Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 04 August 2006 14:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By sharon Field as it is Friday and the weather is not looking to good I thought I would post this quire for you to have a think about! do you think that risk assessments are a good tool for detecting and eradicating risk in the work place or do you think that risk assessments are just something that has to be done occasionally to keep your paper work up to date? regards shaz
Admin  
#2 Posted : 04 August 2006 14:44:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By artisdeeian I'm afraid the Health and Safety Law states that these must be done. However, they become a 'Must Do' becuase they (As You all know)'WARN OF THE POSSIBLE OUTCOMES' of the Hazard effects. But come on guys, one of the first thing HSE ask in the event of a serious accident is Can you produce your 'RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THIS TASK'. no matter how trivial the task was, accidents do happen. the answer to your question from my point of view is:- How many Managers and workers take note of what A Risk Assessment is all about, (And be honest). It can become a paper chase. I am a great believer in practicalities of enforcing rules. Unfortunately we cannot all be watching over the workers to make sure they are aware of the dangers. Not a definate answer I know but I will be looking for one from the Forum. Ian.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 04 August 2006 15:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Zaphod My Answer is 'Yes' to both. If they are embraced as a useful tool to manage risk they become useful. If they are seen as just a paper-exercise, they will just function as a paper exercise - a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 04 August 2006 15:19:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Youel Apart from the law angle they are a very valuable tool - I saved ~80% [approx £29k]off the cost of one job alone by getting the managers concerned to re- look at what they were doing via the RA process Additionally how do you know what you are doing / pricing for if you do not appraise what you are doing/going to do RA is an excellant appraisal tool
Admin  
#5 Posted : 04 August 2006 16:08:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Philip McAleenan Excellent question Sharon, and hopefully it is doesn't become just idle rhetoric for a Friday afternoon. You have three replies to date, all siding with the RA as a valuable tool, Ian because it is the law, Zaphod because it it is a useful tool andBob because it assists financial appraisal. To take a different perspective, risk assessment is quite possibly the single most fallacious notion in the panopoly of the safety industry. Why? Lets take for a start that, as Zaphod has suggested, it is about “managing risk”. Risk Management is a contradictory concept that has been given meaning by regulations and the industry that has grown up around it. In actuality, risk is the probability of a negative outcome of an action that is not managed. Do you therefore manage probability? No, what you do manage is the operation that determines the outcome that you want. Correcly managed, there is no risk as you will always achieve the desired outcome. Throw your die and the probability of any particular number coming up is always one in six. But to ensure that you always get a six, you do not manage the probability, you control the die; by loading it, putting sixes on all faces, settig it down face up etc. What risk assessment does is calculates the probability of a negative occuring as a result of a particular action/set of actions. But the laws of cause and effect state that any given action will always lead to a given outcome. Likewise the results of a sequence of actions will also lead to a given outcome. These laws apply to negative as well as positive outcomes. From a workers perspective a negative outcome is the result of one or more actions that were not intended. If the were not intended then s/he had no control of the operation. A positive outcome results from knowing and implimenting a series of actions and conditions that will invariably lead to it. Thus production requires that inputs are known, implimented and controlled througghout. The operation is managed, the output is guananteed, no risk. Risk assessment seems to me to be about calculating the probability of a negative outcome occurring. But if you know exactly what the negative outcome is, them you will know what actions/conditions led to this outcome and the probability is absolute, ie. These actions will always cause this outcome, so why play the game of calculating, when the task should be to determine which of the inputs are incorrect and alter them? On the other hand if you do not know what the outcome will be, but are aware that there could be a number of undersireable outcomes, then again risk assessment does you no good at all. If you do not know what will happen it is because ethere are variable within the causal sequence that you are ignorant of, and being ignorant of these, a calculation of probability is no more that guess work, but more to thepoint is illustratice of the fact that the focus is not on what is required to achieve the desired result. But, I hear you say, the law says it must be done. Actually it doesn’t. What the law requires is that we carry out our work operations in a way that does not cause death or injury to ourselves or others (though why a law is required to tell us that is beyond me). Anyhow, the fact that subsequent regulations, codes and guidance came up with a risk assessment approach does not mean that this is the only options for workers. Indeed, successful work operations do not necessarily stem from an awareness of risk, but as I’ve stated, from an awareness of what inputs are required to achieve the objectives of the operation. I would contend that by assessing the risks associated with work operations focusses the mind on whether the risk is worth taking or not, and that leads to “risk aversion” and all the nonsense that that can lead to. Focus on how to achieve a successful outcome and you focus your thinking on what is required to control the operation rather than on risk taking. This leads to creativity which is at the core of human endeavour and competence. Remove the language of risk and risk assessment from the workplace and you can change work behaviour and performance an din the process you give workers back control of their competence. Regards, Philip
Admin  
#6 Posted : 04 August 2006 16:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By tommy_t Philip I managed to read all the way through your response, which I think is good going for this time on a Friday afternoon. I've had a think and come to the conclusion that you are talking about risk assessment - risk assessment is simply deciding whether a task is being carried out safely, which I think is what you're advocating. I do disagree that with the same actions you will always get the same result - if you cut something with a knife, for example, there is always a chance that the knife may slip and cut your hand, therfore there is a level of risk.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 04 August 2006 16:36:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert S Woods Philip, If you've got time to come up with such an in depth and well constructed answer then your short of work.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 04 August 2006 16:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Philip McAleenan ‘Fraid not Tommy. If you analyse a work operation you do not need to consider risk at all . You consider what is required to achieve with absolute certainty the desired outcome. Anything less and you have no control over the operation and then, with absolute certainty, you will have an undesired outcome. As regards cutting with knives, you eliminate chance by being competent in the use of them in all the circumstances in which you can expect to use them. If you are less than competent, then there is a risk. My point is that it is pointless to assess risk when all that it does is merely tell you what you already know, i.e. competence is lacking. If you already know that, focus you energy and intellectual skills on remedying that deficiency rather than ersatz mathematical exercises involving absurd matrices. And Robert, in depth and well-constructed answers is my work, and take it from me there is plenty of it out there. ;-) Philip
Admin  
#9 Posted : 04 August 2006 16:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert S Woods It was supposed to be a facetious toungue in cheek remark but it doesn't read on screen like it did in draft form. Apologies for any offence caused and long may you find the work that needs such thought (cos it's no good asking me to do it).
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.