Page 68 - Beyond Decommissioning

The fundamentals of industrial redevelopment 49

to exist, the regulator or other legally defined parties should assume responsibility for
the records. Record keeping is particularly important and subject to regulatory or insti-
tutional supervision where restrictions are placed on the future use of sites
(IAEA, 2006b).

2.7 Change management

What I’ve looked to do is try and become a change agent for good, to create the behav-
ioral changes, the cultural changes to really embrace urgency, adopt a higher toler-
ance to risk, and just encourage people to make decisions.
Steve Easterbrook (1967–)

Not everything in the redevelopment projects can be restricted to technical or orga-
nizational processes, although these remain of the greatest importance. There is a
somehow “hidden” side, which has to do with motivation, behaviors, and mind-sets,
in other words: people and “culture.” Progress is driven by people and framed by
culture.
The industrial redevelopment is particularly vulnerable to the impacts to a cultural
“deficit.” In this regard, it is different from other well-codified and well-regulated
stages of a nuclear or other industrial facility’s life cycle such as construction or oper-
ation. This difference is due to the long duration, intrinsic variability, and the needed
flexibility of the redevelopment project, which inevitably leaves a lot of room for
twists, unknowns, surprises, and impromptu decisions in circumstances, which cannot
be predetermined accurately. The multidisciplinary nature of the redevelopment
(merging: radiological and industrial protection, radioactive, and toxic waste manage-
ment; civil, mechanical, chemical, and electronic engineering; funding resources and
cost estimates; environmental management; stakeholder involvement; politics; etc.)
prescribes that all these disciplines be managed in an integrated manner, another
cultural point.
Instilling a winning culture can be a tough challenge, as it requires changing how
people think about themselves and the organization/community they are in, and mod-
ifying attitudes. Actual changes (e.g., from decommissioning of a nuclear facility to
site redevelopment) can be potent catalysts for cultural change. But any kind of
change—newcomers joining in project, new technologies, new regulations, and
new neighbors—is double edged. On one side, there is an opportunity to get rid of
old habits and embrace new, productive ones; but on the other hand, change can raise
an instinctive repulsion. If the latter prevails, the redevelopment may not materialize
for a long time. As a major change, redevelopment may be perceived as a threat by
organizations well-settled onsite and the local communities and result in the following
(Levin, 2000):
confusion, misunderstanding, and emotional stress;
l
l mistrust and individual selfishness (“who cares?”; “leave me in peace”);
l fear of losing what was successful in the past;
l people stick to and value the past;
l uncertainties about proposed redevelopment;