Rank: New forum user 
|
Dear Colleagues,
I would like to have your opinion on the revised HSG65. I have been implementing the traditional POPMAR for several years, and changing to the ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’ approach is, I think, an opportunity for a fresh start.
I have been working on changing our internal auditing method and general reporting procedures to reflect these changes.
I much preferred the POPMAR model, and I have been struggling in moving on to the new one.
Do any of you feel the same way? I would like to hear how other people have dealt with the change in practical terms.
Any comment would be welcome.
Thank you
Karine
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Plan/Do/Check/Act isn't (by any means!) new, and the principles are essentially those of POPIMAR and I acknowledge that. If you're comfortable with what you have and it's effective, why change?
HSG65 revised. L21 withdrawn. HSE web-guidance dumbed down. In practical terms, I suggest the best we can do is carry on regardless. Despite what the Government would have us all believe, it doesn't need fixing because...........it ain't broke!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks for your message Ron, I know what you mean, the principles are the same as for any other management systems, however, I think that changing to the revised version demonstrates that you are keeping up to date, and gives you a chance to refresh the system in place.
I find that using the same forms, over and over again can become monotonous, and people may loose interest.
When it comes to auditing, I think that updating the process in place could be seen as a sign of improvement. But I also understand your point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Karine, I'd personally need a greater justification for all that work. "Keeping up to date" doesn't cut it for me as I don't consider the current system to be outmoded.
If, as you describe, there is a lack of interest, a feeling of monotony and some sense of staleness in what the SMS (or audit thereof) brings to the table then perhaps the problem lies with the goals, objectives and strategies and culture of the Organisation - or is the Company a consistent 5-star performer?
Either way, would your proposed changes lead to any improvement in health and safety management performance?
The audit system is merely a measuring tool, and any significant change to it requires a business case justification?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I'm all for change when it's right. In my opinion, the root of this change and others linked to the 'cutting down on bureaucracy' is to appeal to/satisfy a particular section of society which has nothing to do with the job I'm here to do.
In a time when [necessary] change is all around us it sometimes make sense to play up the unchanging nature of safety; it's something you can rely on (in either sense; if you do it right, it protects you - if you do it wrong, you suffer).
I look forward to the day when an Inspector pulls me up for using POPIMAR instead of PlanDoBlahBlah.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
What's new about Plan, Do,........?
This is an approach that I was taught to use back in the 1960's when I was working for an oil company of project planning and co-ordination. (That dates me!) If you check in areas other than health and safety you will find this is a common approach. Talk about 'reinventing the wheel'!
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Along with several others I have no intention of reacting to what I see as just a cosmetic modification intended to make the whole thing look less intimidating to H&S virgins. It is also an excuse to use a nice new pastel coloured graphic by the HSE.
All HSE has done is grouped the elements of POPIMAR under the headings of ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’ so that that Plan includes ‘Policy, Organisation, Plan’ (!). Implement is ‘Do’ by anther name as ‘Check’ is the same as ‘Monitor and ‘Review’ is ‘Act’.
You won’t get any brownie points for rewriting all of your policies etc just to fit in with this whimsical change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Agree that one does not have to change their own systems just because HSG65 is revised.
The primary reason, as far as I am aware, why HSE adopted PDCA in the revised verion of HSG65 is that in "Management Systems" methodology globally, irrespective whether it is H&S, Environemtal, Quality etc., PDCA is used.
Therefore in my view, all HSE has done is to embrace what is used globally so that organisations that do not opt for certification initially have compatible system when they decide to opt for certification
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Is the new HSG65 available yet?
My point of contact on the HSE website still states we will let you know when it is available.
Rodger Ker
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I understood that any reissue of HSG65 had been abandoned, with an entire reliance on web-based guidance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
I find implementing procedures that meet with the requirements of OHSAS18001:2007 you can't go far wrong as all management systems follow the same process as PDAC and all the HSG guidance is doing is standardising
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sorry to drag this out from the depths but as I'm studying Module A of the NEBOSH Diploma, I need to be familiar with the new (old!) concepts.
Can anyone update as to any release or availability of this new (old!) HSG65?
PS, the PDCA concept features on page 14 of the 2000 edition - unless I'm not very much mistaken.
Any advice greatly appreciated!
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
98 pages of sheer joy! this will be my Christmas reading :-(
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I've always used PDCA and it is a whole lot easier to describe to the uninitiated than POPIMAR. It is as previously mentioned essentially the same but with less words and in this case I think less is more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Thanks Jay - I do prefer to have a document I can print out - rather than just a website!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It has muddied the water regarding what a policy is.
Particually if you follow what it says on page 23 to the example on the HSE website
The example there is not a policy but a policy plus arrangements for a simple office.
I guess like many others, our policy is an A4 doc signed by the CEO and the "arrangements" that support this policy make War & Peace look like a leaflet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The "PDCA" cycle was originally made popular by an academic called Dr Deming in the 1950s! It has certainly not been invented by HSE. It is the basis for most well known management systems, eg HSG65, which is itself the basis for OHSAS 18001.........nothing new under the sun!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I very much doubt that the HSE has ever claimed it invented the PDCA cycle--all it has done in the new edition of HS(G)65 is to align it to the PDCA concept that is common to other "Management Systems" instead of the previous POPMAR etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.