Hazard Hunt
Two weeks of sharp eyes: most hazards spotted (and reported) wins.
Trusted by frontline teams 15 years of frontline software
Built for: Construction · Manufacturing · Warehousing · Facilities Management
Overview
Hazard Hunt is a short-form safety contest template for rewarding people who report the most verified hazards over a 14-day period. It uses an individual highest_score format, so each entrant competes on their own observation count rather than relying on team totals or subjective judging. The template is built around the safety.observation_reported metric action, which makes it a good fit when your platform already tracks safety observations and you want to turn that activity into a focused campaign.
Use this template when you want more eyes on the floor, more near-miss reporting, or more participation in routine safety walks. It works well in warehouses, plants, construction sites, and facilities teams where hazards are visible but often go unreported until they become incidents. Because the contest is time-boxed, it creates urgency without becoming a permanent leaderboard.
Do not use this template for outcomes that are not verified observations, for open-ended recognition, or for metrics your system does not track. It is also not the right fit if you need team-based fairness, cooperative thresholds, or a most-improved format. If your goal is to reward fixes completed, training finished, or incident-free days, choose a different contest structure. Hazard Hunt is specifically for counting verified hazard reports, and it works best when the rules are simple, the verification process is clear, and the contest ends on schedule.
Standards & compliance context
- Use the contest as an engagement layer on top of your formal safety reporting and corrective-action process, not as a substitute for required incident handling.
- If a submitted hazard indicates immediate danger, route it through your emergency response or stop-work procedure before it enters the contest standings.
- Keep the rules clear about privacy and site access if photos, locations, or employee names are included in submissions.
- Make verification criteria consistent so the contest does not create disputes about what counts as a valid observation.
- If your workplace has union, works-council, or employee-representation requirements, review the contest rules before launch to ensure the format is cooperative and non-punitive.
General regulatory context for orientation only — verify current requirements with counsel or the relevant agency before relying on this template for compliance.
How to use this template
- 1. Set the contest window to 14 days and publish the start and end dates so entrants know exactly when reports count.
- 2. Define what qualifies as a valid safety observation, including whether photos, location details, or supervisor verification are required.
- 3. Enroll eligible individuals as entrants and explain that standings are based on verified safety.observation_reported events only.
- 4. Run the contest during normal work activity, review submissions for duplicates or low-quality entries, and update standings consistently.
- 5. Close the contest on the scheduled end date, award points to the top finishers, and review which hazards were most commonly reported.
- 6. Convert the findings into follow-up actions, such as corrective work orders, toolbox talks, or targeted refresher training.
Best practices
- Require enough detail in each observation to verify the hazard without guessing.
- Use a short contest window so the campaign feels active and the standings stay relevant.
- Publish the scoring rules before launch, including what counts, what does not count, and how duplicates are handled.
- Keep the contest individual unless you intentionally redesign it for team competition.
- Review reports daily so entrants see that valid observations are being acknowledged quickly.
- Tie the contest to real corrective action, because people stop reporting if hazards disappear into a black hole.
- Avoid subjective scoring and score only verified system events to reduce Goodhart-style gaming.
- Do not let the contest run indefinitely, or it becomes a leaderboard instead of a contest.
What this template typically catches
Issues teams running this template most often surface in practice:
Common use cases
Frequently asked questions
What does the Hazard Hunt template actually include?
It includes a two-week individual contest setup with a highest_score goal, points-based prizes, and scoring tied to the verified safety.observation_reported action. The template is designed to rank entrants by count of reported safety observations, so it fits hazard-spotting drives, near-miss reporting pushes, and site walk campaigns. It is not a general safety leaderboard or an open-ended recognition board.
Who should run this contest?
A safety manager, EHS lead, site supervisor, or regional operations leader can run it. The best operator is someone who can verify submissions, communicate the rules clearly, and close the contest on time. If you have multiple sites, one coordinator should own the standings so the scoring stays consistent.
How often should Hazard Hunt run?
This template is built for a 14-day sprint, which is long enough to build momentum and short enough to keep attention high. It works well as a recurring monthly or quarterly campaign if you want repeated bursts of reporting. Avoid leaving it always on, because that turns it into a leaderboard instead of a contest.
Is this fair for small teams or mixed shifts?
Yes, if you keep the contest individual and use verified event counts rather than subjective scoring. For mixed-size groups, the cleanest approach is to keep the field open to all eligible entrants and make the rules about what counts as a valid observation very explicit. If you need team-based fairness, this template is not the right fit without redesigning it.
How do you prevent people from gaming the contest?
Use only verified safety.observation_reported events and define what counts as a valid observation before launch. Require enough detail in each report to confirm the hazard, and reject duplicates or vague entries that do not lead to action. A daily cap can also help keep the contest honest and prevent one person from flooding the standings with low-value reports.
Does this replace a formal safety reporting process?
No. It should sit on top of your normal safety reporting workflow, not replace it. The contest is for engagement and visibility, while your incident management or corrective-action process still handles triage, remediation, and escalation. If a report indicates an immediate danger, it should be handled outside the contest rules first.
Can we customize the prize and scoring rules?
Yes. The template already uses points as the prize type, but you can adjust the reward, rank payouts, and eligibility rules to fit your site culture. You can also add a daily submission cap, define what qualifies as a report, and specify whether photos, location details, or supervisor confirmation are required.
How does this integrate with existing safety tools?
It works best when observations are captured in the same system your team already uses for safety reporting, inspections, or corrective actions. Because the template scores a tracked metric action, it can align with your existing workflow instead of relying on manual tallies. That makes the standings easier to verify and reduces disputes.
What is the main difference between this and an ad-hoc safety challenge?
An ad-hoc challenge usually has vague rules, inconsistent scoring, and no clear end date. Hazard Hunt gives you a defined duration, a specific scoring action, and a ranking method that makes the contest easy to explain and repeat. That structure matters because it keeps the campaign fair and easier to administer.
Related templates
Ready to use this template?
Get started with MangoApps and use Hazard Hunt with your team — pricing built for small business.
