Gap analysis for the Veiligheidsladder: from baseline to target level
A gap analysis compares your current safety behaviour with the target level of the Veiligheidsladder (Safety Culture Ladder, SCL) 2.0. The official documents page of Safety Culture Ladder publishes the standard, the certification scheme and explanations. Use the requirements per level for content and the step-by-step plan for the order. A SAQ (Self Assessment Questionnaire) score is a baseline measurement, not a certificate.
The ladder measures safety culture and behaviour. So you are not only looking for policy or a completed form, but for what management, supervisors and employees actually do. The five levels run from pathological to progressive. Which level can be assessed depends on the product you choose. SCL Original gives a certificate up to and including level 5, SCL up to and including level 4, and SCL Light a statement with a level indication up to and including level 3.
Start with scope and purpose
First write down which organisation, locations and activities you are examining. Then note the target level and the reason, for example a client requirement. The updated ViA guidance (Dutch guidance document) states that from 1 July 2026, many contracts worth €100,000 or more require at least maturity level 3. The client and the contract remain decisive for the exact requirement and the accepted evidence.
Choose a suitable SCL 2.0 type. SCL Original gives a certificate up to and including level 5; SCL gives a certificate up to and including level 4. SCL Light is an entry model with a statement and a level indication up to and including level 3. For organisations of up to 50 employees, there is a variant for small organisations. An Approved Self Assessment (ASA) gives a self-declaration without a level. In the updated ViA guidance, the ASA has been replaced by SCL Light as evidence for small organisations. Always check this against the current tender conditions.
Worksheet for your baseline measurement
Use the same questions for each theme. Add sources from interviews, workplace inspection rounds, incident reports and observations. Paper alone does not prove culture.
| SCL theme | What do you see now? | Desired behaviour | Evidence | Priority/owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Policy and leadership | Management only discusses safety after incidents | Safety is part of decisions and planning | Agenda, decision, interview | High / management |
| Knowledge and responsibility | Employees know the risks, but almost never report | Everyone speaks up and reports early | Interviews, reports | High / site supervisor |
| Discussion and learning | The toolbox meeting is a one-way presentation | Teams discuss causes and learn from the work | Minutes, observation | Medium / foreman |
| Cooperation | Subcontractors receive the same instructions | Client and chain partners learn together | Meetings, actions | Medium / project manager |
| Improving | Actions are closed without measuring effect | Measures are followed up and adjusted | Action list, trend | High / KAM (Kwaliteit, Arbo en Milieu, quality, health, safety and environment) |
The themes in this worksheet are a practical translation for the analysis. Do not copy the standard text; check each point against the current SCL 2.0 documents and the audit agreements with your certification body.
From gap to action
A good gap describes behaviour, risk and evidence. “Toolbox talks are missing” is too vague. “Employees report near misses verbally, but nobody records or discusses the cause” gives a starting point. Then formulate an action: the foreman records reports from 1 October, discusses one report every week, and measures after eight weeks how many reports have been followed up.
Give every action an owner, a deadline and a measure of effect. Then plan new workplace inspection rounds and conversations with employees who are not part of the project team. If only the KAM employee can explain the desired behaviour, the gap is not yet closed.
Fictional case: preparing for level 3
An installation company wants to reach level 3. The SAQ gives a usable starting point, but during three workplace inspection rounds it becomes clear that reports are mostly made only after a supervisor asks for them. The analysis therefore records “reactive reporting” as a high risk. The action is a short reporting route on the site, a weekly team discussion and a monthly trend analysis by the project manager.
After two months, the company interviews eight employees again. Six can name a recent report and its follow-up. Two do not yet know the route; their teams receive extra explanation. The company keeps the reports and interview notes as evidence, but this does not yet mean it is certified.
A gap analysis or SAQ does not automatically make you certified. An accredited certification body assesses the chosen SCL type, level, scope and the behaviour in practice.
Frequently asked questions
Is a high SAQ score enough for level 3?
No. The SAQ helps you choose priorities. The audit also looks at interviews, observations and the way the organisation learns and improves.
Do I have to choose SCL Original?
Not automatically. SCL Original, SCL and SCL Light have different audit scope and results. Choose based on organisation size, client and contract conditions.
How often should I repeat the gap analysis?
Repeat it before the audit and after important improvement actions. In addition, use the annual review of your chosen SCL 2.0 type to keep following behaviour.