Operational Risk Management as an Integrated Part of Safety Management Systems

Author(s):  
Roland Müller ◽  
Christopher Drax
Author(s):  
Philip Grossweiler ◽  
David Costello ◽  
Kevin Graham

Regulations governing the safety of drilling and offshore production operations have changed since the Macondo spill. This paper suggests management level perspectives on the nexus of human factors and safety management systems including an overview of ideas from: Congressional Testimony; the Bipartisan Policy Center inputs to the Presidents Commission on the Spill; the National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council Deepwater Horizon Report, and workshops and initiatives by RPSEA (Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America), SPE, and ASME. The value of benchmarks from risk management practices from the aviation, nuclear power, and financial community are also discussed. The paper will also consider questions as to what management might consider reducing risk and treating risk management as not just a cost center, but as a way to integrate safety management systems into improving corporate performance for all stakeholders. Paper published with permission.


Tehnika ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-366
Author(s):  
Nuri Alherian ◽  
Vesna Spasojević-Brkić ◽  
Martina Perišić ◽  
Abdulghder Alsharif

Novel integrated risk management model for standardized management systems, such as ISO 9001:2015 for quality management systems, ISO 14001:2015 for environmental management systems, ISO/IEC 27001:2013 for information security management systems, ISO 45001:2018 for occupational health and safety management systems, and ISO 22000:2018 for food safety management systems, has been proposed in order to enable that organizations can manage their processes and associated risks versus requirements of each internal and external stakeholder, due to the fact that those models rarely exist in literature. Proposed model consists of three levels - correspondence, coordination and integration and put in place a clear and structured approach to controlling organizational risks. Using sample of 30 Serbian companies the proposed model has been checked empirically to contextual independence of proposed model using Mann-Whitney U*test and it has been proved that model is context free and applicable to companies different in size since there were no differences between micro & small vs. medium & large companies. Limitation of this research for sure is the sample size, so its extension is recommended. Further recommendation for future research is also a more detailed analysis on collected data done by using more sophisticated statistical analysis tools, such as regression analysis, structural equations modeling and similar to see interrelations between variables in the proposed model.


2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 1003-1011
Author(s):  
Ataline Muliasari

Airport securitt; is a process of realization of airport security. Related to the abave, the security of anairport will go to support the realization of flight safety. Domine iuard Osok Airport are still tryingto realize the security of airports with strict monitoring of passenger luggage. However, it is lesssupported btj the quality and quantity of equipment and human resourres. For example, the absenreof X-RJJy facilities fur VIP lounge. So it am re possible dangerous goods included in the aircraft cabinthrough the door.Based on analysis of hazard identification and safett; risk management, it appears that DomineE.duard Osok Airport still has a ven; high level of risk to flight safety.Keywords: Safety Management Systems, Risk


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3(58)) ◽  
pp. 31-36
Author(s):  
Yuliia Slyva

The object of research is risk management in food safety management systems. The subject of the study is individual indicators, criteria and a comprehensive indicator of risk management for food safety. One of the most problematic areas is the lack of a common methodology for food safety risk assessment for the development, implementation and operation of food safety management systems. This leads to the fact that it is impossible to properly assess the risk groups depending on the object of management: – unintentional threats (HACCP concept – hazard analysis and critical control points); – intentional threats (concepts VACCP – vulnerability analysis and critical control points, TACCP – threat analysis and critical control points). And evaluate the overall effectiveness of the food safety management system. The study used methods of systems analysis and mathematical modeling as the main research method in all fields of knowledge. As well as a scientifically sound method of assessing the characteristics of complex systems used for decision-making in various fields of economic, managerial and social activities. The proposed in the work algorithm allows to quantify the level of risk management in the food safety management system by such groups as unintentional and intentional threats, taking into account the general indicators of the criteria and their factors. The overall criterion for unintentional threats, which are identified using HACCP principles, is determined by three criteria: microbiological threats, chemical threats and control measures, which in turn include a number of factors. The general indicator of the criterion for intentional threats, which are identified using the principles of VAССР and TAССР, is also determined by three criteria: opportunities, motivation and control measures, which in turn have a separate number of factors. The obtained algorithm allows to determine the levels of risk management and serve as an effective tool for obtaining objective information about the effectiveness of the implementation of the food safety management system. In contrast to existing methods of food safety risk assessment, which are based only on the management of unintentional threats, the proposed algorithm allows to take into account the impact of intentional threats – fraud and bioterrorism. And consider food safety risks comprehensively and develop options for improving management measures.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toni Wäfler ◽  
Rahel Gugerli ◽  
Giulio Nisoli

We all aim for safe processes. However, providing safety is a complex endeavour. What is it that makes a process safe? And what is the contribution of humans? It is very common to consider humans a risk factor prone to errors. Therefore, we implement sophisticated safety management systems (SMS) in order to prevent potential "human failure". These SMS provide an impressive increase of safety. In safety science this approach is labelled "Safety-I", and it starts to be questioned because humans do not show failures only. On the contrary, they often actively contribute to safety, sometimes even by deviating from a procedure. This "Safety-II" perspective considers humans to be a "safety factor" as well because of their ability to adjust behaviour to the given situation. However, adaptability requires scope of action and this is where Safety-I and Safety-II contradict each other. While the former restricts freedom of action, the latter requires room for manoeuvring. Thus, the task of integrating the Safety-II perspective into SMS, which are traditionally Safety-I based, is difficult. This challenge was the main objective of our project. We discovered two methods that contribute to the quality of SMS by integrating Safety-II into SMS without jeopardizing the Safety-I approach.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document