ICAM investigations: evidence, contributing factors and human review

A useful incident investigation explains how an event became possible and what needs to change. It should connect evidence, contributing factors and corrective actions—not stop at the last person involved or a single label such as “human error”.

ICAM means Incident Cause Analysis Method. In an EHS safety system, it provides a structured way to examine an incident, organise evidence and consider the organisational conditions and defences associated with the event. Software can help organise this work, but competent people remain responsible for the investigation and its conclusions.

Start with the investigation scope

Before opening a template, agree what the team needs to understand. Record the event, immediate response, investigation boundaries, people involved and evidence that needs to be preserved. Choose an investigation approach that fits the event and your organisation’s procedures.

A 5 Whys discussion can help a team explore a focused issue. An ICAM investigation supports a broader examination of contributing factors and system conditions. The method should serve the investigation, rather than force every event into the same level of analysis.

Organise PEEPO evidence

PEEPO is a useful organising framework for People, Environment, Equipment, Procedures and Organisation. Keep observations, photographs, relevant records, interview notes and other evidence linked to their sources. Distinguish what the evidence demonstrates from what the team has inferred.

For a public reference to ICAM and the PEEPO framework, see the South Australian Government’s WHS Incident Investigation guide note (version 2, 31 October 2022). Its procedural requirements apply to the arrangement described in that document.

Use the evidence to build a coherent sequence of events. Record gaps and conflicting accounts so that uncertainty remains visible during review. A tidy report is not a substitute for a well-supported explanation.

Examine contributing factors and defences

Review the relationship between individual or team actions, task and environmental conditions, organisational factors, and failed or absent defences. Avoid treating the investigation as a search for one person to blame.

Each finding should point back to relevant evidence. Where a conclusion remains uncertain, make that uncertainty explicit and identify what further information or review is needed.

Turn findings into reviewable actions

A corrective action should describe the change required, the responsible owner, the intended completion date and the evidence needed for closure. Review whether the proposed action addresses the identified factor, rather than simply repeating a general instruction to be more careful.

Completing an action and checking its effectiveness are different steps. Keep both visible so the investigation can support follow-through after the report is issued.

Where AI assistance fits

Where enabled, AI-assisted workflows can support activities such as organising information or preparing draft material. AI output may be incomplete, inaccurate or inconsistent. It must not be treated as an independent investigation finding or an approval decision.

The investigation team should check generated material against the underlying evidence and apply competent professional judgement. Read the SMP 365 AI disclosure for processing information, limitations and human-review requirements.

Explore the SMP 365 ICAM workflow

SMP 365 ICAM brings PEEPO evidence, contributing factors, defences, organisational factors and reviewed investigation reports into a Microsoft 365 workflow. The guided ICAM software demo uses fictional sample data and selected interactions, so you can explore the approach without accessing a customer system.

For incident intake and follow-up, explore SMP 365 Incident Management. To discuss roles, permissions and deployment requirements, book an EHS safety software demonstration.

Reviewed 9 September 2026. This article is a product and workflow guide, not investigation accreditation or legal advice.