A systems approach to risk management through leading safety indicators

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 136, Issue , 2015, Pages 17-34

  Leveson, Nancy ^a  

^a Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge   (United States)

Author keywords

Leading indicators; Process safety; Risk management; STAMP; STPA; System safety

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENTS; HAZARDS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; STAMPING; SYSTEM THEORY;

IDENTIFYING SYSTEM; LEADING INDICATORS; MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE; PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT; PROCESS SAFETY; QUANTITATIVE METRICS; STPA; SYSTEM SAFETY;

RELIABILITY THEORY;

EID: 84949115150     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2014.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Khawaji Ibrahim. Developing system-based leading indicators for proactive risk management in the chemical processing industry. SM thesis. MIT, 2012.
2. Rasmussen Jens. Risk management in a dynamic society: a modeling problem. Saf Sci 1997;27(2/3):183-213.
3. Leveson Nancy. A new accident model for engineering safer systems. (237-27). Saf Sci 2004;42(4).
4. Leveson Nancy. Engineering a safer world: applying systems thinking to safety. MIT Press; 2012.
5. American Bureau of Shipping, Safety culture and leading indicators of safety; January 2012, Houston TX.
6. International Council on Mining and Metals. Leading indicators for occupational health and safety in mining. ICMM; 2012.
7. The BP Grangemouth Major Incident Investigation Report, UK Health and Safety Executive; August 2003.
8. American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Center for chemical process safety center of chemical process safety, layer of protection analysis. New York: Wiley & Sons; 2001.
9. American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Center for chemical process safety center of chemical process safety, guidelines for risk based process safety. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons; 2007.
10. American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Center for chemical process safety center of chemical process safety. Process Saf Lead Lagging Metrics 2008.
11. American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Center for chemical process safety center of chemical process safety, guidelines for process safety metrics. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons; 2010.
12. Guidance on developing safety performance indicators, OECD working group on chemical accidents; 2003.
13. Organization for Economic Coordination and Development (OECD). Guidance on safety performance indicators. Environment, Health and Safety Publications; 2008.
14. Step-by-step guide to developing process safety performance indicators, UK Health and Safety Executive, HSG254; 2006.
15. Process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals regulation, The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Title 29 of CFR Section 1910.119; 1991.
16. Functional safety: safety related systems, IEC 61511; 2008. 79.
17. Leading performance indicators: a guide for effective use, step-change in safety; 2001.
18. Guide to report process safety incidents, the American Petroleum Institute; 2008.
19. Process safety performance indicators for the refining and petrochemical industries, the American Petroleum Institute, ANSI/API 754, First Edition; April 2010.
20. Bagian James P. The opportunity of precursors. In: Phimister JR, Bier VM, Kunreuther HC, editors. Accident precursor analysis and management: reducing technological risk through diligence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004. p. 127-36.
21. Corcoran William R. Defining and analyzing precursors. In: Phimister JR, Bier VM, Kunreuther HC, editors. Accident precursor analysis and management: reducing technological risk through diligence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004. p. 127-36.
22. Tamuz Mihal. Understanding accident precursors. In: Phimister JR, Bier VM, Kunreuther HC, editors. Accident precursor analysis and management: reducing technological risk through diligence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004. p. 127-36.
23. Pate-Cornell ME. Warning systems in risk management, Risk Anal, 5(2): 223-234.
24. Sattison Martin B. Nuclear accident precursor assessment. In: Phimister JR, Bier HC, Kunreuther HC, editors. Accident precursor analysis and management: reducing technological risk through diligence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004. p. 127-36.
25. Kongvik Trond, Almklov Petter, Fenstad Jorn. Organizational safety indicators: Some conceptual considerations and a supplementary qualitative approach. Saf Sci 2010;48:1402-11.
26. Flin R, Mearns K, O'Connor P, Bryden R. Measuring safety climate: identifying the common features. Saf Sci 2000;34:177-92.
27. Oien K, Utne IB, Tinmannsvik RK, Massaiu S. Building aafety indicators: Part 2 - Application, practices, and results. Saf Sci 2011;49:162-71.
28. Murphy DM, Patè-Cornell EM. The SAM framework: modelling the effects of management factors on human behaviour in risk analysis. Risk Anal 1996;16:501-15.
29. Hale AR, Ale BJM, Goossens LHJ, Heijer T, Bellamy LJ, Mud ML, et al. Modeling accidents for prioritizing prevention. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2007;92:1701-15.
30. Oien K, Utne IB, Herrera IA. Building safety indicators: Part 1 - Theoretical foundation. Saf Sci 2011;49:148-61.
31. Hudson P. Process indicators: managing safety by the numbers. Saf Sci 2009;47:483-5.
32. Andrew Rae, John McDermid, Rob Alexander. The science and superstition of quantitative risk assessment. In: Proceedings of probabilistic safety assessment and management (PSAM) conference 11, international association for probabilistic safety assessment and management (IAPSAM), Helsinki; June 2012. p. 2292-2301.
33. Manion M. The epistemology of fault tree analysis: an ethical critique. Int J Risk Assess Manage 2007;7(3).
34. Lewis HW, Budnitz RJ, Rowe WD, Kouts HJC, von Hippel F, Loewenstein WB, et al. Risk assessment review group to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1979;26(5):4686-90.
35. Leveson Nancy. Safeware. Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishers; 1995.
36. -9, 〈http:/sunnyday.mit.edu/16.863/follensbee.html〉; 1993.
37. Matthew Wald, Jad Mouwad. Protracted fire inquiry keeping 787 on ground, New York Times. 〈http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/business/the-ntsb-sees-lengthy-inquiry-into-787-dreamliner.html?-r=1&〉, Retrieved 2013-01-2.
38. Kahneman D, Tversky A. On the psychology of prediction. Psychol Rev 1973;80 (4):237-51.
39. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol 1973;5(2):207-32.
40. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974;185(4157):1124-31.
41. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981.
42. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1982.
43. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Facts and fears: understanding perceived risk. Soc Risk Assess 1980:181-216.
44. Dewar James. Assumption-based planning. Cambridge University Press; 2002.
45. Leveson NG. Technical and managerial factors in the NASA Challenger and Columbia losses: looking forward to the future. (From Chromosomes to the Cosmos). In: Handelsman, Fleishman, editors. Controversies in science and technology, vol. 2. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.; 2007.
46. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Glossary, 〈http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/design-basis-accident.html〉; 2014.
47. CBS News, Oil blowout preventers known to fail, 〈www.cbsnews.com/ap-oil-blowout-preventers-known-to-fail〉/; May 8, 2010.
48. Shanks, Earl, Andrew Dykes, Marc Quilici, John Pruitt, Deepwater BOP control systems-a look at reliability issues. In: Paper OTC 15194, offshore technology conference; 2003.
49. Leveson NG. Intent specifications: an approach to building human-centered specifications. Trans Software Eng 2000;SE-26(1).
50. Leveson NG, Reese Jon D. TCAS intent specification, 〈http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tcas-intent.pdf〉.
51. Bundesstelle fur Flugunfalluntersuchung, investigation report, German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Investigation; May 2004.
52. van der Schaaf Tjerk, Kanse Lisette. Checking for biases in incident reporting. In: Phimister JR, Bier VM, Kunreuther HC, editors. Accident precursor analysis and management: Reducing technological risk through diligence.Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004. p. 127-36.
53. Dokas Ioannis M, Feehan John, Syed Imran. EWaSAP: an early warning sign identification approach based on a systemic hazard analysis. (Oct). Saf Sci 2013;58:11-26.
54. Leveson NG, Dulac N, Cutcher-Gershenfeld J, Barrett B, Carroll J, Zipkin, D, et al. Modeling, analyzing, and engineering safety culture. In: First international conference of the association for the advancement of space safety, Nice, Oct. 2005.
55. 2 capture, transport, and storage projects. Ph.D. dissertation. Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines de Paris; December 2012.
56. Georges, Stephanie. A system theoretic approach for determining causal factors of quality loss in complex system design. MIT SM thesis. Engineering Systems Division; February 2013.