover and reputational cost following psychological injury. | Regulator notification and reporting compliance | Critical | Medium |
| Injury management and claims coordination | Standard | High | |
| Impartial investigation and organisational learning | Standard | High |
| Control | Degradation factor | Degradation control |
|---|---|---|
| Workload and staffing-level review | Vacancies and unplanned absence concentrate load on remaining workers | Temporary staffing pool and workload re-triage during absence peaks |
| Fatigue-managed rostering and breaks | Overtime and informal shift swaps bypass roster protections | Swap and overtime approval gate with a fatigue check before acceptance |
| Behaviour standards and code of conduct | Standards not applied to senior or high-performing staff | Impartial escalation route for reports about senior management, with officer-level oversight |
| Impartial complaint and grievance procedure | Fear of victimisation suppresses reporting | Anti-victimisation protections actively enforced and communicated; confidential reporting channel |
| Exposure rotation and dosage limits | Understaffing forces continuous exposure onto remaining specialists | Minimum-staffing trigger that pauses intake or redistributes allocation |
| EAP and confidential counselling | Stigma and confidentiality doubts suppress uptake | Leader endorsement, guaranteed confidentiality and multiple access channels |
| Fitness-for-work and fatigue reporting | Blame response to fatigue declarations suppresses reporting | No-fault stand-down policy with pay protection |
| Crisis response plan and referral pathway | Crisis outside hours or at a remote site with no trained responder available | 24/7 crisis line and site-specific response plans with rostered coverage |
Workload and staffing-level review
Every control in this template carries this level of detail — this is one of the critical ones.
What it does. Scheduled review of workloads, staffing levels and skill mix against actual demand, with achievable performance targets set in consultation with workers.
Performance standard — objective. Keep work demands within what the rostered workforce can sustainably deliver, so excessive workload does not become a source of harm.
A verification criterion. Workloads and staffing levels are reviewed on a defined cycle against actual demand, with targets set in consultation with workers.
How it erodes. Reviews skipped in busy periods (exactly when they matter), targets rolled over unchanged year to year, and consultation reduced to announcement let workload drift beyond sustainable levels unnoticed.
Questions about this template
Is this bowtie example free to use?
Yes. Open it read-only in the real editor with no sign-in and read every control in full. To adapt it to your own operation, start the free 3-month trial — full editor and register, work email, no credit card.
What does the template include?
6 threats, 5 consequences, and 36 controls (barriers) around the top event, plus 8 degradation factors with their own controls, and a performance standard on every control. The control register and audit-ready PDF are generated from the same model.
What standard or framework does it align with?
It is built on the Western Australian Code of Practice for psychosocial hazards and speaks WHS duty-of-care language. It gives safety teams the same barrier discipline for psychosocial risk that they already apply to physical hazards.
Can I export it?
Yes — PNG and SVG for slides and reports, JSON for version control, and a multi-page PDF containing the control registers, degradation factors, and performance standards. Trial exports are brand-marked.
Open this bowtie in the editor.
Read every control, criterion, and degradation factor in the live model — then adapt it to your own operation on the free 3-month trial.
More worked bowtie examples
- Process safety bowtie example: loss of containment of flammable hydrocarbon
- Aviation SMS bowtie example: loss of separation in controlled airspace
- Cyber security bowtie example: unauthorised access to a customer database
- Medical device bowtie example: unintended drug overdose from an infusion pump
- Reliability bowtie example: critical pump failure causing unplanned shutdown
Or start from the template gallery.