In order to ensure that plants can continue production safely in all circumstances, they have an extensive set of HSE procedures and forms. These often involve high costs, many of which could be significantly reduced.

Perhaps you recall the example of the hammers costing $100 in the American army? The procedure for buying materials was so extensive and complex that the cost of even the cheapest equipment increased astronomically and items such as hammers ended up costing $100 to buy. It may be an amusing story, but it can also shed light on our own HSE processes. Let's take two examples from practice: Management of Change (MoC) and Incident Management.

Read how an integrated system can significantly reduce the workload and the cost of your HSE processes (Incident Management, Management of Change).

Management of Change
Companies that have a properly organized MoC process apply a detailed procedure in order to guarantee safety. Any modifications must be requested using extensive forms and are often evaluated by more than five specialists. Then the proposed change is assessed once or several times in a committee before being sent for further design work if necessary. The design is then used to build the modification, there is a pre-startup and safety review and the operators are informed and trained. Finally, all the relevant documentation is updated.

This procedure is so extensive because any changes can lead to dangers for safety. But even changes to things that are less risky follow the same process. As a result, a gasket on an emergency water pipe costing just a few Euros can end up with a price tag of €100.

Incident Management
A similar process applies for Incident Management. If an incident has occurred, an operator discusses this with the shift foreman and they write a report in the shift report, then complete the form, which is sent to the HSE coordinator. The coordinator lists the information from the incident, assesses the incident with specialists, determines the actions to be taken and issues instructions for them. He then issues the management with a report which may also be sent to government. He then monitors employees to ensure that the actions are being implemented and reported back on. The operators themselves often have several action lists, which means that the action list issued by the HSE coordinator is an additional burden which they need to be frequently reminded about. In addition, it is often not given the highest priority.

It is such an extensive procedure because a thorough recording, analysis and follow-up of incidents is important in order to prevent this kind of accident, damage or contamination happening in the future. But all incidents, no matter how large or small, go through the same process. This means that dealing with an incident worth just a few Euros can quickly end up costing hundreds of Euros.

These are just two of the many examples we could give; but the same applies for processes relating to work permits and risk analyses. And it is also possible to imagine a combination of a faulty work permit leading to an incident that needs to be solved by means of the MoC process.

Cheaper, quicker and better
The introduction of a simpler (Lean) procedure that is integrated in the line can significantly reduce the cost of these processes. The shift foremen, production assistants and maintenance technicians can discuss, assess and immediately follow up on smaller modifications and incidents in existing meetings, such as the morning meeting. This means that fewer people, stages and materials are needed in order to deal with these kinds of things; modifications and incident handling not only become cheaper, but faster and more effective. It also has the added advantage that employees will request changes more often.

Support from applications
This integration is made possible by means of information systems. They support employees in recording whether the change or incident is risky and/or complicated and whether the extensive or the simpler procedure is the right one to follow. The applications also provide assistance in correctly following the relevant process, ensuring that follow-up action is carried out and informing the HSE coordinators about the quality, correctness and progress of the procedure. Systems can certainly help, but only and more importantly in combination with changed and improved processes and employee behavior. This is the start of any optimization that aims to prevent outdated and ineffective processes becoming part of the automated system.

Improving on Incident Management

Improving on Management of Change