Loss control is one of the most neglected aspects of occupational safety management. Generally:
a) There are few referential by which to evaluate loss in a specific workplace;
b) Few top managers are willing to declare that there is a loss problem inside their enterprise; more line managers are not interested in losing their time in order to quantify loss.
A new method concerning the evidence of occupational loss and the estimation of enterprise loss control capabilities was developed under my supervision.
The method is oriented towards the following goals:
-a.) realize the evidence of significant occupational safety related loss at workplaces; we are understanding as safety related loss the one that if not checked and controlled in due time could turn into incidents and occupational accidents;
-b) assess the existing loss control capabilities of the enterprise;
-c) propose improvements for these capabilities in order to make loss control operational and efficient;
Some relevant aspects of the method are presented in this paper.
DESCRIPTION OF THE METHOD
The generic diagram could be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1-Structure of the new method
In order to talk about loss there should be specific evidence- concerning loss that is:
a) out of the usual activity;
b) targeted by improvement plans;
Once identified and declared relevant- the enterprise should assess its loss control capabilities. The assessment is using analytic hierarchy process A-HP and done on the basis of an expert team, as presented in the paragraph below.
ASSESSMENT OF LOSS CONTROL CAPABILITIES
The method uses analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in order to assess loss control capabilities- given the complexity of the problem.
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a structured technique for organizing and analysing complex decisions, like those needed in Safety Management based on mathematics and psychology.
Generally, most of the safety constructs (technical, human or organisational) could be considered as analytic hierarchies.
The method could be applied in group decision making- considering the expertise held by safety specialists.
Assessors first decompose their situation regarding loss control into a hierarchy of more easily comprehended sub-problems, each of which can be analysed independently. The elements of the hierarchy can relate to significant aspects of the decision problem—tangible or intangible, carefully measured or roughly estimated, well or poorly understood—anything at all that applies to the decision at hand.
The AHP converts these evaluations to numerical values that can be processed and compared over the entire range of the problem. A numerical weight or priority is derived for each element of the hierarchy, allowing diverse and often incommensurable elements to be compared to one another in a rational and consistent way. This capability distinguishes the AHP from other decision making techniques.
The procedure for using the AHP in this method of loss control can be summarized as:
-Model the problem (loss control inside an operational facility) as a hierarchy containing the decision goal, the alternatives for reaching it, and the criteria for evaluating the alternatives.
-Establish priorities among the elements of the hierarchy by making a series of judgments based on pairwise comparisons of the elements. For example, comparing the human based and the organisational based approaches regarding a better loss control;
-Synthesize these judgments to yield a set of overall priorities for the hierarchy. This would combine the expert’s judgments about location, price and timing for properties A, B, C, and D into overall priorities for each property.
-Check the consistency of the judgments on the basis of actual results in loss control for similar units.
-Come to a final decision based on the results of this process.
Specific software Expert Choice 200- was used for the implementation of the assessment structure. Behind each item (main influencers) is a checklist with more than 50 items- that the assessment panel should use.
Figure 2 shows the main reporting print.
Figure 2- Main reporting print
Some aspects of this assessment are presented in figures 3, 4 and 5.
Figure 3-Constructed hierarchy for assessment
Figure 3 shows the constructed hierarchy draft.This hierarchy is based on the OTO paradigm Operator-Technique-Organization.
Figure 4-Analysis of the cooperation attribute
Figure 5- Dynamic sensitivity