On The Strengths and Weaknesses of Risk Assessment Tools - Essay Example

Strength and Weaknesses of Risk Assessment Tools Name Institution Date Introduction Risk assessment is an important consideration when it comes to safety at the workplace. Risk assessment is significant since it gives analysis of the risks that are likely to occur in the workplace during operations. This is very useful in the manufacturing, construction and production industry. With the knowledge of the risks, it will be easier for an organization to put in place safety measures as well as ensuring that the system is working in the approved manner. In case of an accident, the assessment will make it easy to determine the real cause and the steps to be taken (Kletz, 2000). The assessment is however, meant to avert the occurrences of accident. Despite the measures it recommends, accidents may still occur due to natural causes. The risk assessment is thus useful in preventing loss of lives and also damage to equipment and machines. Various methods are used to carry out the assessment. The paper will discus four major strategies used in risk management and also how it could have been useful in preventing an accident that occurred in Montara Company. The advantages and disadvantages of the methods will also be critically discussed. Risk assessment tools Consequences of risk Matrix This is a risk assessment method that tends to define the level of risks using some defined matrices. It is used to determine the probability of the harm that the risk may cause. This mechanism also categorizes the risks into several groups depending on how severe they are. This will help the management to make decisions regarding the risks. The standard risk matrices exists indifferent contexts but different organizations are also allowed to make their own. This tool is mainly used in the manufacturing industry in operations of machines. This method is mainly applied in the car manufacture industry. It is used to establish possible risks that may occur while using the machine. This gives the knowledge of the machine part that needs to be frequently inspected. It is also used for the purpose of making assessments incase an accident has occurred. The main reason is to establish the cause of the accident. Strengths The main strength of this method is its ability to different the elative risks in order to make a decision. This is mainly because the method identifies risks and classifies them depending on the damages it may cause. This is then followed by determining the best solution of combating the risk. This method also ranks the possible risks depending on their consequences and severity. This will therefore enable an organization to prioritize and manage key risks that are likely to cause extensive damages. The organizations are able to fully benefit from this method as it has different ranks for different risk and how to approach them an example being the defensible ranking that allows the organization achieve its goals and objectives despite the risks (Cox, 2008). Weaknesses Despite the strengths in this system it also has several weaknesses. The major weakness of this method is that it may result to ambiguous output and input. This is because the method may not be able to categorize severity objectively, the relationship between the output and the input may be misjudged and hence improper decisions made. This method requires also of expertise and is prone to errors. Smaller risks may be assigned higher rating and huge risks assigned low ratings. This will automatically lead to more problems since the recommended solution may not be able to solve the risk resulting to more damages (United States Department of Defense, 2006). HAZOP Hazard and operatability study (HAZOP), is mainly a structure that helps to study the existing or new systems for the purpose of identifying the risks and recommending possible solutions. The risks being used may be on the personnel department or the equipment in operation. The method considers system parts separately and systematically examines the deviation of each of the part separately. This method was initially used to assess risks in the chemical processes but has since diversified to other sectors including Engineering and production. This technique is useful in complex processes and is very efficient in terms of assessing the risks. It is mainly used to ensure that equipment is running correctly. An example is during borehole drilling in water supplies. This method ensures that all the parts functions properly and any part that may cause breakdowns is frequently inspected. This ensures that the equipment will function normally and hence avert accidents that may because by failure of equipment. Strengths This method of assessment is quite reliable and it mainly focuses on operational experiences of the teams involved. This makes the implementation process quite easy and does not require many resources. The method also ensures that the workers in the organization it is being applied are safe. The techniques emphasize more on safety of the environment and also the workers. The method considers the operational process and also covers the aspects of human error. This is considering the fact that human errors are the leading cause of accident in most organizations and sectors. This method is also easy to implement and it bring the members of a team together since it requires much opinions for it to be successful. After the possible risks have been identified, the method also plays an important role in establishing the solutions. This makes risk management easier (British Standard BS, 2002). Weaknesses This technique may not be conclusive enough and it may not be able to address multiple risks. This is mainly because the technique mainly focuses on one event as compared to the combination of events that exist within an organization. The use of HAZOD is mainly guided by the use of information that is provided in its guidelines or software. This is quite dangerous to organization as it leaves some gaps. This is because it mainly leads to ignoring other hazards that may not be in the guidelines but are equally risky. This method requires training of facilitators for it to be implemented successfully. This ends up consuming a lot of productive time by the managers and employees (Nolan, 1994). FMEA Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a technique used to identify the potential failure modes within a system and classify it according to its severity. The likelihood of the failure is mainly based upon the past experiences of failures within the system. The use of past experience makes this technique quite cheap and saves a lot of expenses. The method also identifies the consequences of the failure of the system before recommending the appropriate solutions. This technique is commonly used in the manufacturing industry although it is gaining popularity in the service industry. It is mainly applicable the processing of food substances. The method ensures that the machines operates normally and thus prevent the risk of producing poor quality food substance due to failure of one area of the machine. This is considering that contamination or poisoning may occur if one part of the equipment does not function properly. Strengths This method is quite useful in ensuring that the procedure runs smoothly. This is mainly because the system focuses more on the quality of the end products and thus ensures that no defect in the system will compromise the quality. As a result of this, the method ensures customer satisfaction and hence increased profits for the organization. Due to the collection of details about the operations of the system, it is important in ensuring that the defects in the system are completely eliminated and thus improves safety. The method also focuses on problem prevention which ensures that the chances of risk occurrence are minimized. Reduction of costs is also the main advantage of this method as prevention of accidents increases the production time and reduces the cost of maintenance and frequent repairs (Fadlovich, 2007). Weaknesses This method in most cases is operated by the internal members of staff from the company. However in some instances they may not be able to detect the problems in the system. As a result of this, the company will definitely be required to hire experts. This will therefore lead to increased cost. The method thus becomes efficient when the internal team members are able to establish the problem. In some most cases, the technique is always centered towards a certain system alone; this exposes the whole system to risks as most of the systems work in combination. This technique may also not be effective in its ranking as it does not address the severity of the problem completely. Instead figures are used during the ranking (Kmenta, 2004). Fault tree It is a failure analysis mode that uses the technique of combining events to come up with the real analysis. This method will always study the events at the bottom to get to the top. This is mainly studying minor problems to establish major problems in the system. This method is mainly used when designing a system, diagnose a problem and also for determining the safety of the equipment. This technique is useful in prevention of accidents and also analysis the causes of accidents. It is mainly used in the Engineering field and also the aerospace field. This tool is mainly used in the nuclear power plants in the generation of electricity. The technique establishes the areas of risks in the equipment that may lead to leakages of radioactive substances during the production of electricity. This area is thus monitored continuously to avoid any chances of accidents in the power plant considering the effects of radio active substances incase of leakage Strengths This technique can be used to diagnose and prevent problems from taking place in very complex systems like the nuclear power plants and military hardware manufacture. This is considering the risks that will be posed to the population incase of an accidents in these industries. The system is also able to predict the most probable system failure likely to occur and thus prevents accidents. The technique is also able to solve the problem of human errors as it gives solutions to what should be done incase of the occurrence of a human error. The system also places more emphasis on the protection of the environment by exposure to harmful materials due to accidents. The safety of the workers in an industry is also put into account by this method and thus aims at preventing injuries and fatalities in industries (Ericson, 1999). Weaknesses Although this technique is quite efficient it has some major weaknesses. Although this method aims at eliminating human errors, it does not address their cause. This gives room for occurrence of the accidents. Constructing the fault trees is quite a complicated process; as a result of this it requires a lot of expertise in order to determine the risks. This may lead to increased costs for organizations using the technique. This method only seeks to addresses complex risks and as a result it cannot be used to solve problems during normal operations of a system. The system also requires detailed knowledge of the design and as a result it may present a lot of challenges during its construction which may end up consuming a lot of time (Vesely, 2002). Assessments of Montara blow out. Montara is an oil drilling company that is located in Australia. The drilling takes place in the sea of Timor. The company experienced a huge oil spill accident that lend to massive destruction of the environment in 2009. The main tools and drilling equipment was extensively damaged leading to huge loses for the company. The main cause of the accident was the failure of the cement at the bottom of the casing. The main system used by the company to prevent accidents and contain them was weak as the report recommended that the accident was a disaster waiting to happen (Montara Report, 2009). The company mainly relied on the OHS rules that were set by the authorities in Australia. The company did not have an internal mechanism of predicting possible accidents and recommend the means of avoiding or preventing them. This means that the company did not have a proper risk management and assessment technique. If the company had applied some of the methods of risk assessment discussed above the accident would have been averted. The use of FMEA would have ensured that the company would have taken steps to ensure that the possibility of system failure does not occur. This is because the accident resulted from the failure of the cement at the casing. This technique would have provided for an alternative incase the failure occurred and thus averting the accident. The fault tree analysis would also have ensured that the accident does not take place. This is mainly because it would have established the possible causes of the accident which includes the failure of cement at the casing. This would have ensured that all those systems that would lead to oil spill and other accidents are well monitored. HAZOP on the other hand would have focused on the environmental protection and hence it would have given all the possible causes of the oil spill and thus preventing the accident. Risk matrix would have provided the probability of the failure of the cement at the casing and thus prevent the accident. This shows that the company did not use any of these methods to manage risks. Conclusion In conclusion it is worth noting that risk management is a very important undertaking in any organization. This is mainly for the purpose of preventing accidents and ensuring safety at the work place. The four risk management techniques mainly focuses on the prevention of accidents through taking certain measures. It is also evident that the advantages of each method outweigh the disadvantages. Montara company could have prevented the accident that lead to loses and destruction of the environment had it undertaken the risk management techniques discussed. References Cox, L. (2008). Risk Analysis: 'What's Wrong with Risk Matrices?’ Vol. 28, No. 2, DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01030.x. United States Department of Defense, (2006). Risk Management Guide for DoD Acquisition. British Standard BS, (2002). British Standards Institution. Hazard and operability studies (HAZOP studies)- Application Guide IEC 61882:2001 Kletz, T. (2000). By Accident - a life preventing them in industry PVF Publications ISBN 0- 9538440-0-5 Nolan, D. (1994) Application of HAZOP and What-If Safety Reviews to the Petroleum, Petrochemical and Chemical Industries. William Andrew Publishing/Noyes. ISBN 978- 0-8155-1353-7 Fadlovich, E. (2007). "Performing Failure Mode and Effect Analysis". Embedded Technology. Retrieved on 29 March 29, 2012 from Kmenta, S. (2004). "Scenario-Based Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Using Expected Cost". Journal of Mechanical Design 126 (6): 1027. doi:10.1115/1.1799614 Ericson, C. (1999). "Fault Tree Analysis - A History" (pdf): Proceedings of the 17th International Systems Safety Conference. Retrieved on 29 March 2012 from < http://www.fault-tree.net/papers/ericson-fta-history.pdf.>  Vesely, W. et. al. (2002) (pdf). National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Fault Tree Handbook with Aerospace Applications. Retrieved on 29 March 2012 from Montara Report, (2009). Retrieved on 29 March 2012 from < http://www.ret.gov.au/Department/Documents/MIR/Montara-Report.pdf> Read More

HAZOP Hazard and operatability study (HAZOP), is mainly a structure that helps to study the existing or new systems for the purpose of identifying the risks and recommending possible solutions. The risks being used may be on the personnel department or the equipment in operation. The method considers system parts separately and systematically examines the deviation of each of the part separately. This method was initially used to assess risks in the chemical processes but has since diversified to other sectors including Engineering and production.

This technique is useful in complex processes and is very efficient in terms of assessing the risks. It is mainly used to ensure that equipment is running correctly. An example is during borehole drilling in water supplies. This method ensures that all the parts functions properly and any part that may cause breakdowns is frequently inspected. This ensures that the equipment will function normally and hence avert accidents that may because by failure of equipment. Strengths This method of assessment is quite reliable and it mainly focuses on operational experiences of the teams involved.

This makes the implementation process quite easy and does not require many resources. The method also ensures that the workers in the organization it is being applied are safe. The techniques emphasize more on safety of the environment and also the workers. The method considers the operational process and also covers the aspects of human error. This is considering the fact that human errors are the leading cause of accident in most organizations and sectors. This method is also easy to implement and it bring the members of a team together since it requires much opinions for it to be successful.

After the possible risks have been identified, the method also plays an important role in establishing the solutions. This makes risk management easier (British Standard BS, 2002). Weaknesses This technique may not be conclusive enough and it may not be able to address multiple risks. This is mainly because the technique mainly focuses on one event as compared to the combination of events that exist within an organization. The use of HAZOD is mainly guided by the use of information that is provided in its guidelines or software.

This is quite dangerous to organization as it leaves some gaps. This is because it mainly leads to ignoring other hazards that may not be in the guidelines but are equally risky. This method requires training of facilitators for it to be implemented successfully. This ends up consuming a lot of productive time by the managers and employees (Nolan, 1994). FMEA Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a technique used to identify the potential failure modes within a system and classify it according to its severity.

The likelihood of the failure is mainly based upon the past experiences of failures within the system. The use of past experience makes this technique quite cheap and saves a lot of expenses. The method also identifies the consequences of the failure of the system before recommending the appropriate solutions. This technique is commonly used in the manufacturing industry although it is gaining popularity in the service industry. It is mainly applicable the processing of food substances. The method ensures that the machines operates normally and thus prevent the risk of producing poor quality food substance due to failure of one area of the machine.

This is considering that contamination or poisoning may occur if one part of the equipment does not function properly. Strengths This method is quite useful in ensuring that the procedure runs smoothly. This is mainly because the system focuses more on the quality of the end products and thus ensures that no defect in the system will compromise the quality. As a result of this, the method ensures customer satisfaction and hence increased profits for the organization. Due to the collection of details about the operations of the system, it is important in ensuring that the defects in the system are completely eliminated and thus improves safety.

Read More