This December we had the privilege to present at the lunch as they aim to invite a speaker each year to present on the topic of safety. During the presentation we explored the fact that every organisation needs to pause for a moment and reflect on their successes. The OHS Manager at the MCC, Stephen Allen, was able to clearly delineate the key wins they had achieved during the year. This included:

• The recertification of our Safety Management System against the SafetyMAP Advanced criteria (this was a full system audit against all 125 criteria).
•  No reportable incidents for the past 12 months (MCC staff or patrons)
•  A very successful internal audit and site inspection program. The audits resulted in just under 80 valuable actions to improve our systems, and the inspections have increased active participation in safety related activities

Participation in this event reminded me how important it is to measure successes using positive lead indicators and then sharing them at a significant event. Perhaps in our annual strategic plans we need to ensure that we build in time to celebrate and thank those that have contributed to our successes.

In making declarations of contravention, Justice Middleton identified a number of key facts which supported his findings.

A few of these comments included that directors:

• knew or ought to have known that the current liabilities were larger than disclosed, and that the guarantees had been granted;
• failed to properly read, understand and give sufficient attention to the content of the financial reports as they related to current liabilities and the guarantees;
• failed to make enquiry or adequate enquiry of management, the Audit Committee and other members of the Board concerning the apparent deficiencies in the reports;

The case is seen as having major implications for the way company directors do their job.

The head of ASIC, Mr Medcraft, says the ruling clarifies the duties of company directors.

“They can’t just simply delegate to management or rubber-stamp management, they are held to a high standard,” he said.

“I think today’s decision empowers directors, because what it says is, ‘I’m responsible, therefore I want to know what is going on’.”

This points to the importance of 2 things:

• Directors need to ensure that the organisation’s risk management framework and governance framework are very transparent and support them in their oversight roles
• Directors need to have in place processes to personally ensure that the reports they are being provided are accurate

Centro penalties decision

Download hydration paper

Most of the incidents involved young people – with an average age of 21 – and 70 per cent of the time the collision was fatal.

“Sixty-eight per cent were male and 67 per cent were under 30 years of age. Sixty-four of the 116 victims (55 per cent) were hit by a train. Eighty-one of the 116 collisions (70 per cent) resulted in death,”

Most of the incidents also occurred in urban areas. The researchers say the reason that most of those injured or killed were young people is because that age group has less traffic experience, is less likely to drive cars and use headphones more frequently. They say distraction and sensory deprivation are the two likely factors.

“The actual sensory deprivation that results from using headphones with electronic devices may be a unique problem in pedestrian incidents, where auditory cues can be more important than visual ones,”

The study however did not take into account near misses or possible suicidal intentions and it covered iPods, MP3 players and other musical devices but did not include mobile phones.

This study has now prompted calls for a government advertising campaign in Australia and the Pedestrian Council of Australia chair Harold Scruby says headphone-related injuries and deaths in Australia is a growing problem.

“We estimate one in 10 people are using some sort of distracting device when they cross the road – be that headphones, using an iPhone, using a mobile phone, texting or looking at a screen of some kind – but certainly the headphones are a very major factor in all this because you can’t hear traffic approaching,”

Though the study focuses on a growing social issue, Safety practitioners nevertheless need to reflect on current practises within their business around pedestrian movements to understand current risk exposure and to formulate or endorse effective controls.

More recently, we were asked by one such client to formulate and deliver what we coined, technical safety workshops, for their front line leaders and the managers who support them. The aim was to increase the general understanding of the legislative components of Safety and to explore how they in turn address these requirements in the way they conduct their day to day business.

Ultimately, it was about developing a line of sight for the front line leaders so that they could clearly and unambiguously understand the impact of their role. The program was also designed to demonstrate the helpful processes that the business has to enable the front line leaders to address these obligations through clear and directional leadership.

As is our way, the workshops were undertaken using the adult learning principles that we are renowned for. Practical exercises were well received as indeed was the homework component between each workshop that people were asked to report on, upon their return. And their newly discovered insights were fascinating learning for everyone.

The enduring relationships we enjoy with our clients enable us to explore these contextual solutions.  We savour our role in the design and enablement and we welcome such conversations…. perhaps with you too!

In partnership with Toll Domestic Forwarding the team at Enhance Solutions spoke to around 160 people across 18 sites, including OH&S representatives, drivers, forklift operators and managers.

The questions we asked included “What does safety mean to you?”, “What currently works?”, “What currently doesn’t work” and “What does good safety culture look like, feel like and sound like?”

That information was then used to develop a safety vision and a three year plan for how to achieve the vision. The next extraordinary step that TDF took clearly illustrated their commitment to the goal of ‘No Injuries’ and the development of a strong, positive safety culture. The Divisional Human Resources Manager and the Divisional Director then visited their branches across Australia and New Zealand to give everyone in the business feedback on:

• What we heard you say

• What we have done

• What we are going to do

In total they visited 29 sites in Australia and 23 sites in New Zealand. They ran a total of 90 one hour sessions which touched the lives of 2,200 employees. What an incredible effort.

As a part of the program they have had a series of powerful posters made up which most sites now have on display.

One of the key messages gained as a result of the survey was the need to skill up the leaders in the business. In order to address this Toll DF have committed to a safety leadership program for all front line staff and above. During the latter half of 2011 they had already worked with us to put 164 of their people through leadership programs. What an incredible effort!

As a part of the program participants are required to undertake a project with the intention of it being implemented.

Recently three people from the organisation based at Unanderra (Wollongong, NSW) initiated and produced a presentation called “Think Twice! – Driving Safely Values”. The concept was based on targeting and educating young drivers employed by Downer in regards to Safety Values and the appreciation of incident outcomes.

Many other Downer Unanderra employees were active participants in the development and shooting stages.

The presentation was delivered to Blue Scope Steel recently and the team were subsequently invited to enter the Project Presentation into their Living Safety Awards. On the 8^th November 2011, the Downer Unanderra team won the award for “Home and Community Safety Initiative”.

Paul Sunshine was presented with the trophy (see photo) by Mark Vassella, Chief Executive BANZ.  Even though Paul’s name appears on the trophy he respectfully announced that it was a team achievement. The team was lead byColin Wilmott, Area Manager;Ian Buick, Project Manager and Paul Sunshine, Zero Harm Advisor Sydney Illawarra.

Enhance Solutions would like to congratulate the team that won and Downer Australia – Engineering Construction & Services based inNewcastlefor their support of the Leading Zero Harm program. They have now held 13 separate programs which requires a great deal of commitment and support from the organisation.

As Risk Managers we are tasked with the objective to embed a risk management culture into an organisation, or words to that effect.  This objective seems to be posing more questions than answers currently.  To assist both ourselves, and risk managers in general, we facilitated a think tank involving a cross section of experienced risk managers across several different sectors from health to project risk.

The group grappled with a few key questions:

1.  What does a risk culture really look like?
2. What are the things that influence the risk culture?

Two further questions emerged from this:

3. What should risk champions be?
4. What do we do if we don’t have senior management buy-in?

We would like to thank those involved in the Think Tank.  This paper aims to summarise the thoughts and inputs from the group and provide some guidance for risk managers in general.

1.     What does a risk culture really look like?

For an organisation to strive towards a risk culture, it needs to have a Vision of the Future to strive towards.   So do we really know what it is we are aiming to embed in organisations?  What does it look like or feel like when there is a Risk Culture?  What do we see?

Interestingly enough, the first question triggered a completely separate question – “what is culture?”.   For the sake of completeness the following definition or description of Culture is provided.

Culture

Culture is a difficult concept to define.  We all intuitively know what we mean, however it is a very complex concept.

Some definitions include:

“A pattern of shared basic assumptions invented, discovered, or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that have worked well enough to be considered valid and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those problems”   Schein, 1992.

“the specific collection of values and norms that are shared by people and groups in an organization and that control the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders outside the organization.“  Hill and Jones, 2001

The Think Tank group defined Culture as “ the acted out values and behaviours and personality of an organisation, or the way an organisation looks and feels – internally for employees and externally for clients and stakeholders.”

The challenge is how to describe the current culture of an organisation.

The Roshan Institute suggests that Culture refers to the following Ways of Life, including but not limited to:

Language : the oldest human institution and the most sophisticated medium of expression.

Thought : the ways in which people perceive, interpret, and understand the world around them.

Arts & Sciences : Most advanced expression

Spirituality : the value system expressed through language and actions.

Social activity : the shared pursuits within a cultural community

Interaction : the social aspects of human contact, including the give-and-take of socialization, negotiation, protocol, and conventions.

This definition tends to provide a more tangible set of lenses to look at a culture.

Risk Culture

Risk culture is the collection of beliefs, values and behaviours of the people within the organisation that shape risk decisions. In order for a risk culture to exist, risk management must be embedded into the organisation’s culture. It should be inclusive in the organisation’s policies, procedures, and practices, not a separate business activity. When achieved, the entire organisation has become involved in the management of risk, with risk management automatically being factored into decision making at all levels of the organisation.

How it looks and feels

As risk managers, for us to achieve this we need to have a good understanding of what this looks like, and feels like.  What we are hearing people say and what we are seeing people do.  We asked the Think Tank members to discuss this.

The key characteristics of a risk culture identified by the Think Tank group are outlined below:

1. Vision & Value
2. Strategy & Appetite
3. Organisational Structure
4. Information and Systems, and Training
5. Leadership & Communication

• People in the organisation see the value of risk management, namely how it can benefit their work as well as produce optimum outcomes for the organisation.
• People are engaged in risk management and are applying it consistently because they see the value behind managing risk.
• There is a consistent view of risk and opportunity across the organisation. People recognise that risk management is not only used to for preventing or minimising adverse outcomes but that it is used for realising gains and can help the organisation to grow.
• The organisation welcomes external audits and recommendations for continuous improvement.
• In a risk culture, risk management is incorporated into the organisation’s strategy. It is a part of the vision, mission and values of an organisation.
• Risk management is incorporated into the business planning cycle, starting with the strategic plan and then cascading through to operational and team plans.
• The risk appetite is clearly defined and expressed in the organisation and is aligned with the organisation’s strategy.
• The organisational structure is set up to enable escalation of risks to the right level.
• Risk management roles and responsibilities for each level of the organisation are clearly defined and acted out. Each level of the organisation is well integrated with the next level above or below, for example, there is a harmonious connection between the board, executive and operations.
• Key performance indicators include risk management for each level of the organisation.
• Processes would be used that enable people to make and act on decisions quickly and efficiently with positive flow-on effects.  As more people in the organisation begin to see the benefit of using the processes, adoption of such processes is likely to become more widespread.
• The system is set up to allow managers and staff to report and document risks, and to treat risks.
• There is a strong and active risk framework, including risk management policies and procedures together with an active and transparent risk register.
• There are appropriate tools for risk management, for example, user guides, risk assessment forms, risk treatment forms, etc.
• Induction training and role specific training exists to support the risk framework and language.
• The ‘tone at top’ is strong and positive and management lead by example with executives actively engaged in the risk management process and applying it to their work.
• There is ownership of risk throughout the organisation, including at Board, Executive, Management and staff level. Risk leadership is evident at each level of the organisation and people are self driven and willing to take ownership of risks.  This leads to better decision making at all levels.
• Risk management language is used consistently throughout the organisation and is understood. This includes a harmonious connection between all levels, and between operational, project and strategic levels.
• There is a focus on learning and continuous improvement.

The Architecture

In a risk culture there will be artefacts such as documents, reports, procedures and tools that define how the organisation should work, and then there will be less visible and tangible things happening which are indications of how the organisation really works.  In a strong risk culture these will work well together and complement each other.

There are various elements that make up a risk culture. The degree to which the culture thrives depends heavily on how well these elements work together.

2.      What can influence a risk culture?

The group provided insights into both things that could positively influence and drive a risk culture and barriers or negative influencers.

Risk Champions

The terminology “Risk Champion” is becoming common place, however it seems that organisations interpret this role differently.  So what are the pros and cons of risk champions?

When implementing a risk language and culture through an organisation there are often more questions than answers.  As an organisations’ leaders and employees are starting to try new practices, someone needs to be there to coach them, answer their questions and guide them through the confusion.  In most organisations there are not enough Risk Managers available to do this, therefore having Risk Champions scattered through the organisation with more in depth knowledge initially can really help to get and maintain momentum.

On the downside, some organisations focus their training on Risk Champions alone, sending a clear message to the organisation that risk is the role of the Risk Champions.  This approach can have the effect of letting the management team off the hook.

Risk Champions need to be set up as a resource and a coach to support the role of the leadership within the organisation.

Senior management buy-in

It almost goes without saying that the biggest hurdle or barrier to success is getting Senior Leadership support and buy-in.  So one of the key questions asked was what hints or tricks help to get senior buy-in if you don’t already?  The overwhelming hint was that senior leaders need to see value.  As a Risk Manager, you need to paint an overwhelming need for change, and create a sense of urgency.  The tactics for doing this were varied, however part of it tended to be dependent on the decision making style of the senior leaders.  Are they motivated by information and data, or motivated by feelings.

The hints and tips were:

• Benchmark
• Conduct a hard document review
• Use specific risks
• Do it with people & use a tool to engage
• Think BIG but start small – work with a few key operations people
• Get quick wins – celebrate & communicate
• Honesty and integrity
• Flexible approach
• Build relationships
• Stealth
• Creative engagement

And the final hint or tip that was provide was

• Just keep going….

The three biggest characteristics required of a Risk Manager are the 3P’s

PATIENCE

PERSEVERANCE

PASSION

Good luck to you all on the journey!

This article discusses the method for conducting a team-based risk assessment, also known as a generative risk analysis or vulnerability analysis.

Team based risk assessment

Team based risk assessment provides:

• A gathering of relevant ideas and issues from key stakeholders
• Alignment of the team on risks and issues.

The analysis is a facilitated team based process to ensure all relevant aspects of the prospective business opportunity, project or project phase have been examined and assessed. This process requires input from all interested stakeholders so that there is a balanced contribution to the overall analysis. Stakeholders offer pertinent and important information related to the business prospect under examination.

The process is made up of the following components:

• Team Selection
• Context/Scope
• Risk Characterisation
• Vulnerability Analysis
• Risk Assessment
• Verification & Review

Step 1             Selection of Team Members

The first step is the selection of a team of stakeholders and if necessary experts for the assessment. The key is to select the necessary and correct members. They should consist of a minimum number of specialists and key stakeholders in the process. Team size will affect the output of the analysis – usually less is better.

Step 2             Define the Context/Scope

Risk and uncertainty are inherent in the development of all businesses. The proper identification of risk and a structured approach to analysis and monitoring are essential if a proactive approach is to be taken to recognise and overcome the challenges that arise in each phase of the business. The context of the assessment is the primary foundation on which the rest of the analysis will be built. It is typically defined by management as the first step in initiating an analysis. The descriptive definition of the context ensures we have a clear understanding of what is to be included as subject to analysis.

Step 3             Conduct a Vulnerability Workshop

So far, we have developed our context, set our objectives, and developed agreed risk characterisations and criteria. It is now time to conduct our vulnerability analysis.

The central concept to a vulnerability analysis is that it is a method of obtaining consensus on the relative importance of vulnerabilities, risk characterisation, control options and the creation of action plans in a workshop with relevant stakeholders. It is a team-based generative risk analysis. The vulnerability technique can be used in different circumstances and phases. Vulnerabilities can be grouped under headings such as people, production, and external factors, and then matched against critical success factors.

Step 4             Conduct a Risk Assessment

Using agreed risk criteria, we are now able to build a risk register, which represents the risks arising from each vulnerability. Our register will explicitly define:

• The identified vulnerabilities
• The risk arising from those vulnerabilities
• Any influencing factors or existing controls
• An allocation of consequence, likelihood and risk rating
• Strategies, or control options, which will mitigate or eliminate the impact of our risks
• Assigned responsibilities and review timeframes

Our completed analysis will now consist of 3 parts:

1. Our Context document, including risk characterisation
2. Vulnerability Table
3. Risk Register

If you would like more information on vulnerability analysis, please contact Simon Hart at Enhance Solutions.

Acknowledgement

Enhance Solutions acknowledges the work of R2a in risk and reliability management and is grateful to R2a for permission to reproduce text and diagrams from the publication “Risk and Reliability – An Introductory Text” by Richard M. Robinson, Kevin J. Anderson, et. al

 Social research supports the hypothesis that the most effective organisations are based on communities of shared ethical values. In short, moral interactions build mutual trust and procure the social capital upon which the organisation develops.

Social capital is major input for the nature of the kind of organisation that is created. If people who work together trust one another, it is because they are all operating according to a common set of ethical norms, hence doing business costs less. Such an organisation will be better able to innovate and implement change, since the high degree of trust will permit a wide variety of social relationships to emerge.

By contrast, people who do not trust one another will end up co-operating only under a system of formal rules and regulations, which have to be negotiated, agreed to, litigated, and enforced. This legal apparatus, serving as a substitute for trust, entails what economists call “transaction costs”.

High degree of trust is thought to increase economic efficiency by reducing the transaction costs that would otherwise be incurred. Transactional arrangements are also thought to be easier and less expensive if the relationship architecture is characterized by honesty. For instance, there will be:

• less need for control mechanisms within the management process;
• less need to specify matters contractually;
• there will be fewer grounds for dispute; and hence fewer disputes;
• less need for litigation (which consumes wealth but adds little or no value; destroys relationships; and reduces trust);
• less need to hedge against unexpected contingencies and unpredictable issues.

Building trust though, is a continuing exercise that demands both time and resourcing. Yet, the cost of building trust hence social capital far outweighs the transactional cost that any change management processes can bring. So, it’s a timely reminder for all of us to continue the good work in developing and maintaining the social capital of our respective organisations.

No doubt, 2012 will bring its own set of challenges!

Fukuyama, F. (1995), Trust: The Social Values And The Creation Of Prosperity, Hamish Hamilton, London

We have made improvements to the design and navigation to make it easier for you to find information about our company.

We are very excited to have the site now live and we will continue to add content throughout the rest of the year.

Thanks for visiting, we would appreciate any feedback you may have

At this stage Kotter suggests that there should be more change not less. The organisation should capitalise on the successful change that has occurred and identify more opportunities to tackle additional and bigger change projects. It is important that more levels within the organisation are involved in the change effort with project management and leadership coming from below. For example, if it has been decided that a new method of reporting risks is required, this could be project managed by a group of team leaders. The key message here is for an organisation to continuously build on the change effort and look for opportunities to involve as many people as possible.

Wicked problems are difficult to recognise, though they are characterised in the way they present themselves. That is, they present through complex interdependencies and typically, the effort to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may reveal or create other problems.

Horst Rittel and Melvin M. Webber formally described the concept of wicked problems back in 1973, by contrasting “wicked” problems with relatively “tame” solvable problems to which there are defined answers such as in mathematics or puzzle solving.

Classic examples of wicked problems include economic, environmental, and political issues. A problem, where the solution requires a great number of people to change their mindsets and behaviour, is likely to be a wicked problem. Therefore, many standard examples of wicked problems come from the areas of public planning and social policy. These include global climate change, natural hazards, healthcare, pandemic influenza, international drug trafficking, homeland security, renewable energy sources etc.

In looking to expand the concept of problem wickedness to other areas of endeavour such as business, Jeff Conklin (2005) refined the characteristics of wicked problems as follows:

1. The problem is not understood until after the formulation of a solution.
2. Wicked problems have no stopping rule – that is, no definable end.
3. Solutions to wicked problems are not right or wrong.
4. Every wicked problem is essentially novel and unique.
5. Every solution to a wicked problem is a ‘one shot operation’.
6. Wicked problems have no given alternative solutions.

Socially, wicked problems are a force of fragmentation – that is, when people see themselves more separate than united and where information and knowledge is scattered and chaotic. It is also important to understand that fragmentation can be hidden. A good example to illustrate this point is the un-realised and incompatible assumptions about a problem where every member believes his or her understanding of the problem is complete and shared by all. Further still, fragmentation is exacerbated when working with wicked problems, whilst using thinking tools and methods that were designed for tame problems.

Many complex problems that are dealt with in the Risk and Safety Management space are actually wicked problems. These are problems that have complex interdependencies and follow the characteristics refined by Conklin. Too often though, these problems are still tackled using tradition methods and linear problem solving processes that are designed to produce an end point or single answer and are typically led by people who are highly trained in these methods and tools.

The challenge in the Risk and Safety management space is to recognise when problems are tame to be solved through conventional problems solving pathways and when problems are wicked in nature and therefore cannot be solved using the conventional pathways.

Wicked problems require the collective intelligence and wisdom of the wider organisation, where a socially shared cognition will undermine the natural forces of fragmentation, enabling fuller collaboration to deeply understand the problem, whilst working towards a longer-term resolution.

Fear not. There’s only one type of tea you need to know about if you’re interested in improving your health, green and its multitude of shades, is the new black.

Researchers from Maastricht University in Holland examined the results of 11 studies using meta analysis and found that as little as three cups (250ml per cup) of green tea promoted weight loss, weight maintenance, decreases in total abdominal fat, visceral fat (fat around your organs) and blood triglycerides (blood fats). Similar research has shown that green tea also improves blood sugar regulation, influences fat cell turnover, increases metabolic rate and decreases appetite. Closer to home a seemingly simple, yet unique combination of Spearmint, Olive Leaf, Grape seed and Green Tea have been used to make a supercharged tea called “Spearole” tea that provides the same amount of antioxidants as three cups of tea and a glass of red wine.

Research by the University of Queensland has shown that drinking three cups of Spearole tea may help to reduce weight gain and decrease blood pressure. As a whole, the benefits of Spearole tea are quite astounding, however each ingredient has its own healthy benefits. Olive leaves contain anti inflammatory agents which help boost the immune system, by fighting bacteria and viruses. Grape seed can help with improving blood flow and the strengthening of blood vessels. Whilst spearmint is great for flavour, it also works as an excellent relaxant, and has properties which help fight infection, reduce inflammation, and are antiseptics.

Green tea is an effective obesity and cardiovascular disease fighter that complements the effects of exercise and can help you achieve your health and fitness goals. So supplement your structured eating and exercise regime with green tea, your friends will be green with envy.

Source: International Journal of Obesity; University of Queensland

- Involve others in the decision making process and gain their buy in to the decision.
- Weigh up the best possible approaches.
- Make an informed decision which is more likely to have a meaningful outcome.

Often, people can rush into making decisions in an organisation. This can be due to pressures to achieve objectives, management demands for immediate results or in reaction to sudden events.  However, a rushed decision can result in poor outcomes which often need to be revised, requiring additional time and money to do so.  To avoid a negative outcome from reactive and rushed decisions, it is advisable to make business decisions based on good reasoning and sound judgement. Risk Management follows a logical decision making process that enables you to consider the risks involved with certain actions and how to control those risks.

The below diagram shows how you can factor risk management into your decision making.

Factoring risk into decision making 

A practical example:

• Identify the decision and the risks involved

For example, your organisation may provide several services to customers but there is one service in particular for which demand has been declining in the past 6 months. The CEO is putting pressure on you to do something about this as the service is running at a loss. You need to make a decision on whether to discontinue the service altogether but …

…what are the risks involved in making this decision?
If you discontinue the service, a few months later you may have a sudden surge in demand for the service which your company will not be able to meet. As a result, your customers may decide to go elsewhere. The risk may therefore be loss of client base.
-Identify the stakeholders who must be involved in the decision
If deciding to discontinue a service, you may wish to involve stakeholders such as:
- The CEO: to oversee the decision and endorse the final outcome
- Chief Finance Officer: to advise of the financial implications of discontinuing the service
- Public Relations Manager: to assess how the public/media will react to you discontinuing the service and what it will mean for your reputation in the industry.
- Marketing Manager: to advise on what this will mean for your organisations competitiveness in the industry.

- Assess the risks which impact the decision

We identified the risk as being: loss of client base. To assess this risk we would look at the consequence of a loss of client base and the likelihood of that consequence occurring. Depending on your consequence and likelihood table, this may result in a high level risk.

- Decide on ways in which to treat the risks

Options include:

- Accepting the risk as it is and not doing anything.

- Reducing the risk by reducing the consequence and/or likelihood. For example, you may offer incentives for clients to use other services you provide which would reduce the risk of loss of client base.

- Avoiding the risk by continuing with the service. However, this may bring another risk of financial loss the longer the service continues to run at a loss.

- Use this information to make an informed decision

You know that you need to decide on whether to discontinue the service, you know the risks involved, you have gained information from the relevant stakeholders and you have looked at options for treating the risks. Now you can make an informed decision.

Think of 3 decisions you need to make in the next week. Using the steps above, consider how you will factor risk management into these decisions.

Remember, making risk management a part of decision making is also making it a part of organisational processes and procedures. In which of your organisational processes & procedures do you need to integrate risk-based decision making?

This revised Standard (AS 3745- 2010) applies to all workplaces, with the exception of Class 1a buildings (Private residences) as defined in the Building Code of Australia, unless that dwelling is also used as a workplace.
This Standard outlines the minimum requirements for the establishment, validation and implementation of an emergency plan for a workplace to provide for the safety of occupants of that workplace and its visitors leading up to, and during an evacuation.

It also outlines the minimum requirements for the formation and training of an emergency planning committee. The development of an emergency plan and emergency response procedures covering emergency situations up until the appropriate Emergency Service arrives to manage the situation! The establishment, authority and training of an emergency workplace control organisation, and the testing and validation of established emergency response procedures. It also covers guidance on the planning and response for fire and smoke emergencies, bomb threats, civil disorder and illegal occupancy.

The emergencies referred to in this Standard do not exclusively represent the likely range of emergencies that may occur in a workplace. The ranges of specific emergencies for each workplace are to be identified in accordance with the intent of the Standard.

To be compliant, an organisation needs to understand the standard and have someone advising them with extensive experience in applying emergency management principals. Given the recent events Australia and our neighbours have experienced regarding earthquakes, floods and fire, it is essential that businesses assess their particular workplaces in light of this. At Enhance Solutions we are fortunate to have Norm Thomas as an associate. Norm previously held the rank of Inspector with the Melbourne Metropolitan Fire & Emergency Services Board, (MFESB) Whilst in this position he was chartered with the responsibility for the protection of life, property and the environment of the greater Melbourne area incorporating a population of approx 331,000 thousand people.

His responsibilities included the operational command, control, co-ordination & training for volunteers and essential “lifeline” organisations.

If you are concerned about your emergency management practices and would like assistance with this crucial area of risk please contact us to arrange for an assessment.

If you would like to make a donation, there is still time before I fly out for the ultimate adventure.

TO DONATE …. CLICK ON THE FUNDRAISING LINK BELOW ….

http://www.gofundraise.com.au/BurlingtonD

One of the items that was discussed however is how do you get senior management buy in to risk management if you haven’t already got it.

Survey results shown in the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance (Banks 2006) showed that the top 5 drivers for organisations to implement ERM are as follows:

The first result is a good start.  The essence of good corporate governance requires that the risk management tone of an organisation be set from the Top.  Principle 7 of the ASX Corporate Governance Guidelines requires this.   However, many risk managers we deal with grapple with the issue that the Board and Executive teams aren’t driving risk management yet.  Much of this is probably because they don’ see that risk management adds value.   At the early stage of a risk management journey it can be seen as more of a compliance requirement and an administrative chore.

As risk managers, one of our roles is to help build teh value proposition for risk management.  Within the ISO31000 principles it states that Risk Management should add value to an organisation and it continues by describing ten benefits of Risk Management, including:

• - Fewer surprises
• - Exploitation of opportunities
• - Improved planning, performance and effectiveness
• - Economy and efficiency
• - Improved stakeholder relationships
• - Improved information for decision making
• - Enhanced reputation
• - Director protection
• - Accountability, assurance and governance
• - Personal wellbeing.

When we ask the same question of risks managers, and senior managers with organisations what value a strong risk management culture provides, the answers are similar, but also provide some more intangible results such as:

• - Open communication
• - Organisational learning
• - Better transparency
• - Better decision making
• - Better confidence in the future.

In our opinion, if we work with of Executives to build a vision of what a strong risk culture could look and feel like, then it is a good first step for getting strong buy-in and drive for embedding a strong risk culture which provides some of the less tangible results we believe are possible.

1. Provide evidence that sacrifices are worth it. For example to allow people time off to attend a safety leadership program is a sacrifice to the business, however as statistics show evidence of the impact of greater awareness, this gives evidence that the sacrifice was worth it.
2. For those driving the change small wins offer a chance to relax for a few minutes and celebrate. Positive feedback after small wins builds morale and helps with motivation.
3. Help fine tune the vision and strategies developed to achieve the vision. Small wins give ongoing feedback with regard to any fine tuning required.
4. Quick wins also help to dispel the stories woven by cynics and nay-sayers in the organisation.
5. Provide evidence that the change is on track and therefore assist with keeping people on board and supportive of the change.
6. Help to build momentum. As more people see the success of the program, they will join in.