Rank: Super forum user 
|
We started to implement HSG 65 as a management system 6 months ago and now wish to measure how effective it is being. We did the gap analysis, hopefully identified the hazards, put in place the risk assessments and procedures and did a couple of audits. Besides the usual of looking at incidents and their frequencies , how else should we look at the effectiveness of the system.
SBH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A robust audit system should be able to determine BOTH the status of the deployment of the nmanagement system AND its effectiveness.
There will be pro-active/leading indicators you should be able to track if you have implemented HS(G)65. It is unfortunate that all HS(G)65 users have to compile their own audit checklists. It would have been great if such a checklist was included in the publication.
The difference between "Status" and "Effectiveness" having an umbrella to protect yourself (from rain) . If the umbrella is fully deployed, it should protect you ( i.e. have you got all the procedures, training, risk assessments etc ) . But, does it actually protect you or does it have holes--that is effectiveness. To measure effectiveness, it is best to do it using pro-active/leading indicators instead of depending on reactive/lagging indicators
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
If you started 6 months ago, you will have been using the previous version of HSG65. As the model is all about continual improvement, you ought also to review the completely updated version published last December, and adjust your core system as necessary to align with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.