Page | 27 Best Practices presented by CARDET Risk Assessment Techniques Name of lead organisations: European Risk Observatory; OHS stakeholders in Europe such as health and safety agencies; HSE in Great Britain (HSE, 1998); INRS in France (INRS, 2004); International organizations such as the European Council, the European Commission (EC, 1996); International Labour Organization (ILO, 2001) Type of Best Practice: Handbook/Guidelines, Self-Assessment Tests and Risk assessment tools and interviews through focus group Purpose/Aim of the Tool/Programme/Resource: The INRS in France recommends the intervention of external experts to help conduct the risk assessment (INRS, 2007). External experts can use a variety of tools to conduct the risk assessment, including observation, surveys (e.g. stress surveys), health- related indicators (e.g. blood pressures, drug consumption), individual or collective interviews. Short description of the methods/output and how they were implemented: As underlined by Leka and Cox (2010), risk assessment comprises six steps: hazard identification; assessment of harm; identification of likely risk factors; description of underlying mechanisms; audit of existing management systems and employee support; drawing conclusions about residual risk and priorities. According to them, the combined use of these tools facilitates the identification of psychosocial hazards, the assessment of harms, and the association between hazards and harms. Questions focus particularly on common interventions and how common risk factors are dealt with in an organization. Has a study or assessment been undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of this tool/programme/resource in helping professionals to manage stress? Yes: The results show that several of the psychosocial risk management measures have low frequencies: the consultation of a psychologist and the existence of procedures to deal with psychosocial risks have the lowest frequency across all establishments included in ESENER; knowing whom to address on the topic of psychosocial risk management and the existence of training are the most frequent measures. The findings of our empirical analysis also expose that practice still differs greatly among Member States with relatively few frequent measures shared across a range of Member States. Nonetheless, some more frequent measures, such as the use of information or support from external sources on how to deal with psychosocial risks at establishment level, could in part be seen as a response to the importance given to this issue at the European and national levels. Provide an overview of the outcomes and lessons learned which are relevant or transferable to the BooStress project: Tools to conduct the risk assessment Observation, surveys (e.g. stress surveys) Individual or collective interviews. Identification of psychosocial hazards (and the interrelations between them) Assessment of harms Identify the association between hazards and harms risk indicators