Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

~SPE

SPE numbdpage 19231/1

ma
Authors

OFFSHORESAFETY - GETTING T:{E EMPHASISRIGHT R. THORNAN

Copyr@ht 1989, SocIMy o! PewXeuco Engineers This paperwas preparedforpresentationatOffshoreEurqw 89, Merdsen, 5.8 September 1989. Pamiasionto copy is restricted10an abatraclof rot morethan300 words.Ilfualraliona may notbe copied. The abstractalwxdd containconspkx@us acknowledge. .entof whereand by whomthe paperwas pmeanted. FublkxIiOn alswMra is Usudy granteduponrequestprc+idad propercreditis made,

1. INTRODUCTION
which, in this ,a pre-occupation. has, for whether or not some incident the momen~, Eocusaed media and public The reason is both atte~tfon on it mozal and commercial. Moral in that we all have an obligation to minimise riaka commercial in that none of to people; a vested interest in acctdents, US has and more particularly because we know and coat efficiency safety, that effectiveness go hand in hand and are Good safety management not in conflict. is quite simply one aspect of a good and there is every efficient operation: The only reason to strive after it. question ia how? Safety industry, is a is subject always
q

My suggestion will be that the way the dice are loaded, we need a collective conscious and continuous effort of mind to get the emphasis right and to keep it right. believe I the fssuea are relevant throughout the industry, although I see them primarily from the standpoint of a drflling contractor. Lets 2. look at the loading of the dice.

REGULATION We work within a framework of external inLernatlonal and domestic regulation. In the drilling industry we are not short of it. The list of things we comply with is impressive and of course it representa only the tip of the iceberg because behind many of the titles are volumes of detailed regulations, guidance, notices, standarda, codes, and procedures requiremerits. We do not, aa some might think, and indeed as some might prefer, spend our battle to resist lives locked in regulation. external On the contrary extensively to the we contribute of formulating and continuous process updating it since it ta a means whereby the best available can be drawn together and made the standard. a human regulation is of course of the end and the value activity, product depends heavily on the 8tandard of the contribution made by all the from the those including people, and from the numerous aourcea industry who have a of specialtsed expertise, hand in it, But taken aa a whole, the very has a regulatory process and beneficial impact on sfgntficant safety development both in quality and in the areas it covers. It in go it alao conaumea considerable reaourcea the thought, skill, and money, which in to devising and complying with
q

ia man-made and manindustry Our All accidents are either operated. There of God or caused by people. Acts is no other agency involved. regard to Actsof God, we can pray. regard to the remainder we need to get hold of and hang on to the crucial point, that people are both the cause of and the prime defence againat accidents accidents.
III

In

The

title

Of

my paper

refers

to

emphasis.

The theme of my paper will be that are individuals and people because difficult f.o generalise ahout, the great of attention is given over to weight and equipment, systems hardware, procedures which can be specified, spelt out , written down and measured against, leaat the appearance of with at and with a comfortable authenticity feeling of responsibility. be whether this will question My concentration of thought and resources important aspect of safety one on From the detracting management is to the attention and resources given even more important one, the people who are the cause of acctdenta and the prtme Are we getting defence against them. the emphasis right?

SPE numberlw Title

19231/2 R. THORMAN

Authors

OFFSHORESAFETY - GETTING THE ENPHASIS RIOHT This goes. is all to the good, as far aa it

However, the vast bulk of regulation fs to do with hardwcre, equipment, systems etc., - things that surround people, and very little has to do with people themselves. This will always be the case. You can make a piece of metal, of a certain composition and shape, consistently and predictably do a particular job in a particular way. You can therefore lay down what composition and shape it should be and thus regulate the outcome. YOUcannot do the same with people (and I will have some more to aay on this in a moment). So regulation will always be hardware orientated, and that is to say that although it contributes extensively to one important aspect of safety management, it contributes very li~tle ,to the even more important aspect - the people tt Is regulating around. There is en obvious dice-loading factor in this situation. The regulatory process is bv nature mandatory and therefore dictates a certain consumption of resources. But it is onlv .. dealinE with one part of the picture and cannot judge whether a better return for those resources, in terms of safety, would be had In other ways. In other words there is an inbuilt tendency for hardware to take priority over people. 3. CONTRACTING contractors, we As operate in a competitive market place. In doing so, we have to to the stated react requ~rements of our customers. It is a fact that our customers are generally acutely conscious that the value they get for their money will depend in part on the hardware supplied and in part on the people and the way they perform. But again, and for good reasons of definition, the average tender documentation drilling contract and exhaustive contains information on hardware and disproportionately little about people. True we are often asked for details o? so-called key personnel:
they are important to both performance of

questions they ask -- and just as importantly the questions they dont zak have an inevitable and strong influence on contractors priorities, particularly of course when contractors are struggling for existence. The way our customers are perceived to evaluate tenders and award contracts has a crucial influence. If contractor have the impression that the majority of their potential customers are evaluating tenders and awarding contracts primarily on hardware and price, contractors fighting for survival will progressively be driven to those priorities. Bearing in mind that the major direct cost of most contractors (and I am not here just taiking about drilling contractors) is the bulk of the people, the effect will be a drift, almost a compulsion, In the direction of economizing in the precise area where most accidents are caused or prevented. I do not want to be too depressing about this. The Iaat three years or so have been a more or less painful learning period for oil companies-and contractors alike. Soae of the companies we have worked for have found means of rewarding performance, and making it both possible and worthwhile for contractors to retain and maintain standards of Individual levels, competence at all which as I said earlier goes hand in hand with safety. But we are in a period of tight Ludgets, of partners with tight bcdgets, of a continuous hunt for means of lowering costs; in a period when perhaps the discernment of operating professionals as to where the best value for money may be obtained ia more readily overridden by considerations of pure price. And we general view in the find it a industry that the smart contracting thing to do is to give the customer what he indfcates he wants at the lowest price. There is generally perceived to be no premium for providing what he ought to want. In these circumstances the I=YQSL prices who economise most set. by those are ruthlessly in those areas which their to take into . dont appear cu.vtomers accollnL it) evaluating tenders, and the main one is the standard of the bulk of wh!,ch questions are the people about rarely asked.

But the majority and safety, accidents hy not caused are


personn-1,

key

Our

customers

should

be aware that

Lhe

SPE numbarlpfqa Title

19231/3 R. THORMAN

Authors

OFFSHORE SAFETY - GETTING THE EMPHASIS RIGHT And so we have the second dice loading factor, a commercial environment which inclfnes towarda the highest common denominator in hardware, and the loweat common denominator in people.

Lets look at the implications and where it leads us in getting the emphasia r~ght. Acci.dents are cauaed by people.

of that terms of

4.

PEOPLE - THE PRIME DEFENCE Lets now look more positively the prime cause of, and defence against, accidenta. atpeople, the prime

People cause accidents for all reaaona but we can concentrate main categories : (i) Lack of knowledge

sorts a; m a few

or experience

Throughout the industry, whether we are design, talking about manufacture, operation, planning, organisation - in any part of the business there ia the potential for people getting things wrong which can be either the primary of an accident or the cauae of a cause small initial Incident escalating into a disaster. Our reaponae to this should be twofold.

One part is to recognise that people will get things wrong and to try to devfse means of protecting against that possibility. A great deal of that goes on, and much of it is admirable. invent like a deadmans We things handle, so that even the ultlmate human failure is protected against. We invent which make it mechanisms do the wrong thing, impossible to the mechanism ia properly pro~ided conceived, designed and built, properly by someone who properly maintained understanda it, and ia not overridden, disconnected or circumvented by some being. We invent perverse human systems and procedures, and write them out and get them approved and printed bound in volumes and require and compliance with ~hem, sometimes without sufficient regard to whether they are comprehensible and practical, and often I fear withcut regard to the capacity of involved to absorb and be the people able to use the sheer volume of them. There is a need for this activity. There is great and well intentioned enthusiasm for it, for guarding against consequences of people getting the things ,wrong. But clearly the response is, or people get why and first place, remove the cauaes. line of defence; imperfect backatop. priority part of the should be, to examine things wrong in the what we can do to That is the first the other is an

They do not have a ttorough understanding of the job they are doing or of the equipment they are using. They may know what to do, in a normal routine, ~dont know enough about why. Tkcy may know Wiat to do outside a normal routine, but not have the technical skill to do it properly (and may not know it), They can know -their OW.I functions thoroughly but not understand q nough about how those functions interact with others. so they may give every appearance of being good at their job as long as everything is going normally, and yet be quite inadequate if something of th% ordinary occurs. out (ii) Carelessness You can uae a lot of words this heading, irresponsibility, motivation, indiscipline. (iii) Complacency In particular we should note here that complacency can be by too generated positively great an emphasis being given to the efficacy of procedures and People can be lulled ayatema. into the belief that a system takes care of everything and that they dont need to think for themselves.
(iv)

under 1 ike poor

Bravado I am not principally thinking of the individual who thinks he 1s but rather of the immortal, individual who thinks that, if he has a go, he can do a job for which he is unqualified.

SPE numbedpage Titte

19231/4 R.T~ that formal qualifications way mean that he will competently. in the no job

OFFSHORBSAFETY - GETIINGTHE EMPHASIS RIGHT

(v)

Preeeur,e mean this I By uhf Ch influences difficult for someone job aa he knows it done, or circumstances faced is someone requirement to do more can once than he manage.. -. outside make it to do hie should be where with a things at properly

do

(vi)

Poor Communication

It follows that, if we are to tackle the root cauaes of accidents, our priorities must be to put people together to do a , job who : a) have the neceaaary depth of knowledge, experience, skills, education and tr8ining to do it properly even when the unusual occurs. are careful and responsible

so we get into the ?ealm of real difficulty. We have a range of requirements which are eaoier to state than to measure. They can be talked about in t erma such as character, aptitude, application which are difficult to define, They are tnx,,ga that can be improved in fndividuela by experience, by example by d::;cussion, but which cannot readily be taught in the classroom or tested in objective examinations.
They

are human qualities, different in each individual, fundamental to to safety, and can only really be aaseased by subjective judgement.

Which nea.ns

that you can only knov judge someone perfmms, and can only if things ~tart to how he will react you know him pretty well go wrong, If

b) c)

continually recognise the importance of what they are doing and are alert for problems recognise their limitation

And the longer you know better the judgement you about him.

him, can

the aske

d) e)

maintain atandarda and adopt sensible priorities when under prebmre communicate effectively easily and

f)

in the case of those who In addition, direct the work of others, we must be careful to ensure that they have the and leadership management necessary qualitiea. things can be taught Some of these education and and teated by formal to training. If we take the trouble understand what has been taught, over depth of what to period, what ,and how it has been understanding, qualifications formal then tested, can a good guide to an give us certain grasp of Individuale It may be and skills, knowledge without certain possible to say that cannot be qualifications, he competent to do a particular job. But if we requirements, at the look very it is list of obvious

new employee Any ia a relatively unknown quantity. His formal qualifications (if any), his Cl? (If believable), information from previous employers (if available), the results selection process, and of your interviews, will often weed out those Whether who are unsuitable. the resulting employee will turn out to have a reasonable mix of the qualitlea we are looking for with safety h mind will only emerge in time. He haa to find his feet in his new surroundings; time to and we have to have get experience of how he does his job. and often said, that It is a fact, in the last three yearn a lot of have left the people experienced industry. It is just as important, a lot but rarely if ever said, that of people of whom we have experince have left th~: industry. are now having to Those peopld this can .. be How safely replaced, be managed is influenced by numbers. newcomers cm be up to a point, If they absorbed without difficulty. are a small enough proportion, their aupervisora and the people they qre play will them in with work i ng and gradually while their strengths are assessed. If uhey weaknesses

SPE numbaflpage Title

19231/5

Mhors

OFFSHORESAFETY - GETTINGTHE EMPHASISRIGHT are too large


and into a proportion continuity great uncertainty ia the heart of our safety

R. THORMAN

ia lost introduced management.

The inevitable conclusion is that our employment practices have a central bearing on our safety potential. A short employment policy which term accepts turnover of people high undermines not only the continuity of but peoples experience also our experience of them. it represents a double at our firat line of blow defence. Conversely an employment policy which and results in low is career-based turnover and a comparatively high degree the of stability, providea safety essential for prerequisite
management.

evaluation of tenders. That is the key, For we must not have a situation where the lowest price gets the job, if the lowest price is achieved by an employment policy which compromises the standard of the people.

a collective dutv on safetv. we . lso have a collective self-interest, since safety and efficiency go hand in hand. We need, despite the pressures and distractions, to give a higher priority to the fact that people cause and prevent accidenta. And that-means creating a commercial environment which in emphasia in the promotes R shift directio;, of people - not ,as the potential innocent victims of accidents but as potentially the most valuable weapon in our continual campaign to inprove atandarda our of safety.
-a-

We have

5*

CORRECTIt& TWE EMPHASIS What can we collectively do about in an industry which ia characterised fluctuating demand, where both levels and riska are relatively where competition is cut-throat, form where people such a proportion of costs? I suggest i) threethings : this, by skill high, and large

That we first of all recognise the point that career-orientated stability of employment ia a vital factor In the promotion of safety.

our ii) That regulators and the cu8tomers keep in that mind only have one pot, and contractors at present a meagre one. The more they are obliged, or led, to spend on what money and other reaourcea other people think is important to safety, the leas they are able to do in the dtrection which they may judge to be more important, iii) That take our customers in particular steps to encourage stability of employment by contractors. They need not be concerned with how that
is achieved that IS the

stability contractors

results. measure, for example the average length of unbroken service of all continuous a contractors relevant employees, good comparative give a will indication, monetary and provide weighting a basis in for the

job A simple

only with

the

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi