safety driven performance, lloyd’s register, october, 2013, houston, texas, usa daryl attwood phd...

Safety Driven Performance, Lloyd’s Register, October, 2013, Houston, Texas, USADaryl Attwood PhD

Occupational accidents –

a holistic approach

Daryl Attwood, PhD

* Based on research conducted at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada

OIL AND GASLLOYD’S REGISTER EMEA


Safety notes

• No alarm tests are expected, so any heard are real

• Evacuation routes

• Muster location



Lloyd’s Register

• Celebrated 250th anniversary in 2010.

• Lloyd’s coffee house – London – not the insurance company

• Primary objective – safety of people in the industries we serve.

• Began with ships – now in many industries, including a significant oil and gas presence.



Major accidents….

Explosions - Piper Alpha

Helicopter crashes



Fatality causesCauses of global fatalities in the oil and gas industry. Source: International Association of Oil and Gas Producers, Report No. 419,

May 2009, "Safety performance indicators - 2008 data"

Struck by23%

Other5%

Fall9%

Air transport6%

Explosion / burn18%

Electrical3%

Drowning6%

Caught between5%

Vehicle incidents25%

Accidents usually defined as “Major Accidents”(air transport, explosion, burn): 24%.

Other accidents: 76%



Occupational accidents – trips, falls, etc.….



Direct causes? Quality of safety equipment? Weather

conditions? Safety behaviour?

Occupational accident root causes………

Something even broader?Cultural / Regional differences?Global Fatal Accident Rate (FAR) = 3.1Middle East = 2.4, Africa, 4.4, South America

5.2

Financial pressure on corporations?

Organisational issues? Training? Procedures? Corporate safety

culture?Lost time incident frequency (LTIF) ranged

from 0.00 to 3.96

FAR = Fatal accidents per 100 million hours workedLTIF = Fatalities + lost workday cases per one million hours worked



Corporate differences

Total recordable incident rate

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

TRIR

(per

mill

ion

hour

s w

orke

d)



Regional differences

Fatal accident rate by region

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1990 1995 2000 2005

Year

FA

R

Africa

Europe

Middle East

South America



Regionaldifferences 5 Year rolling average fatal accident rate by region.

(Source: International association of oil and gas producers, Report No. 419, Safety performance indicators - 2008 data)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6Africa, FSU greater than 5

Europe, Middle East, North and South America between 2.9 and 4.

Asia, Australia less than 1.5



Safety experts polled as part of research to gather opinion with respect to the relative importance of many factors……some selected results….

Overall Importance Frequency

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0 2 4 6 8 10

Importance Score

Nu

mb

er o

f R

esp

on

ses

External

Organisational

Direct

Physical vs Mental - Importance

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0 2 4 6 8 10

Importance Score

Num

ber

of R

espo

nses

Physical

Mental



Tosca receives a major injury

Falls down the stairs

Not looking where she was going

Not reported

Lack of attention

Not aware of danger

No permssion

Substance on the floor

Duringbreak

Interview

Running

No employees to use contractors eqpt

Using contractors machine

Review procedures for cleaning

Not trained. No informationNo supervision

Refresher on safety standards/procedures

Not told not to run

Lack of supervision

Review timings supervision increased

Review break timings supervision increased

Taken at wrong time

Review system for visitors

Takes place in stores

No procedures

Review procedure for spillage

Review induction awareness training

Review induction cse and refresher training

Substandard induction. No refresher

No procedure

Using mirror

Not cleaned up

Unaware of danger

The existing approach to occupational accident analysis – Tosca’s fall fault tree

Direct CausesCorporate Issues

But were there any broader causes? Financial pressures? Others?



A holistic approach to occupational accident analysis

External influence

Corporate influence

Direct factors



ModelStructure

Capability

MentalPhysical Behaviour

Attitude

Motivation

Coordination

Fitness

Lack of fatigue

Knowledge

Intelligence

Weather Safety design PPE

Value of life Price of oil Shareholder pressure Royalty regime

on corporate elementsInfluence of external elements

Corporate safety culture Corporate training programme Safety procedures

Influence of corporate elements on direct factors



Model running mechanism

1. Calibration against an existing, known result.

2. Compare performance of case under consideration with base

case for each element.

3. Re-run model using adjusted component reliabilities – this

generates actual prediction for the case under consideration.



Safety situation – installation

Factor Expert Score Factor Expert Score

Direct factors

External factors Attitude 7

Value placed on life 9 Motivation 6

Price of oil 10 Lack of fatigue 8

Shareholder pressure 3 Coordination 5

Royalty regime 4 Fitness 6

Knowledge 7

Corporate factors Intelligence 5

Safety culture 7 Safety design 7

Safety training 7 Weather 3

Safety procedures 8 Personal protective equipment

8

Factors judged more conducive to good safety than industry average

Factors judged less conducive to good safety than industry average



Model prediction versus actual results, 200 POB platform

Actual vs Predicted Accidents, 200 POB Platform

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Num

ber o

f acc

iden

ts

Actual

Predicted



Model prediction versus actual results, drilling sector

Drilling Lost Time Incidents

1.50

1.70

1.90

2.10

2.30

2.50

2.70

2.90

3.10

3.30

3.50

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Accid

en

ts / E

6 M

an

ho

urs

Actual

Predicted



Model Uses

• Predict accident numbers or frequencies on new installations

• Study the effect of changes in individual safety program

elements on safety results

• Establish key performance indicator targets for staff and

contractor organisations.



Model use in predicting probability of number of accidents

Proability of accidents

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Number of accidents

Pro

abili

ty


Occupational accidents –

a holistic approach

Daryl Attwood, Ph D

* Based on research conducted at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada

safety driven performance, lloyd’s register, october, 2013, houston, texas, usa daryl attwood phd...

Documents

usa daryl attwood phd

safety behaviour

lloyds coffee house

corporate safety culture

quality of safety equipment

gas presence

significant oil

canada slide