THE DIRECT ANSWER
The decision to start with
Use driving-event records to start a contextual review, not to make an automatic judgment. Confirm event definitions, compare similar exposure, listen to the driver and agree on a specific coaching action that can be reviewed fairly.
Who this is for: Fleet managers and safety leads designing a practical driving-event review process.
Explain the purpose and the data
Tell drivers which events are collected, why the fleet reviews them, who has access and how concerns can be raised. Distinguish the device’s event label from a verified account of what happened. Confirm the actual thresholds and supported events for the deployment.
Keep access and retention appropriate to the purpose and the fleet’s applicable policies. An event score should not become a substitute for explaining the evidence. Involve the people responsible for safety and employee processes when defining how records will be used.
Validate the event before coaching
Open the time, location and journey context. Check device installation and threshold consistency when a new pattern appears. A harsh-braking event may reflect avoiding an obstacle, while a speed event may need review of the relevant road context. Keep missing context explicit.
Ask the driver for an account and compare available records before deciding on an action. Where video is not part of the confirmed setup, do not imply that telemetry reconstructs everything the driver saw. Prioritize events that are supported by evidence and matter to the agreed safety process.
Compare rates, not raw totals alone
A driver covering much more distance has more exposure. Choose a consistent denominator such as distance or driving hours and compare similar vehicle and route types. Report the period and data coverage beside the count. A small sample may not justify a ranking.
Avoid combining fundamentally different events into an unexplained number. Separate the operational question from the scoring method. If thresholds, hardware or route assignment changed between periods, note that before describing a trend as an improvement or deterioration.
Agree on one observable action
Use a private, specific conversation: describe the verified situation, ask what contributed and agree on the next behavior or operational change. Recognize good decisions as well as recurring risks. Supportive coaching is also discussed in Geotab’s industry guidance, without implying its product features are available in SafarTrak.
Set a review date and decide what evidence would show progress. A dispatch or scheduling issue may need a process owner alongside the driver. Record that responsibility so the driver is not left accountable for something outside their control.
Review the result with context
Compare similar exposure and inspect a sample of events, not just the summary rate. Keep the driver’s feedback and any corrections alongside the record. A lower event rate is a useful operational observation, but it does not by itself prove a reduction in collisions.
For SafarTrak, confirm the driving events and journey context provided by your device and configuration. Start with that verified coverage, then define how the safety team will review and act on it. Ask for the workflow to be demonstrated before relying on it.
Put the criteria side by side
Swipe or scroll sideways to view every column.
| Field | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Event and timestamp | Identify the record under review |
| Vehicle, route and exposure | Make comparisons interpretable |
| Driver explanation | Add context the device may not capture |
| Agreed action and owner | Connect review to a practical change |
| Follow-up evidence | Check progress and record corrections |
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
Illustrative comparison: counts versus exposure
Driver A has 12 reviewed events over 3,000 km; Driver B has 8 over 1,000 km. Their rates are 4 and 8 per 1,000 km. The raw count tells a different story from the rate. Neither number determines fault: route, vehicle, definitions and event context still need review.
Common questions
Does a harsh-driving alert prove unsafe behavior?
It identifies a configured event for review. It does not establish the surrounding circumstances or remove the need to check the record and driver context.
Can we publish a driver league table?
Consider whether it serves the agreed safety purpose, whether comparisons are fair and whether your policies allow it. A private coaching process is often a more useful starting point.
Sources and further reading
- Geotab: building a driver coaching culture
Industry perspective on supportive coaching. Geotab product features described there are not SafarTrak feature claims.
Published by SafarTrak as general operational guidance. Examples are illustrative; confirm vehicle, device and workflow coverage for your deployment. How we publish our guides.
Download the review sheet (CSV)