Bradford Factor

Managing employee absences is a delicate balancing act for HR managers. One tool that many organizations use to monitor absenteeism is the Bradford Factor (also known as the Bradford score or Bradford index). This simple metric shines a light on how frequent, short-term absences can be more disruptive to a business than occasional longer absences. Below, we’ll explain what the Bradford Factor is, how it’s calculated, what different scores mean, and the pros and cons of using it in your absence management strategy. Throughout, we’ll keep the tone friendly and practical, so you feel empowered to use this tool wisely.

What is the Bradford Factor?

The Bradford Factor is an HR metric used to measure employee absenteeism by combining the frequency and duration of absences into a single score. In essence, it gives more weight to repeated short-term absences than to one-off long absences. The concept originated from research at the University of Bradford (UK) in the 1980s. The underlying idea is that many brief, unplanned absences disrupt operations more than a few longer absences, even if the total days missed are the same.

In practical terms, the Bradford Factor allows HR teams to spot patterns of absenteeism objectively. It’s a straightforward, data-driven formula (as we’ll see below) that any size company can apply. Many modern HR systems even include Bradford Factor tracking, making it easy to get insights at a glance. But while the Bradford score can highlight potential attendance problems, it’s not a judgment of character. It’s simply a starting point for understanding how disruptive an employee’s absence pattern might be.

What does a Bradford Score indicate?

A Bradford Factor score is essentially an indicator of disruption caused by an employee’s absences. Low scores are a good sign, suggesting the person either hasn’t been off work much or took leave in one continuous block (which is easier for the team to manage). High scores are a red flag, as they signal frequent, sporadic absences that can impact team productivity and workflow. In other words, the score correlates with how unpredictable and frequent someone’s absences have been:

• Lower Bradford score (e.g. under 50): Indicates minimal disruption. The employee’s attendance is consistent, with few unplanned interruptions. This often means better team dynamics and productivity, since others aren’t constantly covering unexpected gaps.

• Higher Bradford score: Signals repeated short-term absences and potential issues. A high number suggests the employee has been calling in sick or absent on many separate occasions, which can strain the team and may warrant attention from management. It doesn’t automatically mean the employee is doing something wrong, but it does indicate a pattern that HR should look into.

It’s important to note that the Bradford Factor doesn’t tell you why someone has a high score; it only flags that there is a pattern. For instance, an elevated score might indicate an underlying health issue, personal challenges, or disengagement at work. So, a Bradford score indicates the impact of absences, but you’ll want to dig deeper into context before drawing conclusions. We’ll discuss later how to handle high scores in a fair, supportive way.

What is a Good or Bad Bradford Score?

When it comes to Bradford Factor scores, lower is always better from an absence management perspective. A “good” Bradford score is a low one, typically indicating that an employee has infrequent absences. Conversely, a “bad” or concerning score is a high number, reflecting frequent short-term absences. Here’s a general guide to good vs. bad Bradford scores:

• Under 50 points: This is a normal Bradford Factor for most employees over a year. It’s the typical score for an average person with a few or no sick days. Essentially a good, low score.

• 50–100 points: Scores in this range are borderline. Many organizations treat 50 as a monitoring threshold. Crossing around 50 points might prompt HR to keep an eye on the employee’s attendance, as the pattern of absences could be heading toward a problem.

• 101–200 points: A score into the low 100s is generally considered high and cause for concern. It suggests a pattern of absences that likely needs addressing. For example, an employee scoring around 150 has definitely had multiple instances of absence. At this stage, companies often do a closer review or an informal warning, and offer support to the employee before things escalate.

• 200+ points: When Bradford scores climb above 200, it’s widely seen as a serious issue. Such a high score means the employee’s short-term absences are very frequent, significantly disrupting work. Employers typically have formal interventions at this point. Possibly a written warning or other disciplinary action, while also checking if the employee needs any help or accommodations.

Keep in mind that these benchmarks can vary by organization. The above ranges are common guidelines, not strict rules. The key takeaway is that “good” = low score (no real absence concerns), and “bad” = high score (frequent absences raising concerns). Always consider the context, though – an otherwise dedicated employee with a high score might be dealing with legitimate health issues. So, treat the numbers as signals, not final judgments.

How to Calculate the Bradford Factor

Calculating a Bradford Factor score is refreshingly simple. The formula is:

B = S² × D

Where:

• S = the number of separate absence instances (the number of times the person was absent) during a defined period. Each occurrence, no matter how short or long, counts as one “spell” of absence.

• D = the total number of days the person was absent during that same period (usually measured over the past 12 months or a rolling year).

The result B is the Bradford Factor score. The math gives much more weight to S (frequency) because S is squared. This means frequent short absences boost the score dramatically, while a single extended absence keeps the score low.

Example: Imagine two employees who each missed 10 days in the last year:

• Employee A took one continuous absence of 10 days (perhaps recovering from surgery). Their Bradford score would be: B = 1² × 10 = 10.

• Employee B took those 10 days as three separate sick leaves (on different occasions). Their score would be: B = 3² × 10 = 90.

Both were out for 10 days total, but Employee B’s multiple instances of absence send their score much higher. This example illustrates why the Bradford Factor is useful. It highlights that repeat absences (like Employee B’s pattern) are more disruptive than one-off events.

The infographic above provides an example of calculating a Bradford Factor. In this scenario, an employee had 2 separate absence occurrences totaling 9 days, resulting in a Bradford score of 36. This score falls below common concern thresholds (often around 50 points). The chart visualizes how a few longer absences can keep the Bradford score relatively low, whereas more frequent short absences would spike the score into higher risk zones.

A practical note on timing: The Bradford formula is usually applied over a rolling 12-month period (or a fixed calendar year). That means you count S and D for, say, the past 52 weeks. Many companies update scores continuously as absences occur, always looking back at the last year. In other cases, they might reset calculations each calendar year. The defined period matters because it affects the score. Absences “drop off” after they fall outside the 12-month window. So if an employee improves their attendance and has no absences for a while, their Bradford score will naturally decrease over time as old instances age out.

How do you Evaluate various Bradford Scores?

Interpreting a Bradford score isn’t just about the number itself. It’s about what your company does at certain thresholds. Many organizations use trigger points to evaluate when a score needs attention. For example, a company might set these rough guidelines for a 12-month score:

• 0–50 points: No action needed. The employee’s attendance is fine.

• 50+ points: Begin monitoring. Hitting 50 might prompt a friendly check-in or an alert in the HR system, just to stay aware.

• 100+ points: Investigate and address. A score in the low hundreds is a clear sign to review the person’s absence record. Typically, HR or the manager would have a one-on-one meeting with the employee around this point. The goal is to find out if anything is wrong and offer support if needed (or discuss attendance expectations if no valid issue).

• 200+ points: Take action. Crossing 200 is serious in many workplaces. It might trigger formal actions, like a written warning or an absence management review meeting.

• 500+ points: Extremely high scores (500 and above) are rare but signify severe absenteeism problems. Some organizations use this level as grounds for final warnings or even dismissal in extreme cases. However, every company sets its own policy; what’s “unacceptable” at one place might be handled differently at another.

When evaluating Bradford scores, consistency and fairness are key. Make sure employees know the trigger points and consequences in advance (this transparency feels fair and removes surprises). Also, always consider the individual context alongside the score. A high score should be a conversation starter, not an automatic punishment. For instance, if an employee’s Bradford score suddenly spikes, talk to them to understand why. A score is just a number until you pair it with real context.

Remember that an elevated score could point to underlying issues beyond attendance. It might reveal that an employee is dealing with health problems, stress, or other challenges. In practice, good HR evaluation means asking: “This person’s score is high. What’s the story behind it?” Maybe their frequent short absences mean they aren’t fully recovering from an illness, or they have a recurring condition that needs accommodation. As an empathetic, people-centric HR manager, use the Bradford Factor as a tool to identify who might need help or a check-in. For example, if someone routinely racks up a high score, approach them in a supportive way: “I noticed you’ve had quite a few days off. How are you doing? Is there anything we can do to support you?”. This kind of dialogue can uncover whether the issue is work-related, health-related, or something else, and then you can respond appropriately.

In short, evaluate Bradford scores flexibly. Use threshold guidelines to stay consistent, but don’t ignore context and compassion. The best outcome is to address problems early (like workload issues, health needs, or morale problems) so that attendance improves and the person feels supported. A win-win for the employee and the company.

Bradford Factor Pros and Cons

Like any HR tool, the Bradford Factor has its advantages and disadvantages. It’s important to understand both sides before deciding how to use this metric in your organization.

Pros:

• Highlights patterns of absenteeism clearly. The Bradford Factor provides a clear, objective metric that quickly shows if an employee has an unusual pattern of absences. It’s a straightforward formula that any manager can understand, making it easier to spot when someone’s attendance stands out for the wrong reasons.

• Easy to track and compare over time. Because it’s just a number, you can track Bradford scores month by month or year by year. This data-driven tracking helps HR see trends. For example, if the overall team’s scores are rising, or if one employee’s score is improving or worsening. It’s quantifiable, so it brings a sense of data clarity to absence management.

• Encourages accountability and planning. When employees know this formula is in play, it can motivate them to avoid unnecessary absences. The score basically discourages frequent short sick days – staff may think twice about taking a casual day off because they know multiple one-day absences will spike their score. In other words, it incentivizes employees to come to work when they can, or to consolidate medical appointments into one absence if possible. This can build a culture of better attendance habits (as long as it’s applied reasonably).

• Customizable to company needs. The Bradford Factor system is flexible. HR can choose the monitoring period (e.g. 6 months, 1 year) and set their own trigger score thresholds that fit the organization’s size and tolerance. For instance, a company could decide that in their environment, a score of 150 (not 100) is the alert level. This adjustability means the tool can be tuned so it’s fair and relevant for different workplaces.

• Reduces impact of absenteeism on operations. Ultimately, using the Bradford Factor as part of your absence policy can help reduce disruptive absences. By identifying frequent short-term absence issues early, managers can intervene, offering support or issuing warnings as needed. Which may lead to improved attendance. Fewer surprise absences mean less last-minute scrambling to cover shifts and a smoother workflow.

Cons:

• Lacks nuance and context. The biggest criticism is that the Bradford score is just a number. It doesn’t explain why someone is absent. Two employees could both have a score of 120, but one might be dealing with migraines while another might be taking “sickies” to extend weekends. The formula itself doesn’t differentiate valid medical issues from potential misuse. Important personal circumstances can be overlooked if managers focus only on the score and not the reason behind it.

• Can unfairly penalize genuine illness. Because it heavily weights frequent absences, the Bradford Factor can disadvantage employees with chronic illnesses or disabilities who need intermittent time off. For example, someone undergoing periodic treatment or a parent with a sick child may accumulate a high score through no fault of their own. If an employer rigidly enforces Bradford score triggers without flexibility, it could lead to claims of discrimination or denying rightful sick leave. It’s crucial to pair the metric with human judgment and comply with any laws protecting medical absences.

• Potential to encourage “presenteeism.” In an ironic twist, strict use of the Bradford Factor might make employees afraid to take short sick leave. So they come to work ill to avoid adding to their score. This presenteeism is risky: an employee who isn’t fully recovered could reduce their own productivity or spread illness to coworkers. Over time, a culture of people dragging themselves to work sick is unhealthy for everyone.

• Morale and trust issues. If implemented poorly, Bradford scoring can be seen as punitive or impersonal, hurting morale. Employees might feel that the company cares only about numbers, not about their well-being. A very rigid absence policy (“three strikes and you’re out”) tied to Bradford scores can create fear and resentment. It may also harm the employer’s reputation as a caring workplace. In contrast, a supportive approach using the score as a prompt for dialogue, is needed to maintain trust.

• Arbitrary thresholds and misuse. Deciding that, say, 100 points = warning and 200 = disciplinary action is somewhat arbitrary. Those trigger points might not fit all roles or situations, and if they’re not well thought out, they can lead to unfair outcomes. For instance, an employee just over the limit might get penalized while another just under it doesn’t, even if their situations are similar. There’s a risk that managers rely too much on the formula (“the computer says you’re high risk”) instead of using judgment. Regular reviews and flexibility are needed to avoid blind spots.

Bottom line: The Bradford Factor is useful for raising a flag about attendance issues, but it should never be the whole story. It works best as one component of a broader, humane absence management approach. By understanding these pros and cons, you can implement Bradford Factor policies that are firm yet fair. Leveraging the data insights while still treating employees as people with unique circumstances.

FAQ: Bradford Factor

What is a normal Bradford Factor?
For an average employee, a normal Bradford Factor is quite low – usually in the tens or less. In practice, many employees have a Bradford score of 0 to 20 in a year (for example, one or two brief absences). A score under 50 points in a year is considered normal and not a cause for concern. Low scores mean absences are infrequent, so they have little impact on the business. In short, a “normal” Bradford Factor is one that stays well below any trigger thresholds your company has set (often 50+). If someone’s score is near zero, that means they’ve had perfect or near-perfect attendance.

What is a Bradford score of 90?
A Bradford Factor of 90 is on the higher side and would catch a manager’s attention. It indicates the person had multiple short-term absences rather than one long absence. For example, an employee who took three separate sick leaves totaling 10 days would have a Bradford score of 90 (since 3² × 10 = 90). In many organizations, a score nearing 100 is around the threshold where HR starts to intervene or at least closely monitor the situation. So, a score of 90 typically means the employee’s absence pattern is approaching a problematic level. It’s not usually grounds for serious disciplinary action on its own, but it’s high enough that HR would likely check in with the employee. Essentially, 90 isn’t a “good” score – it’s a sign to be vigilant and possibly have a supportive conversation to see if any help or adjustments are needed to improve attendance.

Can you lower your Bradford score?
Yes, you can lower your Bradford Factor score over time by changing your absence pattern (though you can’t magically erase past absences). Because the formula punishes frequency, the key to a lower score is to reduce how often you’re off. If you’re an employee, this isn’t about coming to work sick – it’s about planning and taking necessary leave in a way that avoids multiple short disruptions. For instance, taking one longer continuous leave tends to result in a lower Bradford score than taking the same number of days off spread across several occasions. Of course, you don’t always have control over when you fall ill, but it helps to be aware: fewer separate absences = lower score. On the employer side, giving staff the option to combine leave or offer flexible scheduling for appointments can help reduce those short, frequent absences.