HEALTH & SAFETY
4. Efficiency gains
Bow-ties help identify where resources should be focused for risk reduction (i.e. prevention or mitigation), thus reducing the volume of safety analysis, leading to a potential reduction in unnecessary/lower importance barriers.
BENEFITS OF THE BOW-TIE METHOD
1. Logical, structured understanding Risk assessments can have a tendency to concentrate on the level of risk only, rather than considering all aspects of the management of risk. The structured approach of the bow-tie forces an assessment of how well all initial causes are being controlled and how well prepared the organisation is to recover should things start to go wrong. This logical approach often identifies gaps and issues that are missed by other techniques.
2. Clear communication and improved understanding By visually illustrating the hazard, its causes and consequences, and the controls to minimise the risk, the bow- tie can be readily understood at all levels, from senior managers and operations personnel, to regulators and members of the public.
3. Greater ownership
Bow-tie workshops encourage participation and stimulate communication between key stakeholders, whether from the company, contractors or external parties, who all have a role to play in managing risk and yet may not be involved in more traditional techniques. When people feel involved they tend to ‘buy-in’ to the process. When action is taken based on what they say, people will take ownership. All of which lends itself to more effective risk management.
5. ALARP Demonstration Bow-ties are an effective tool for qualitative demonstration that hazards are being managed to a level which is As Low As Reasonably Practicable
(ALARP). The bow-tie diagram clearly identifies all existing barriers in place to prevent realisation of a hazard, and prompts operators to ask “is there anything more we can reasonably do?”
6. “Future Proof” Risk Management Unlike other risk assessment techniques, the bow-tie illustrates not only what controls are currently in place, but, through the use of critical tasks, why they will still be there tomorrow.
SO WHERE DO BOW-TIES FIT IN? Bow-tie diagrams can be generated for every hazard identified for any particular operation at any point in its life cycle. However, it is clearly not appropriate, efficient or cost effective to construct diagrams for all identified hazards. Bow- tie diagrams are most commonly used, and realise the largest benefit in analysing major hazards.
The Risk Assessment Matrix, discussed in a previous issue (see February/March 2012), can be utilised as a “screening” tool to identify major hazards requiring further investigation, with bow-tie diagrams clearly identifying the controls/ mitigations against such hazards.
LIMITATIONS OF THE BOW-TIE METHOD Of course bow-ties are not the panacea for all risk management problems. If you want to quantify your level of risk in absolute terms then the bow-tie method will not help directly. Similarly, if you want to model complex inter-relationships between your risk controls, there are better ways than using bow-ties.
As with all risk assessment techniques, the quality of the information output is dependent on the quality of the individuals leading the workshops/assessment and the team assembled to assist. The danger exists that, due to the apparent simplicity of the bow-tie diagram, such assessments are undertaken by inexperienced personnel and without the direct input from all involved parties (operations, maintenance etc.). In such a scenario, bow-ties could be generated which do not represent the on-site operations and omit key threats, consequences or controls.
In summary, a number of differing techniques are available for assessing risk. However if you want to remove the mystique of risk management and obtain insights into your risk controls that are easy to understand and easy to communicate, then there is no better method than bow-ties.
James Sneddon Risktec Solutions Ltd
www.risktec.co.uk
www.windenergynetwork.co.uk
41
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100