Indonesia's National Police Traffic Corps (Korlantas) recorded 1,835 road crashes during the 2024 Lebaran homecoming, with at least 281 people killed. Crashes fell 15 percent from 2,159 in the same period last year, and deaths fell 3 percent from 291. Serious injuries, however, rose 13 percent to 317 (CNN Indonesia, 2024).
The same data show that the most common crash types were head-on collisions (433), collisions from not keeping a safe distance (379) and single-vehicle crashes (342). The head of Korlantas mentioned drowsiness and fatigue as possible factors in some rear-end and single-vehicle crashes. Motorcycles were involved in 73 percent of crashes, buses and public transport in 12 percent, and goods vehicles in 10 percent (CNN Indonesia, 2024). These are interim police figures, and the cause of each crash cannot yet be concluded.
For companies that employ truck drivers, staff bus drivers or operational vehicle drivers, the question is practical: what kind of training actually changes how people drive? This article compares three approaches against the available evidence.
Comparison Criteria
We use four criteria: evidence of effect on crashes, evidence of change in driving behaviour, cost and resource needs, and how well the effect lasts after the programme ends.
Classroom Training
The most common form is classroom defensive driving, sometimes with a short practical session. A systematic review of 21 randomised controlled trials covering more than 300,000 licensed drivers found that post-licence driver education slightly reduced traffic offences (relative risk 0.96) but did not significantly reduce crashes (relative risk 0.98; 95 percent confidence interval 0.96 to 1.01). The reviewers concluded there was no evidence that such education prevents road crashes or injuries (Ker et al., 2005). Most trials came from the United States, so the context differs from Indonesia.
Knowledge still matters for behaviour. A survey of 65 cement truck drivers in Cilacap found that driving safety knowledge was significantly associated with safe driving behaviour (prevalence ratio 2.14), while length of service and the management role as measured were not (Arianto & Feriana, 2021). The design was cross-sectional, so the association does not establish cause and effect.
Data-Based Coaching
The second approach uses an in-vehicle monitoring system (IVMS) that records harsh braking, sudden acceleration and risky manoeuvres. A study of 315 vehicles at two companies in local truck transport and oil and gas support compared two kinds of feedback over about two years. In-cab warning lights alone did not reduce risky driving significantly compared with the control group. When drivers also watched videos of their own risky driving with a supervisor and were coached, risky driving fell further, with adjusted odds ratios of 0.61 against the lights-only period and 0.52 against the control group (Bell et al., 2017).
The drawbacks are device cost, the need for supervisors trained to give feedback, and the risk of driver resistance when data are used only to punish. The study also measured behaviour, not crash counts.
A Systems Approach
The third approach places training inside a management system. ISO 39001:2012 on road traffic safety management systems asks organisations to set a policy, objectives and road traffic safety performance factors, such as speed, driver fitness and journey planning, and then to monitor and evaluate them (International Organization for Standardization [ISO], 2012). Its strength is that training is tied to working hour rules, route selection and vehicle checks. Its weakness is a longer implementation time, and published evidence of its effect on crashes in Indonesian companies is still scarce.
Reading the Comparison
In our view, these three approaches are not mutually exclusive. The evidence above shows that classroom training alone is not enough to reduce crashes, yet it remains necessary to build the basic knowledge that is associated with behaviour. Measurable behaviour change appears when feedback is specific and discussed by the direct supervisor. A systems approach makes sure the effort does not stop with one training batch.
The homecoming crash pattern offers a further hint. Rear-end and single-vehicle crashes linked to drowsiness are hard to prevent with classroom content alone, because both are also shaped by the working hours and trip schedules that companies set.
Practical Steps
- Use the classroom for basic knowledge, then measure behaviour on the road, not just test scores.
- When using IVMS, state from the start that the data serve coaching, and train supervisors in how to discuss it.
- Link training to rules on driving hours, rest breaks and journey plans, especially in peak seasons such as Lebaran.
- Evaluate the programme with behaviour and event indicators, for example harsh braking events per 100 km and near-miss reports.
How Nusa Safety Helps
Nusa Safety can help companies build driver training modules that combine classroom content with data-based coaching through custom training module development, write journey management procedures through SOP and technical guideline development, and link trip data with OHS reporting through HSE digitalization. Nusa Safety issues internal training certificates only.
This article is general information and not legal or professional advice for any specific case.
References
- Arianto, M. E., & Feriana, S. (2021). Pengetahuan keselamatan berkendara, masa kerja dan peran manajemen dengan perilaku keselamatan berkendara pada pengemudi truk bermuatan semen di PT Energi Sukses Abadi Cilacap [Driving safety knowledge, length of service and management role in relation to safe driving behaviour among cement truck drivers in Cilacap]. An-Nadaa: Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat, 8(1), 14-20. https://doi.org/10.31602/ann.v8i1.3924
- Bell, J. L., Taylor, M. A., Chen, G.-X., Kirk, R. D., & Leatherman, E. R. (2017). Evaluation of an in-vehicle monitoring system (IVMS) to reduce risky driving behaviors in commercial drivers: Comparison of in-cab warning lights and supervisory coaching with videos of driving behavior. Journal of Safety Research, 60, 125-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2016.12.008
- CNN Indonesia. (2024, April 12). Korlantas catat 1.835 kecelakaan selama mudik Lebaran, 281 meninggal [Traffic police record 1,835 crashes during the Lebaran homecoming, 281 dead]. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20240412162219-12-1085671/korlantas-catat-1835-kecelakaan-selama-mudik-lebaran-281-meninggal
- International Organization for Standardization. (2012). Road traffic safety (RTS) management systems - Requirements with guidance for use (ISO Standard No. 39001:2012). https://www.iso.org/standard/44958.html
- Ker, K., Roberts, I., Collier, T., Beyer, F., Bunn, F., & Frost, C. (2005). Post-licence driver education for the prevention of road traffic crashes: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(2), 305-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2004.09.004
