Page 130 - Serious Incident Prevention How to Achieve and Sustain Accident-Free Operations in Your Plant or Company

CH10pp103-110 4/10/02 12:50 PM Page 108

108 Serious Incident Prevention

Explicit and Implicit Standards

Performance expectations for the execution of critical work must be
documented in enough detail to prevent conditions leading to serious inci-
dents. However, good judgment must be exercised to avoid creation of a bu-
reaucratic management system through excessively rigid requirements. A
proper balance between explicit and implicit standards must be maintained.
A standard of “checking tank high-level alarms on a monthly basis” does
not sufficiently describe the criteria for excellent performance.
Documentation of the optimum methods for testing and calibrating the
alarms is required—methods that ensure reliability of the alarm systems
while utilizing resources efficiently. In establishing the required frequency
for alarm tests, the consequences of failure to detect a hazardous condition
must be considered together with the probabilities for both instrument mal-
function and the presence of a hazardous condition.
In addition to developing task specific standards, management actions
must be consistent with shaping an organizational culture that tolerates
nothing less than excellence in performing the work necessary for serious
incident prevention. Management has the potential either to bring out the
best in people or to create a culture where mediocrity is the norm.
Commitment to a constancy of purpose in support of the serious incident
prevention process is critical—any perception that the critical work is de-
ferrable or optional must be avoided. Management must work toward insti-
tutionalizing the incident-prevention process so that attention to the critical
details becomes a way of life. Management’s responsibilities include keep-
ing the serious incident prevention flame burning.
Documentation of detailed performance standards for all behaviors and
practices required to sustain incident-free operations is impractical. A work-
force must be developed that is not overly dependent upon rigorous man-
agement controls to carry out proper actions. When documented
performance standards do not exist, actions of employees will be guided by
their previous training, commitment, and understanding of organizational
objectives. Steven R. Covey emphasizes the need for effective work prac-
tices formed through the coming together of knowledge (what to, why to),
skills (how to); and desire (want to). To successfully sustain serious-inci-
2
dent-free operations, team members must be consistently willing to go the
extra mile, particularly in exercising their full mental capabilities.
Fear of criticism can cause individuals to rationalize a wait-and-see ap-
proach when prompt action may be required to prevent conditions from de-
teriorating toward a serious incident. Employee confidence in the
disciplinary review process is critical—is there a management bias to blame
problems on employee errors? Without confidence in the system, a ten-