Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Managing Environmental Health and Safety Makes $ense
Similar to Managing Environmental Health and Safety Makes $ense (20)
More from LaurenWeyers
More from LaurenWeyers (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Managing Environmental Health and Safety Makes $ense
- 2. Today’s Objectives 1. What is Culture: Specifically a Health and Safety Culture? How does a Safety Management System (SMS) impact Safety Culture? What are the Elements of an SMS? 2. Intro into an ROI Case Study that supports how to Mature a Culture of Safety: Is it possible to turn subjective data (opinions) into Objective (numerical) Data? Is it possible to prioritize spending around safety and have a good outcome? 3. Why is System Thinking around Safety Culture of Value? Making Safety Simple, while Solving Problems that Matter
- 6. Human System
- 7. 1. System Conditions: Organizational Understanding Elemental Interaction 2. Human Conditions: Beliefs + Behavior + Results = Performance 3. Continuous Improvement: Operating Experience (Do we learn from Successes and Failures) System Influencers Generic SMS Leadership Analytics/ Performance Analysis Investigations/ Causal Analysis Training/ Education Employee Engagement
- 8. Why is System Thinking around Safety Culture of Value? Where would you add more armour to strengthen this bomber?
- 9. Case Study: ● Purpose? ● What is the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP)? ● Why is it important?
- 10. Inspiration
- 13. Consistency Scores ● Scores close to 0 = The respondent has a good grasp of the survey and its content ● Scores close to 1 = The respondent does not have a good grasp of the survey/content or is just guessing. ● A score of 0.10 or less is considered satisfactory. ○ Given our scenario of 8 elements (Wedley, 1993): ■ Satisfactory <= 0.141 ■ Tolerable <= 0.282
- 15. Perception Survey Responses: Converted to Numerical Values
- 16. Perception Survey: Matrix Normalized, Summed, & Created a Priority Vector
- 19. The AHP Process: Post Result Discussion Risk Safety and Health Management System
Editor's Notes
- Introductions
- Does anyone feel like they have “Culture”, let alone, “Safety Culture” figured out? Well, you are in for a treat today. I’m going to take some time today to help show you how to visualize what your safety culture looks like.
- Regardless of what you do for a living, the definition of safety has the same meaning. Let’s watch a short video clip to help us understand how to define safety. Define Safety: is about finding exposure and continually reducing it. Would you agree that defining culture can probably be considered a more difficult task? Generally Speaking: there are 3 levels of culture Those that Show up: Are you present Those that Speak Up: Say what you see….what if we do this And those that Step up….volunteer Now let’s discuss how we can better define a culture of safety by using Safety Management Systems
- What you see in front of you now is an example of a safety management system that would work for most UVM organizations (in my opinion). This system is made up of 8 elements that most of you should be really familiar with. Additionally, take note that this is not a linear representation of an SMS, it is a circular representation of a system. Why is that important? Someone give me an example of their favorite system element that they are responsible for. I have a Hypothesis to share with you: the better that elements work together, in other words interdependent on one another, as opposed to living alone in silo’s, the stronger your culture will be. As with anything else in this world of ours, no system is perfect. You may suggest that there should be more or fewer elements and be able to make your case. I’m actually toying around with the idea that there should be a 9th element in this system, but we’ll let that one go for now to keep it simple. The point is, there is really no right or wrong answer as long as everyone within our organization agrees. Some of you may be thinking that this is overwhelming and hard to absorb. You have been spending years of your careers thinking that a good culture is based on positive metrics and a bad culture is based on negative metrics. When this occurs, you are basically telling me your culture is based on luck, or lack thereof. The reality is that you probably already understand Systems Thinking much more than you realize, and let me prove it to you.
- Maybe your a mechanical thinker… There are 9 major Automobile Systems that must interact with each other in order for that automobile to perform efficiently. The Engine. ... The Fuel System. ... The Ignition System. ... The Electrical System. ... The Exhaust System. ... The Drive Train. ... The Suspension and Steering Systems. ... The Brake System.
- Or maybe you take a physiological approach to thinking Ten major systems in the human body include the skeletal, muscular, nervous, endocrine, cardiovascular, lymphatic, respiratory, digestive, urinary, and the reproductive system.
- So why can’t we think about culture from a system perspective? Textbook definition: Safety Management System (SMS) are a collection of structured, company-wide processes that provide effective risk-based decision-making for daily business functions. Safety Management Systems help organizations offer products or services at the highest level of safety while maintaining safe operations and while avoiding procedural drift. Influencers Hard to manage something you don’t understand or even know it exists. Human performance: the psychology of belief systems (values): If you want to make a difference: Start challenging beliefs, stop chasing behaviors Continuous Improvement Model: How do we learn from, share with, and improve over time? Additionally, how do we manage change?
- Abraham Wald had taken survivorship bias into his calculations. Wald noted that the military only considered the aircraft that had survived their missions. Bombers that had been shot down and lost were unavailable for assessment. Survivorship bias is the error of focusing only on things that made it past some selection process and overlooking those that did not, usually because of lack of data or visibility.
- To develop a reusable tool by which EHS professionals and operation managers can learn to use management systems and system thinking to mature their EHS culture, and to utilize a Safety Management Systems (SMS) functional elements to help prioritize elemental spending so as to produce the highest possible return on investment (ROI) and mature the organization's culture of safety. The AH Process is a tried and tested method that gives the analyst a technique for decision making in complex environments in which many variables or criteria are considered in the prioritization and selection of alternatives or projects. Because Culture Always Trumps Strategy
- Each element must be compared in a pairwise function to the other elements. Next, a priority must be made between the two elements being compared. The purpose of the exercise is to help managers look at those elements systematically so that they can be visualized on how they interact or are interdependent on one another within that system so as to maximize the return on an EH&S investment. By applying the AHP process twice, the analysts receives two rankings; one based on resources used to implement and maintain a particular element, while the other is focused on the desirability of the element to the participant. The AHP process was chosen because it offers insight into: “1) ability to quantify intangible, non-economic factors into the decision making process, 2) teams can make informed tradeoffs among multiple selection criteria, including multiple performance objectives and output activities” (XXX, p. 21 XXX).
- Element comparison within the survey looks like this. In this case, employee engagement is extremely more resource intensive than management or leadership resource requirements. Whereas, from a benefit perspective the opposite may be true.
- What's the benefit of this? Tells us how well the respondents understood the content (in this case safety management) and how to fill out the survey. Potentially leads to an improvement in description of elements if the scores are high. Eliminates scores that are clearly guesses The results: Given the complexity and length of this survey we think the group median score of 0.22 and mean of 0.26 is pretty good. Obviously there were a few higher scores, but 5 out of 7 averaged a score below 0.25 between the two sections. Overall, the respondents scored lower (better) on the Benefits section than the Resources section by an average of about .06 points, which is a relatively large amount
- I will go through the Results quickly only because there isn’t much time. If you would like to understand how the results were achieved, please get with me later to have a more detailed discussion.
- After survey completion, the answers are fed into a matrix based on the descriptive terms their predetermined weights (e.g. equal, slight,...extreme) as numeric values. For the purposes of this case study, each descriptive term was assigned a numerical value. This action allows the survey facilitator to take qualitative data and convert it into quantitative data (XXX, XXX). “The AHP process relies on a matrix format to recognize and manipulate the comparisons of elements” (xxx, p.21 XXX).
- The analysis requires two separate matrices that are produced as a result of this survey; one for Resources, and the other for Benefits. The scores are normalized in each column to a value of one. Furthermore, each element generates a Row Sum. The Priority Vector can then be calculated simply by creating an average for each row on the matrix. Mathematically speaking, since each element is normalized, the sum of all elements' priority vector is also one. The purpose for the priority vector is simply to establish a weighted value of an element compared to another element. Take note that a similar matrix was also created to produce results that take into account the benefits of each comparison.
- The teams elemental comparison looks like this when both resources required and benefits are considered in a benefit/cost ratio. In this case, education and training is moderately more resource intensive than Risk Assessment resource requirements. Whereas, from a benefit perspective the employee participation was deemed to be 3.4 times more beneficial than audits and observations. The combined ranking to this team from a benefit to cost ratio is that employee involvement/participation brings the greatest value to the organization.
- Graphically speaking our results may be easier to comprehend. Red is the resource relative value. Green is the benefits relative value. And Gold is the combined benefit to cost ratio. Important: Result is not a sum of the pieces, but a product of the interaction of all the elements Keep in mind, this is not a one size fits all opportunity. Not every organization is created the same and every organization sits in a different place regarding maturity. Therefore you would be making a mistake here, looking at this graph and saying “what is good for the goose is good for the gander”. This is probably not true and each organization needs to look at themselves to determine their own benefit-cost ratio results.
- Post analytical discussion is where all the action is because it involves RISK. That risk could be compliance risk, operational risk, financial risk