02.05.2016

1

Hunting weak major accident signals

– a leadership approachSturle Næss – StatoilAsgeir Drøivoldsmo - IFE

v

v

Research team Statoil team• Helle Piene Fløtaker (PM)

• Lars-Martin Berglund

• Marius Fernander

• Børre Paaske

• Odd Falmyr (PM for IFE)

• Magnhild Kaarstad

• Kine Reegard

• Asgeir Drøivoldsmo

02.05.2016 2

• Sturle Næss (Statoil PM)

• Statoil reference group

• Statoil steering group

02.05.2016

2

v

v

Project purpose

• Continuous improvement in major accident risk management

• Manage non technical risk drivers

02.05.2016 3Strategic

Superior management, organization andresource setting of the business

Create, monitor and improve work processes and competence

Op

eration

Plan, implement and monitor risk tasks

Three levels

Management and

collaboration

Competence

and capacity

Responsibility

and authority

Governing

documentation

Four barriers

Tactical

Non-technical barriers is in this presentation used

as a generic term for non-technical measures

(barrier elements) that identify conditions that

could lead to major accident situations, reduce

the likelihood of accidents occurring and limit

possible damage.

v

v

2014-06-304 Classification: Internal

Myndighetskrav

MANAGEMENT OF NONTECHNICAL BARRIERS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

02.05.2016

3

v

v

Plattformspesifikke sikkerhetsstrategier

Strategic

”Tactical”

STYRING AV IKKE-TEKNISKE BARRIERER MANAGEMENT OF NON-TECHNICAL BARRIERS AN ELEMENT OF RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS

“Operations”

Performance

requirements

Measures

v

v

Information gathering

Reviews of the state of

performance requirements

Handover and calibration

results

Decide, monitoring and

evaluating measures

Qualitative sources, interviews and observations

Quantitative sources MIS, GPS, Synergi etc

MANAGEMENT OF NON-TECHNICAL BARRIERS METHOD EVALUATION PROCESS

02.05.2016

4

v

v

7

HUNTING WEAK MAJOR ACCIDENT SIGNALS LESSONS SO FAR

Information gathering

Reviews of the state of

performance requirements

Handover and calibration results

Decide, monitoring and evaluating

measures

Qualitative

sources, interviews

and observations

Quantitative sources MIS,

GPS, Synergi

etc

Asset level

First wave in DPN3 of 3 BA

11 of 11 BU13 of 29 Assets

9 performance requirements, 28 indicators

11 HSE & 11 HR leaders (BU)

Risk assessment plans Risk assessment change Risk transfer

Competence and capacity

Roles and responsibilities

Learning

Documentation Communication Compliance

Implementation Team

v

v

8

HUNTING WEAK MAJOR ACCIDENT SIGNALS LESSONS SO FAR

Some strengths and weaknesses

• interest, willingness and ownership to implement the method

• cautious approach by some – want to see the 'evidence' first

• easy to understand • triangulation of methods

• requires analytical and methodological skills

• develope competence «on the job» • improved cooperation between HSE and HR

• challenging to formulate weaknesses in a simple and easily understandable way

• resource intensive for HSE and HR leaders responsible for many assets

• systematic and critical reflection on important and relevant issues

• «political misuse» of results

Next steps• Implement and evaluate first wave• If nesessary – improve the method before next wave• Create the same positivity to compensate the weaknesses as in the hunting for them

02.05.2016

5

v

v

Questions - discussion

02.05.2016 9

v

v

02.05.2016 10

Preliminary method evaluationCriterion Evaluation Comment

Relevance High score from users

Usability Users feedback is positive, but high resource use in the training/learning phase

Validity Anchored in theory and data from the company, still need for more data from use of the method for criterion validity testing

Reliability Need more use of the method

Independence of PMs at each level

Positive feedback from users

02.05.2016

6

v

v

Example

02.05.2016 11