The safety measurement problem revisited

Kjellén, Urban

doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2008.07.023

Cited by 71 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the description by Sgourou et al [11] of the Holistic approaches and the evaluation with various characteristics in relevant studies [12][13][14][15], it is suggested that methods for safety performance evaluation incorporate the following characteristics:…”

Section: Methods For Safety Performance Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the description by Sgourou et al . of the Holistic approaches and the evaluation with various characteristics in relevant studies , it is suggested that methods for safety performance evaluation incorporate the following characteristics: The method shall be supported by a theoretical framework. One or more theories and/or models shall propose a scientific framework as the basis for the methods .…”

Section: Measurement and Dimensions Of Safety Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of safety performance in process industries

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By considering literature review, the management mechanisms of Taiwan Occupational Safety and Health Management System, and local regulations, the study proposes dimensions for the analysis of overall safety performance in the semiconductor industry, establishes three principal factors and 25 safety performance dimensions, and develops a questionnaire on safety performance. Three Taiwan semiconductor plants were selected as the subject for the quantitative analysis of the questionnaire and the current safety performance of the semiconductor industry was thoroughly investigated. The study extensively discusses a case study of three semiconductor plants showing highly significant differences in their "technical factor," "organizational factor," and "human factor" through an analysis of variance of safety performance. From the analysis, it was determined that 22 safety performance dimensions, with the exceptions of "selfinspection," "emergency response," and "safety audit," demonstrate significant differences.

show abstract

Section: Methods For Safety Performance Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurement and Dimensions Of Safety Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of safety performance in process industries

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SMART (i.e. Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound) criteria is one tool that can be applied to further select key performance indicators for measurement (e.g., Carlucci, 2010; Kjellen, 2009). For a review of criteria for selection of key performance indicators, see Podgórski (2015).…”

Section: Limitations Conclusion and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the state of health and safety management system performance measurement in mining organizations

Haas

Yorio

2016

Safety Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complex arguments continue to be articulated regarding the theoretical foundation of health and safety management system (HSMS) performance measurement. The culmination of these efforts has begun to enhance a collective understanding. Despite this enhanced theoretical understanding, however, there are still continuing debates and little consensus. The goal of the current research effort was to empirically explore common methods to HSMS performance measurement in mining organizations. The purpose was to determine if value and insight could be added into the ongoing approaches of the best ways to engage in health and safety performance measurement. Nine site-level health and safety management professionals were provided with 133 practices corresponding to 20 HSMS elements, each fitting into the plan, do, check, act phases common to most HSMS. Participants were asked to supply detailed information as to how they (1) assess the performance of each practice in their organization, or (2) would assess each practice if it were an identified strategic imperative. Qualitative content analysis indicated that the approximately 1200 responses provided could be described and categorized into interventions, organizational performance, and worker performance. A discussion of how these categories relate to existing indicator frameworks is provided. The analysis also revealed divergence in two important measurement issues; (1) quantitative vs qualitative measurement and reporting; and (2) the primary use of objective or subjective metrics. In lieu of these findings we ultimately recommend a balanced measurement and reporting approach within the three metric categories and conclude with suggestions for future research.

show abstract

“…For example, there have been several instances where major accident events have happened in organizations with very few or no injuries (e.g., the Deepwater Horizon accident [40] and the Texas City accident [41]). Kjellén [42], however, argues that accidents should rather be characterized by the loss of control and transfer of energy (Haddon's energy-model) that happens in different accident types. This view might be more relevant to the type of production performed at fish farms.…”

Section: Approaches To Developing Safety Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework Based on a Systems Approach to Developing Safety Indicators in Fish Farming

Holen

Utne

2018

Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The fish farming industry is one of the industries in Norway with the highest occupational fatality and injury rate. Despite the serious health, safety, and environmental issues in the industry, little is done to measure changes in safety over time beyond the traditional Lost Time Injury (LTI) registrations. In this article the objective is twofold; (i) to propose a framework for developing safety indicators based on Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA), and (ii) to apply the framework to find indicators relevant for hazards in operations where subcontractors participate. STPA uses a hierarchical portrayal of the system in focus, in contrast to sequential models, and views safety as a control problem. It is believed that a systemic approach to indicator development better captures the complex safety challenges in aquaculture. Thirteen indicators are identified within areas such as maintenance, training, and planning. The indicators identified may function as a basis for decisions and actions that must be undertaken to ensure safe operations.

show abstract

The safety measurement problem revisited

Cited by 71 publications

References 3 publications

Evaluation of safety performance in process industries

Evaluation of safety performance in process industries

Exploring the state of health and safety management system performance measurement in mining organizations

A Framework Based on a Systems Approach to Developing Safety Indicators in Fish Farming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About