Advertisement

Organisational Learning using Near-Miss and Accident Data within and outside your Organisation

  • Floor Koornneef
  • André Spijkervet
  • Jurek Karczewski
Conference paper

Abstract

This paper describes our experiences with creating learning organisations in the domain of safety and risk management. The useability of accident and incident data for direct feedback to operational risk control will be discussed. Principles will be described of Knowledge Management (KM) in relation to organisational learning. The application of KM and of a relevant knowledge framework for the collection and interpretation of (near-miss) accident data enable organisations to learn faster, more effectively and more efficiently from incidents within a network of organisations. This has been demonstrated in a technology transfer project.

Keywords

Knowledge Management Feedforward Control Occupational Accident Knowledge Asset Accident Data 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Baram 96]
    Baram M. Safety Management: Organisational Learning Disabilities in Using Incident Data. In: Freitag M. et al (eds), Event Analysis in the Context of Safety Management Systems: Theoretical and Practical Approaches. Proceedings of the XIII NeTWork Workshop, Bad Homburg, 11-13 May 1995. In press.Google Scholar
  2. [Benner 83]
    Benner Jr. L: Task report no. 1: Accident Models and Investigation Methodologies employed by U.S. Government Agencies in Accident Investigation Programs. OSHA, Washington DC, 1983.Google Scholar
  3. [Benner 85]
    Benner Jr. L: Rating Accident Models and Investigation Methodologies. In: Journal of Safety Research 16(3): 105–126, Fall 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Bird 76]
    Bird Jr. F E, Loftus R G: Loss Control Management. ILCI, Institute Press, Loganville GA, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. [DoE 95]
    Development of DoE Lessons Learned Programs. DOE-STD-7501-95. Department of Energy, Washington DC, May 1995.Google Scholar
  6. [Duin 92]
    Duin M.J. van. Van Rampen Leren (Learning from Disasters). PhD Thesis, University of Leiden, The Netherlands, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. [Eddy 76]
    Eddy P., Page B., Potter E. Destination Disaster. Times Newspaper Ltd., London, 1976.Google Scholar
  8. [Elsea 83]
    Elsea K J, Conger D S: Management Oversight and Risk Tree. In: the Risk Report, Vol. VI, no. 2. International Risk Management Institute, 1983.Google Scholar
  9. [Hale 87]
    Hale A.R, Glendon A.I. Individual Behaviour in the Control of Danger. Elsevier Science Publishers BV, Amsterdam, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [Heming 95]
    Heming B.H.J., Rodenburg F.G.Th, Hale A.R., Smit K. & van Leeuwen N.D. Veiligheid in Onderhoudsmanagement: verslag van fase 2. (Safety in Maintenance Management: Report of Phase 2). Report to the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment. Safety Science Group. Delft University of Technology, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. [Hendrick 87]
    Hendrick K., Benner L. Jr. Investigating accidents with STEP. Occupational Safety and Health Series vol. 13. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [HMSO 87]
    MV Herald of Free Enterprise. Report of the Court No. 8074. Department of Transport. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, London, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. [Huber 91]
    Huber G.P. Organizational Learning: the Contributing Processes and the Literatures. In: Organ. Sciences, 2, 88-115.Google Scholar
  14. [IEC 95]
    Draft EEC 1508. Functional Safety: Safety-related Systems. Part4: Definitions and Abbreviations of Terms. EEC, TC 65/SC65A. IEC, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. [Johnson 73]
    Johnson W.G. MORT — The Management Oversight and Risk Tree. ERDA SAN 821-2, Idaho Falls, 1973.Google Scholar
  16. [Johnson 80]
    Johnson W.G. MORT Safety Assurance Systems. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York/Basel, 1980.Google Scholar
  17. [Karczewski 93]
    Karczewski J.T. System Komputerowej Analizy Wypadków Przy Pracy ISA-PL. CIOP, Warsaw, 1993.Google Scholar
  18. [Kim 93]
    Kim D. The Link between Individual and Organizational Learning. Sloan Management Review, Autumn 1993.Google Scholar
  19. [Kingston 95]
    Kingston-Howlett J., KoornneefF., Schallier P. EuroMORT Network Project. Draft Summary Proposal. Birmingham/Delft. June 30, 1995.Google Scholar
  20. [Kjellén 83]
    Kjellén U. The Deviation Concept in Occupational Accident Control Theory and Method. OARU, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 1983.Google Scholar
  21. [Kolodner 93]
    Kolodner J. Case-Based Reasoning. Kaufmann, San Mateo, 1993.Google Scholar
  22. [Koornneef 96b]
    Koornneef F., Hale A.R. Learning from Incidents at Work. In: Redmill F. et al (eds), Human Factors in Safety-Critical Systems. Butterworth-Heinemann, 1996.Google Scholar
  23. [Koornneef 96b]
    Koornneef F., Hale A.R. Using MORT to generate Organisational Feedback from Single Accidents at Work. In: Freitag M. et al (eds), Event Analysis in the Context of Safety Management Systems: Theoretical and Practical Approaches. Proceedings of the XIII NeTWork Workshop, Bad Homburg, 11–13 May 1995. In press.Google Scholar
  24. [March 91]
    March J.G, Sproull L.S., Tamuz M. Learning from Samples of One or Fewer. In: Organization Science, Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1991, pp. 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [Meulen 95]
    Meulen M.J.P. van der. Definitions for Hardware/Software Reliability Engineers. Simtech bv. Rotterdam, 1995.Google Scholar
  26. [Rasmussen 91]
    Rasmussen J. Safety Control: some basic Distinctions and Research Issues in High Hazard Low Risk Operation. International NeTWork workshop, Bad Homburg, 1991.Google Scholar
  27. [Rasmussen 95]
    Rasmussen J. The Zeebrugge Accident. Implications for a Research Program. Draft for Discussion, rev. 16/3/95. Hurecon, Danmark, 1995.Google Scholar
  28. [Reason 87]
    Reason J. T. A Framework for Classifying Errors. In: Rasmussen et.al.: New Technology and Human Errors, Wiley, Chichester, 1987.Google Scholar
  29. [Souder 90]
    Souder W.E., Nashar A.S., Padmanabhan V. A Guide to the Best Technology-Transfer Practices. In: Technology Transfer, Winter-Spring, 1990, pp. 5-15.Google Scholar
  30. [Spek 94]
    Spek R. van der, Spijkervet A.L. Knowledge Management: an integral Approach to better Performance of Knowledge Work. In: Proceedings of the Knowledge Management seminar. Nederlands Studie Centrum, 1994.Google Scholar
  31. [SSDC 75]
    Nertney R.J., Clark J.L., Eicher R.W. Occupancy-use Readiness Manual. ANC, ERDA-76/45-1 SSDC-1, Idaho Falls, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. [SSDC 76]
    Nertney R.J., Bullock M.G. Human Factors in Design. ANC, ERDA-76/45-2 SSDC-2, Idaho Falls, 1976.Google Scholar
  33. [SSDC 84]
    Horman, R.L. Glossary of SSDC Terms and Acronyms. DOE 76-45/28 SSDC-28, Idaho Falls, 1984.Google Scholar
  34. [SSDC 87]
    Nertney R.J. Process Operational Readiness and Operational Readiness Follow-On. DOE 76-45/39 SSDC-39, Idaho Falls, 1987.Google Scholar
  35. [SSDC 92]
    Knox N.W., Eicher R.W. MORT User’s Manual. EG&G, ERDA-76/45-4 SSDC-4 (rev. 3), Idaho Falls, Idaho, 1992.Google Scholar
  36. [Stewart 91]
    Stewart T.A. Brain Power: how Intellectual Capital is becoming America’s most valuable Asset. In: Fortune, June 3, 1991.Google Scholar
  37. [Swuste 92]
    Swuste P., Hale A.R. Databases on Measures to prevent occupational Exposure. S-151. Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, The Hague, 1992.Google Scholar
  38. [Vlek 79]
    Vlek C.A.J., Stallen P.J.M. Persoonlijke Beoordeling van Risico’s; over Risico’s, Voordeligheid en Aanvaardbaarheid van individuele, maatschappelijke en industriële Activiteiten. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen, 1979.Google Scholar
  39. [Wiig 93]
    Wiig K.M. Knowledge Management Foundations. Schema Press, Arlington, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Floor Koornneef
    • 1
  • André Spijkervet
    • 2
  • Jurek Karczewski
    • 1
  1. 1.Safety Science GroupDelft University of TechnologyThe Netherlands
  2. 2.CSC Computer SciencesAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations