Posted By Philip McAleenan Risk assessment is a process the purpose of which is to analyse a work operation or situation in order to ascertain whether any harm can come to people should they carry out the operation / be in the situation. The end result is the development of an appropriate method statement or safe system of work that controls the work / situation. Getting caught up in qualitative or quantative matrices is a distraction when all you are required to record is any significant findings of the assessment, which in this context is a finding that the operation / situation is not controlled. Once the controls are in place, the re-assessment should show no significant findings. Competent workers are able to approach a job capable of identifying that which has the potential to harm them, knowing what the appropriate controls are and, providing they are resourced, capable of putting them into place/practice. Thus a more user-friendly approach may be: a) What can cause harm? b) What do I need to do to prevent that harm? c) Is it enough? Regards, Philip

Posted By holmezy pl, the old dilemma of defining whether something is more likely, or likely to be more possible than something that is possibly likely or unlikely to happen, then trying to equate it to a scale of numbers..... At the end of all this subjective guess work, taking ito acount informed opinions and knowledge, the whole process of the RA is to identify what could go wrong, how to stop it, and to prioritise your actions, ie hit the big risks first. Because Im a simple bloke, and was taught by another simple bloke, I use a very simplified scale of 1 to 3 for both severity and liklihood. eg severity 1 = minor injury, 2 = lost time injury, 3= major or "life changing" injury Liklihood 1 = unlikley, 2 = likely, 3 = probable Gives me factor of 1,2 = low risk (green) 3,4 = med risk (amber), 6,9 = high risk (red) Solve the reds immediately, the ambers when you can, and review and monitor the greens. Peaple tend to like low, med or high and also relate to green, amber red alot easier than they do to a scale of mumbers that could be spread over a huge range. Keep it simple. It works for me..... Holmezy Soon be beertime....

Posted By Mitch Use exactly the same system as Holmezy and it works for me and even the knitters can understand it!! 33 minutes to Amber (nectar)

Posted By Chris G I find Hanni Rafaat's risk calculator a usefull tool especially as it can be "calibrated against industry specific or general definitions of risk eg. High = 1 in 1,000 chance of single fatality in 12 hr shift (Offshore industry) High = 1 in 10,000 chance of single fatality in 8 hr working day (general industry. (these figures came from a HSE document several years back & may have been revised since then) I think details of the risk calculator are somewhere on the net if you google Hanni Rafaat. Chris G

Posted By Mitch Which is why I use it! And MP who ever said the HSE make things easy?

Posted By ITK Quantitative risk assessments can distract massively from the real intended purpose of risk assessments. They are also subjective, unlikely, highly unlikely etc etc. An inspector will be more than happy for you to demonstrate you have completed your own risk assessments rather than trying to over complicate them with numbers and calculations. 5 steps to Risk Assessment. 1. Whats the Hazard. 2. Who is at Risk 3. What are you doing/need to do to control the risks. 4. Record the assessment. 5. Review the assessment.

Posted By GeoffB4 Red, green and amber. How does that work on a black and white printer - which is the format most companies use.

Posted By Ian G Hutchings Hi Unless you are looking at more complex risk (e.g. risk modelling ALARP principles etc) I always try and keep it as simple as possible. A large construction company I did some work with had two categories on its risk assessments. Low or High. The existing or proposed controls where either acceptable or they weren't. I thought that this was quite smart, because it didn't allow for people to have lots of issues floating around the usual grey area of 'medium risk'. If you want operators and employees to do the risk assessments they need to be very clear and easy to assign controls and risk levels. In my opinion the more possible risk variations the more it is open to inaccuracies. Ian

Posted By Fornhelper I agree with the sentiments expressed ...the more options the more confusion. A previous employer insisted that a numbers matrix was used (6 x 6) so that it could be demonstrated that the risk had been reduced following the introduction of control measures. When I sat down with operatives to do assessments there was more time spent discussing and arguing about the difference between a 1 (unlikely) and a 2 (improbable) !!!! - I kid you not!!! Eventually got things moving by unofficially using a simple Low Medium High system then filling the numbers in retrospectively to reflect the level of risk agreed. Once we used this approach then the operatives were much more comfortable with the process. In my experience as soon as numbers and calculations are introduced then 'laypersons' just roll their eyes and switch off - nothing to do with lack of ability to understand the methodology and all to do with wanting to cut out the 'b******t' and get to the point!!! I do appreciate there is a place for quantative systems dependant on industry / systems being assessed etc and many of the electronic database type systems use this approach but I would suggest these type of systems are better utilised by 'H & S professionals' and, where we involve others such as managers / operatives / supervisors etc then keeping it as simple as possible is the best way forward. I wouldn't have a problem with an assessment being written down on the back of the proverbial 'fag packet' - should be no problem for a H & S professional to transfer the information on it to reflect a company's standard format) - bottom line is as long as the controls identified remove or reduce the risk to an acceptable level and are implemented then it's 'mission accomplished'. FH

Posted By Mitch To avoid what appears to be a little confusion creeping in I would like to clarify my earlier comment; I do not use quantitative risk assessments but I do use a quantitative system for helping with prioritisation, it also gives a reasonable yardstick when re-assessing.

Posted By PL Thanks guys.