This document outlines a 4-phase approach to determining process safety key performance indicators (KPIs) using the BowTie methodology. Phase 1 involves setting up BowTie diagrams using risk assessment reports. Phase 2 selects leading and lagging KPIs linked to barriers in the BowTie diagrams. Phase 3 establishes criteria and reporting standards for the KPIs. Phase 4 integrates incident data into the BowTie diagrams and starts an improvement cycle. The approach aims to comply with legislation and standards while identifying relevant process safety KPIs in a bottom-up manner tied to an organization's safety management system.

1. Process Safety KPI’s
Determination based on the
Bow Tie methodology
Arthur Groot
04 februari 2014

2. From HAZARD to HARM
04 februari 2014

3. Methodology and key-elements
Identification and monitoring KPI’s


C-level


BU-level

Plant en site management
04 februari 2014




Bottom-up approach
Direct connection between
safety management
system and risks
Compliance with
legislation (Seveso
II), HSG 254 methodology
and CCPS
Identification of relevant
KPI’-s process safety by
using BowTiemethodology
Dedicated Bow-Tie
software
Mandate and commitment
Training programs
ISO 31000
Approach in 4 phases

4. Approach in 4 phases to
determine the KPI’s for process safety
1.
2.
3.
4.
Identification and scoping (setting up
BowTie’s)
Analysis of barriers and selection of KPI’s
(leading and lagging)
Set-up criteria and reporting of KPI’s
Evaluation and review
04 februari 2014

5. Phase 1: identification

Setting-up BowTie’s in 12 steps at operational installation
level by using the following reports:
 HAZOP/HAZID’s
 Safety reports (Seveso II)
 SIL/LOPA assesments
 FMECA analysis
Result: a set of barriers including escalation factor control
04 februari 2014

6. Phase 2, Key Performance Indicators

Starting point:
“You don’t improve what you don’t measure”
 Indicators:


Leading indicators: “performance of barriers before the
consequence”
Lagging indicators: “number of near misses or the
consequences itself”
04 februari 2014

7. Phase 2, analysis of barriers and
selection of KPI’s


Selection of KPI’s, leading (barriers), max. 1 per threat
or consequence line and lagging (consequences)
Connecting barriers (KPI’s) to business model (safety management
system)
04 februari 2014

8. Phase 3, Set-up criteria and
reporting of KPI’s


Setting up PR (performance requirements) for the KPI’s,. the
FISM (Functionality, Integrity, Survivability and Management)
methodology
Setting-up PS (performance standards) for (KPI’s) defining
grades, scoring and assessment criteria
04 februari 2014

9. Performance requirements




Functionality
 definition the expected task(s)
Integrity
 definition of the reliability of the barrier
Survivability
 describes the barrier during an incident
Management
 description of the processes, activities, procedures, competences
to control the barrier
04 februari 2014

10. Performance standard

Grades, scoring methods & assessment criteria
Effectiveness of barrier
Condition of barrier is very bad
Condition of barrier is bad
Performance criteria
Design
i.e procedure not
updated last 4 years
i.e. procedure not
updated last 2 years
Condition of barrier is good
Etc.
Condition of barrier is very good
Etc.
Very Good
04 februari 2014
Good
Moderate
Etc.
Etc.
i.e.producedure
Operational
Etc.
Condition of barrier is moderate
Integrity
Not audited on
performance
Not audited in
the last year
Not audited this
year
Etc.
Not trained operators
Operator trained not in
last 2 years
Operators trained last
year
Bad
Very Bad

11. Phase 3, integration of
Key Performance Indicators
Generic KPI’s related to management systems
 Percentage of completed HSE audits
 Implementation of lesson learned TRIPOD investigations
(progress)
 Validation of procedures for operational and maintenance tasks
(progress is parameter)
 Percentage of underperforming operational documents noticed
during (HSE) audits
 Job-specific trained personal (percentage)
 Etc.
04 februari 2014

12. Phase 3, integration Performance
Indicators process safety
Related to technical integrity
 Percentage of completed tests according to schedule (software,
safety relief valves, pressurized tanks, fire fighting equipment,
etc.)
 Combination of completed test and percentage of tested
equipment that pass/fail the test
 Status of follow-up actions from risk analyses such as HAZOP’s;
 Number of risk analyses executed according to schedule
(HAZOP, SIL, LOPA, etc.)
 Number of (un)controled releases/emissions/spills
 Etc.
04 februari 2014

13. Phase 4, Start reporting, evaluation
and review




Starting with risk optimization
Starting improvement cycle (Plan, Do, Check, Act cycle)
Transparency check
Integrating incident data for risk management
04 februari 2014

14. Phase 4, ‘live’ data of the (HSE) management
system into the Bow-Tie
Management System
04 februari 2014

15. Phase 4: reporting levels process
safety

C-level
BU-level
Plant en site management
04 februari 2014
Summary of CCPS
standard (based on
information form
BowTie level)
 Summary level from
BowTie level, e.g.
CCPS examples
(based on
information form
BowTie level)
 BowTie Level

16. Conclusions KPI’s



Bottom-up approach
Identification of relevant KPI’-s (process) safety by using
BowTie- methodology
Compliance with (HSE) legislation. i.e. (Seveso II), HSG
254 methodology (HSE) and meets criteria set by CCPS
04 februari 2014

17. Services Royal HaskoningDHV
Policy and strategy
Culture
•Development of Environment & Safety Policy
•Corporate Environment Plan
•Stakeholder Analysis
•Carbon Capture and Storage
•REACH and GHS
•Corporate Social Responsibility
•Carbon Trading
•Policy on the Prevention of Serious Accidents
•Energy
•SHWE growth model (based
on Hearts and Minds)
•Safety culture scan
•Incident analysis (TRIPOD)
•Management system audits
•Compliance Audits
Organization and processes
•Environmental Management Systems
•Safety Management Systems
•Occupational Health Management Systems
•HSE Risk Management
•Interim HSE Management
•Training and Coaching
•Environmental and Sustainability Reporting
•Process safety management
04 februari 2014
Compliance
•Environmental impact
assessment (EIA)
•Environmental permitting
•Safety Report
•Fire Report
•QRA/external Safety
•EIA
•Emission studies
•Noise/odor dispersion studies
•IPPC studies
HSE engineering
•Safety Case
•HAZID and HAZOP
•ENVID
•Fire Protection Analyses
•QRA, IRPA
•Technical Safety Review
•Process Hazard Analysis
•Hazard Consequence Modeling
•Asset integrity studies (SIL, IPF
and LOPA)
•Reliability, Availability &
Maintainability Studies (RAMS)
•FME(C)A studies
•BowTie Risk Analyses
•Escape, Evacuation &
Rescue Analysis (EERA)