System Safety Risk Assessment

Learn about System Safety Risk Assessment with The Safety Artisan.



In this module, we're going to look at how we deal with the complexity of the real world. We do a formal risk analysis because real-world scenarios are complex. The Analysis helps us to understand what we need to do to keep people safe. Usually, we have some moral and legal obligation to do it as well. We need to do it well to protect people and prevent harm to people.



You Will Learn to:



- Explain what a system safety approach is and does; and



- Define what a risk analysis program is; 



https://youtu.be/l3MLQQH7lxY

System Safety Risk Analysis.



Topics: System Safety Risk Assessment



Aim: How do we deal with real-world complexity?



- What is System Safety?



- The Need for Process;



- A Realistic, Useful, Powerful process:



- Context, Communication & Consultation; and



- Monitoring & Review, Risk Treatment.



- Required Risk Reduction.



Transcript: System Safety Risk Assessment



Click here for the Transcript on System Safety Risk Assessment

In this module, on System Safety Risk Assessment, we're going to look at how we deal with the complexity of the real world. We do a formal risk analysis because real-world scenarios are complex. The Analysis helps us to understand what we need to do to keep people safe. Usually, we have some moral and legal obligation to do it as well. We need to do it well to protect people and prevent harm to people.



What is System Safety?



To start with, here’s a little definition of system safety. System safety is the application of engineering and management principles, criteria, and techniques to achieve acceptable risk within a wider context. This wider context is operational effectiveness - We want our system to do something. That's why we're buying it or making it. The system has got to be suitable for its use. We've got some time and cost constraints and we've got a life cycle. We can imagine we are developing something from concept, from cradle to grave.



And what are we developing? We're developing a system. An organization of hardware, (or software) material, facilities, people, data and services. All these pieces will perform a designated function within the system. The system will work within a stated or defined operating environment. It will work with the intention to produce specified results.



We've got three things there. We've got a system. We've got the operating environment within which it works- or designed to work. And we have the thing that it's supposed to produce; its function or its application. Why did we buy it, or make, it in the first place? What's it supposed to do? What benefits is it supposed to bring humankind? What does it mean in the context of the big picture?



That's what a system is. I'm not going to elaborate on systems theory or anything like that. That's a whole big subject on its own. But we're talking about something complex. We're not talking about a toaster. It's not consumer goods. It's something complicated that operates in the real world. And as I say, we need to understand those three things - system, environment, purpose - to work out Safety.



We Need A Process



We've sorted our context. How is all this going to happen? We need a process. In the standard that we're going to look at in the next module, we have an eight-element process. As you can see there, we start with documenting our approach. Then we identify and document hazards. We document everything according to the standard so forget that.



We assess risk. We plan how we're going to mitigate the risk. We identify risk mitigation measures or controls as there are often known. Then we apply those controls to reduce risk. We verify and confirm that the risk reduction that we have achieved, or that we believe we will achieve. And then we got to get somebody to accept that risk. In other words, to say that it is an acceptable level of risk. That we can put up with this level of risk in exchange for the benefits that the system is going to give us. Finally, we need to manage risk through the entire lifecycle of the system until we finally get rid of it.



The key point about this is whatever process we follow, we need to approach it with rigor. We stick to a systematic process. We take a structured and rigorous approach to looking at our system.



And as you can see there from the arrows, every step in the eight-element sequence flows into the next step. Each step supports and enables the following steps. We document the results as we go. However, even this example is a little bit too simple.



A More Realistic Process



So, let's get a more realistic process. What we've got here are the same things we’ve had before. We've established the context at the beginning. Next, there’s risk assessment. Risk assessment consists of risk identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation. It asks ‘Where are we?’ in relation to a yardstick or framework that categorizes risk. The category determines whether a risk is acceptable or not.



After determining whether the risk is acceptable or not, we may need to apply some risk treatment. Risk Treatment will reduce the risk further. By then we should have the risk down to an acceptable level.



So, that's the straight-through process, once through. In the real world, we may have to go around this path several times. Having treated the risk over a period of time, we need to monitor and review it. We need to make sure that the risk turns out, in reality, to be what we estimated it to be. Or at least no worse. If it turns out to be better- Well, that's great!



And on that monitoring and review cycle, maybe we even need to go back because the context has changed. These changes could include using the system to do something it was not designed to do. Or modifying the system to operate in a wider variety of environments. Whatever it might be, the context has changed. So, we need to look again at the risk assessment and go round that loop again.



And while we're doing all that, we need to communicate with other people. These other people include end-users, stakeholders, other people who have safety responsibilities. We need to communicate with the people who we have to work with. And we have to consult people. We may have to consult workers. We may have to consult the public, people that we put at risk, other duty holders who hold a duty to manage risk. That's our cycle. That's more realistic. In my experience as a safety engineer, this is much more realistic. A once-through process often doesn't cut it.



Required Risk Reduction



We're doing all this to drive risk down to an acceptable level. Well, what do we mean by that? Well, there are several different ways that we can do this, and I've got to illustrate it here. On the left-hand side of the slide, we have what's usually known as the ALARP triangle. It’s this thing that looks a bit like a carrot where the width of the triangle indicates the amount of risk. So, at the top of the triangle, we've got lots of risks. And if you're in the UK or Australia where I live, this is the way it's done. So there will be some level of risk that is intolerable. Then if the risk isn't intolerable, we can only tolerate it or accept it if it is ALARP or SFARP. And ALARP means that we've reduced the risk as low as reasonably practicable. And SFARP means so far as is reasonably practicable. Essentially, they’re the same thing - reasonably practical.



We must ensure that we have applied all reasonably practicable risk reduction measures. And once we've done so, if we're in this tolerable or acceptable region, then we can live with the risk. The law allows us to do that.



That's how it's done in the UK and Australia. But in other jurisdictions, like the USA, you might need to use a different approach. A risk matrix approach as we can see on the right-hand side of this slide. This particular risk matrix is from the standard we're about to look at. And we could take that and say, ‘We've determined what the risk is. There is no absolute limit on how much risk we can accept. But the higher the risk, the more senior level of sign-off from management we need’. In effect, you are prioritizing the risk. So you only bring the worst risks to the attention of senior management. You are asking  ‘Will you accept this? Or are you prepared to spend the money? Or will you restrict the operational system to reduce the risk?’. This is good because it makes people with authority consider risks. They are responsible and need to make meaningful decisions.



In short, different approaches are legal in different jurisdictions.



Summary of Module



In Module Two, we've asked ourselves, ‘How can we deal with real-world complexity?’. And one way that's developed to do that is System Safety. System Safety is where we take a systematic approach to safety. This approach applies to both the system itself - the product - and the process of System Safety.



We address product and process. We need that rigorous process to give us confidence that what we've done is good enough. We have a realistic, useful and powerful process that enables us to put things in context. It helps us to communicate with everyone we need to, to consult with those that we have a duty to consult with. And also, we put around the basic risk process, this monitoring and review. And of course, we analyze risk to reduce it to acceptable levels. So we've got to treat the risk or reduce it or control it in some way to get it to those acceptable levels. In the end, it's all about getting that required risk reduction to work. That reduction makes the risk acceptable to expose human beings to, for the benefit that it will give us.



This is Module 2 of SSRAP



This is Module 2 from the System Safety Risk Assessment Program (SSRAP) Course. Risk Analysis Programs – Design a System Safety Program for any system in any application. You can access the full course here.



You can find more introductory lessons at Start Here.

#howtoriskassessment #howtoriskassessmentanalysis #learnriskassessment #learnriskassessmentanalysis #riskassess #riskassessment #riskassessmentanalysistechnique #riskassessmentanalysistraining #riskassessmentanalysistutorial #riskassessmenteducation #riskassessmentequation #riskassessmentguide #riskassessmentkeypoints #riskassessmentoutline #riskassessmentquestionstoask #riskassessmentskills #riskassessmenttechnique #riskassessmenttraining #riskassessmenttutorial #riskassessmentvideo #riskmanagement31000pdf

Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/2021/03/13/ssrap-module-2-system-safety-risk-analysis/

FAQ

FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions. Okay, so you can look up the common meanings of words in a dictionary. But that doesn't really explain what those technical terms really mean, does it? Here's what I think, based on 20+ years of experience of both doing and teaching.



FAQ: Safety



'Why Safety?' Questions



how safety is important, why safety is important, why safety matters, safety is key, what safety means to me.



The ILO estimates that some 2.3 million women and men around the world succumb to work-related accidents or diseases every year; this corresponds to over 6000 deaths every single day. Worldwide, there are around 340 million occupational accidents and 160 million victims of work-related illnesses annually. International Labour Organisation, UN, 12 Dec 2020



Safety is important because we need to protect people from physical and psychological harm. It's the right thing to do. In most countries, it is also the law, and there may be severe penalties for those who cause harm to others, or even just for exposing them to certain risks. I can tell you that just being investigated for a safety breach is a highly disruptive and unpleasant experience - I've seen it happen. Accidents are also VERY expensive.



However, I don't like trying to frighten people into complying with the law. It leads to defensive and poor decision making and it saps people's confidence. That's not what I want to happen. I prefer to point out that building safety into the earliest stages of a project is much cheaper and more effective than trying to add it later.



Start learning how to do that in the free lesson System Safety Concepts.



System Safety Questions

is system safety, system safety is, what's system safety, what is system safety management, what is system safety assessment, what is a system safety program plan, what is safety system of work, , what's system safety, which active safety system, why system safety, system safety faa, system safety management, system safety management plan, system safety mil std, system safety methodology, system safety mil-std-882d, system safety mil-std-882e, system safety program plan, system safety process, system safety ppt system safety principles, system safety perspective, system safety precedence, system safety analysis, system safety analysis handbook, system safety analysis techniques, system safety courses, system safety assessment



Start learning how to do that in the lessons on System Safety Concepts, System Safety Principles, and the series on System Safety Analysis Topic Page.



System Safety Engineering Questions

What is system safety engineering, system safety engineering, system safety engineer jobs, system safety engineer salary, system safety engineering and risk assessment, system safety engineering and management pdf, system safety engineering and management, system safety engineering course



Find information about System Safety Engineering in the posts, below:



FAQ: Risk



'What is Risk?' Questions

risk can be defined as, risk definition, risk can involve, risk can be quantified as low medium and, risk can be measured by, risk can be classified as, risk can be identified in, risk is measured by assessing the, risk is measured by assessing the and the of harm, risk is defined as, risk is equal to what, risk is a function of the, risk is a product of probability of occurrence and, how risk is measured, how risk is calculated



For a recap of Risk Basics see Module 1 of my Udemy course here



Risk Management Questions

why risk management, why risk management is important, why risk management is important in project management, why risk management plan is important, why risk management is important for business, why risk management matters, are risk management, are risk management services, is risk management important, is risk management framework, is risk management effective, can risk management be outsourced, can risk management increase risk, can risk management create value, how can risk management help companies, how can risk management be improved, how can risk management improve performance, how risk management improve organization performance, how risk management works, how risk management help you, how risk management helps, how risk management plans can be monitored, how risk management help us, how risk management add value to a firm, how risk management developed, what risk management do, what risk management means, what risk management is, what risk management is not, where risk management, which risk management certification is best, which risk management principle is best demonstrated, which risk management technique is considered the best, which risk management handling technique is an action, which risk management techniques, who risk management guidelines, who risk management, who risk management framework, who risk management tool, who risk management plan, who risk management strategies, will risk management be automated, how will risk management help you, how will this risk management plan be monitored, risk management will reduce, risk management will



Find articles on risk management, below:



Risk Assessment Questions

are risk assessments a legal requirement, are risk assessments mandatory, are risk assessments effective, are risk assessments legally binding, what risk assessments do i need, what risk assessment, Risk assessment, when risk assessment should be reviewed, why risk assessment is important, why risk assess, how risk assessments are monitored and reviewed, how risk assessment is done



For answers to questions about Risk Assessment see my Udemy course here



Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/faq/

Safety Engineering Jobs in Australia

Are you looking for Safety Engineering Jobs in Australia?  Thinking of moving into the profession and wondering if it’s worth it?  Already a safety engineer and thinking of moving to Australia (Poms, take note)?  Then this article is for you!



Introduction



The most popular online job site in Australia is seek.com.au. If we go on this website and search for jobs, let's say, up to $200,000 salary, we will see about a quarter of a million jobs listed.



I can tell you from personal experience that the market for skilled jobs is very buoyant at the moment. Recruiting is very difficult and this is driving up salaries.



Now, out of those quarter of a million jobs, if we search on the terms safe or safety, we will get somewhere between 45,000 and 60,000 hits. Of course, this does not mean that there are that many safety jobs.  Lots of job ads include the word 'safe' or 'safety' as a motherhood and apple pie statement. "We are committed to having a safe working environment", or something like that.



Specific Types of Safety Jobs



The seek search engine helps us. If we just type in the word ‘safe’ it comes up with five suggestions, and these are safety advisor, safety engineer, safety officer, safety coordinator, and safety manager.



- Safety Advisor - 2,000 jobs;



- Safety Officer - 2,000 jobs;



- Safety Coordinator - 880 jobs;



- Safety Manager - 2,200 jobs; and



- Safety Engineer - 700 jobs.



Let's quickly deal with the terminology here. Safety officer, safety coordinator, and safety advisor are jobs that tend to be in the work health and safety or WHS area. This is what we used to call occupational health and safety in Australia.



If you want a job in these areas you will often find that you need industry-specific experience, because you are dealing with quite hands-on issues of occupational health and safety. Wages are okay in these sectors, although not spectacular.



If you want to work in Safety and earn more money, you probably need to look at becoming a safety manager or safety engineer.



There are quite a lot of safety manager jobs available. And they are in all sorts of industries. You're going to need quite a lot of safety experience in order to get one of these jobs, be it in WHS or safety engineering. You will also need to be able to manage other people, rather than doing hands-on engineering work yourself.



We will look at safety management another time.



Let's Look at Safety Engineer Jobs



Out of 700 safety engineer jobs, this is where they are.  No surprise that engineering is top of the list, but only 44% of safety engineer jobs are in engineering.



Engineering310Construction86Mining, Resources & Energy76Government & Defence58Manufacturing, Transport & Logistics48Trades & Services41Information & Communication Technology17Human Resources & Recruitment16Sales13Administration & Office Support10Hospitality & Tourism7Accounting5Call Centre & Customer Service3Science & Technology3Education & Training2CEO & General Management1Consulting & Strategy1Marketing & Communications1Real Estate & Property1Retail & Consumer Products1Table - breakdown of Safety Engineer Jobs by Employment Sector



We can see the breakdown better in this table.  Construction, Mining, Resources & Energy, Government & Defence, Manufacturing, Transport & Logistics, and Trades & Services account for another 44% of positions.  Many of these categories should come as no surprise.  Mining and Resources are Australia’s biggest export earners (followed by education, interestingly).  Ours is a vast country with plenty of room to expand, so construction, Transport & Logistics are always going to be big employers.



Histogram - breakdown of Safety Engineer Jobs by Employment Sector



Government & Defence are big purchasers and operators of sophisticated equipment, so their need for safety expertise is high.  We still make things in Australia, so Manufacturing is in there, and we also have a very strong service economy (remember I mentioned education earlier?) so Trades & Services feature as well.



Pie Chart - breakdown of Safety Engineer Jobs by Employment Sector



Last, ICT, Human Resources & Recruitment, Sales, etc., mop up the remaining 12%.  In this ‘tail’, a wide variety of sectors advertise for just a few positions.



It’s clear that if we want to do safety engineering then we should not limit ourselves to the ‘engineering’ industry.  Many more domains need and want our services.



Diving Deeper into Engineering



As Engineering is the biggest sector, let’s look deeper into that.  Systems Engineering and Civil/Structural Engineering comprise a third of positions, as do Project Engineering, Electrical/ Electronic Engineering and Mechanical Engineering.  Again, a wide variety of other sectors make up the final third.



Systems Engineering62Civil/Structural Engineering40Project Engineering37Electrical/Electronic Engineering35Mechanical Engineering30Building Services Engineering19Maintenance16Other14Management10Process Engineering8Project Management8Aerospace Engineering7Environmental Engineering6Industrial Engineering6Chemical Engineering4Automotive Engineering3Engineering Drafting3Water & Waste Engineering2Table - breakdown of Safety Engineer Jobs in Engineering by Sub-sector



This is illustrated nicely by the histogram, below.  Note how diverse safety engineering disciplines are – no one sector really dominates here.  



Histogram - breakdown of Safety Engineer Jobs in Engineering by Sub-sector



Again, the split is nicely illustrated by the pie chart, below.  We can clearly see how the top five sectors offer two-thirds of the jobs.



Pie Chart - breakdown of Safety Engineer Jobs in Engineering by Sub-sector



System Safety Engineering Job Adverts



To see what employers say they are looking for (not everyone can write an accurate job description), I have analysed a bunch of job adverts.  I looked at 22 adverts for system safety engineering jobs offering a full-time salary of up to $100k, which is basically entry-level in Australia.  I concentrated on the responsibilities that applicants should expect to hold. The results are summarized in this word cloud (thanks Tag Crowd ), below.



Word Cloud - from 22 adverts for system safety engineering jobs



As we can see, there are some obvious words that come up repeatedly – engineering, experience, safety, system – which really tell us nothing.  The next level down is more useful – development, design, management, requirements, and project.  (I notice also ‘support’ and ‘team’ but these are very widely-used words, aren’t they?  Nobody wants an uncooperative loner who won’t provide support.)



For context, and a better understanding, let’s look at the most common phrases in our sample (thanks Online Text Analyzer).  These all recur four times in our sample:



- “experience with aerospace and/or defence projects”;



- “strong understanding of systems engineering principles and lifecycle”;



- “with aerospace and/or defence projects highly”;



- “aerospace and/or defence projects highly regarded”;



- “understanding of systems engineering principles and lifecycle management”; and



- “experience in complex technical development and integration projects”.



We need to be a little bit careful here.  Clearly, there are one or more employers looking for experience in aerospace and defence, and their ads are using certain stock phrases repeatedly.  As we’ve seen earlier in this article, ‘Government and Defence’ is a significant employer of safety engineers, but aerospace jobs are quite rare. 



Nevertheless, if we look through this bias we can discern a need for understanding, particularly of systems engineering principles and the systems engineering lifecycle.  We also need to deal with complex technical development and integration projects.



Thus, in summary, there is a discernible focus on:



- Development & design;



- Management;



- Requirements;



- Systems engineering principles;



- Systems engineering lifecycle;



- Complex technical development; and



- Complex integration projects.



There is nothing here to surprise an experienced Systems Engineer (but this article isn't really written for experts but for those who want in). It’s nice to see it spelt out: this is what employers are willing to pay for.



Next Time…



That was 'Safety Engineering Jobs in Australia' - back to the Blog. Need some courses to help you along? They're here.



Next time I will look at exemplary safety engineer resumes, and I will analyse some salary bands ... until then, what's your view of the safety jobs market in Australia?

#courseforsafetyengineer #cvforsafetyengineer #howtobecomesafetyengineer #issafetyengineeringagoodcareer #jobsforsafetyengineer #qualificationforsafetyengineer #resumeforsafetyengineer #safetyengineer #safetyengineercv #safetyengineerfresherjobs #safetyengineerjobs #safetyengineerresume #safetyengineerrolesandresponsibilities #safetyengineersalary #safetyengineertechnicalskills #safetyinengineeringindustry #whatsafetyengineerdo

Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/2022/11/30/safety-engineering-jobs-in-australia/

Risk Analysis Programs

Risk Analysis Programs - Design a System Safety Program for any system in any application.



https://youtu.be/rEjfdX34t-4

Introduction to the System Safety Risk Analysis Programs Course.



Risk Analysis Programs: Learning Objectives



At the end of this course, you will be able to:



- Describe fundamental risk concepts;



- Explain what a system safety approach is and does;



- Define what a risk analysis program is;



- List the hazard analysis tasks that make up a program;



- Select tasks to meet your needs;



- Design a tailored analysis program for any application; and



- Know how to get more information and resources.



get the full course



Risk Analysis Programs: Transcript



Introduction



Hello and welcome to this course on Systems Safety Risk Analysis Programs. I'm Simon Di Nucci, The Safety Artisan, and I've been a safety engineer and consultant for over 20 years.



I've worked on a wide range of safety programs doing risk analysis on all kinds of things. Ships, planes, trains, air traffic management systems, software systems, you name it. I've worked in the U.K., in Australia, and on many systems from the US.



I've also trained hundreds of people on safety. And now I'vegot the opportunity to share some of that knowledge with you online.



So, what are the benefits of this course?



First of all, you will learn about basic concepts. About system safety, what it is, and what it does. You will know how to apply a risk analysis program to a very complex system and how to manage that complexity. So, that's what you'll know.



At the end of the course, you will also be able to do things that you might not have been able to do before. You will be able to take the elements of a risk analysis program and the different tasks. Select the right tasks and form a program to suit your application, whatever it might be.



You might have a full, high-risk bespoke development system. Or take a commercial system off the shelf and do something new with it. You might be taking a product and using it in a new application or a new location. Whatever it might be, you will learn how to tailor your risk analysis program.



This program will give you the analyses you need, to meet your legal and regulatory requirements. Once you've learned how to do this, you can apply it to almost any system.



Finally, you will feel confident doing this. I will be interpreting the terminology used in the tasks and applying my experience. So, instead of reading the standard and being unsure of your interpretation, you can be sure of what you need to do. Also, I will show you how you can get good results and avoid some of the pitfalls.



So, these are the three benefits of the program:



- You will know what to do.



- You will be able to do things, and …



- You'll be feeling confident doing the tasks.



At the end of the course, I will also show you where to find further resources. There are free resources to choose from. But there are also paid resources for those who want to take their studies to the next level. I hope you enjoy the course.



Get the supporting safety analysis courses here.



Meet the Author



Learn safety engineering with me, an industry professional with 25 years of experience, I have:



•Worked on aircraft, ships, submarines, ATMS, trains, and software;



•Tiny programs to some of the biggest (Eurofighter, Future Submarine);



•In the UK and Australia, on US and European programs;



•Taught safety to hundreds of people in the classroom, and thousands online;



•Presented on safety topics at several international conferences.

#RiskAssessment #riskassess #riskassessInternettutorial #riskassessBest #riskassessBuy #riskassessFreetutorial #riskassessGet #riskassessGuide #riskassessHowto #riskassessImprove #riskassessInstruction #riskassessMethod #riskassessOnlinetutorial #riskassessReview #riskassessSolution #riskassessSolve #riskassessStudy #riskassessTechnique #riskassessThatworks #riskassessTips #riskassessTop #riskassessTraining #riskassessTutorial #riskassessValue #riskassessVideo

Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/2021/01/28/risk-analysis-programs/

Introduction to WHS Codes of Practice

In the 30-minute session, we introduce Australian WHS Codes of Practice (CoP). We cover: What they are and how to use them; their Limitations; we List (Federal) codes; provide Further commentary; and Where to get more information. This session is a useful prerequisite to all the other sessions on CoP.



https://youtu.be/JAOeNfPaULU



Codes of Practice: Topics



- What they are and how to use them;

- Limitations;

- List of CoP (Federal);

- Further commentary; and

- Where to get more information.



Codes of Practice: Transcript



Click Here for the Transcript

Hello and welcome to the Safety Artisan, where you will find professional, pragmatic, and impartial teaching and resources on all thing’s safety. I'm Simon and today is the 16th of August 2020. Welcome to the show.



Introduction



So, today we're going to be talking about Codes of Practice. In fact, we're going to be introducing Codes of Practice and the whole concept of what they are and what they do.



Topics for this Session



What we're going to cover is what Codes of Practice are and how to use them – several slides on that; a brief word on their limitations; a list of federal codes of practice – and I'll explain why I'm emphasizing it's the list of federal ones; some further commentary and where to get more information. So, all useful stuff I hope.



CoP are Guidance...



So, Codes of Practice come in the work, health and safety hierarchy below the act and regulations. So, at the top you've got the WHS Act, then you've got the WTS regulations, which the act calls up. And then you've got the Codes of Practice, which also the act calls up. We'll see that in a moment. And what Codes of Practice do are they provide practical guidance on how to achieve the standards of work, health and safety required under the WHS act and regulations, and some effective ways to identify and manage risks. So, they’re guidance but as we'll see in a moment, they're much more than guidance. So, as I said, the Codes of Practice are called up by the act and they're approved and signed off by the relevant minister. So, they are a legislative instrument.



Now, a quick footnote. These words, by the way, are in the introduction to every Code of Practice. There's a little note here that says we're required to consider all risks associated with work, not just for those risks that have associated codes of practice. So, we can't hide behind that. We've got to think about everything. There are codes of practice for several things, but not everything. Not by a long way.



...Guidance We Should Follow



Now, there are three reasons why Codes of Practice are a bit more than just guidance. So, first of all, they are admissible in court proceedings. Secondly, they are evidence of what is known about a hazard, risk, risk assessment, risk control. And thirdly, courts may rely, or regulators may rely, on Codes of Practice to determine what is reasonably practicable in the circumstances to which the code applies. So, what's the significance of that?



So first of all, the issue about being admissible. If you're unfortunate enough to go to court and be accused of failing under WHS law, then you will be able to appeal to a Code of Practice in your defence and say, “I complied with the Code of Practice”. They are admissible in court proceedings. However, beyond that, all bets are off. It's the court that decides what is anadmissible defence, and that means lawyers decide, not engineers. Now, given that you're in court and the incident has already happened a lot of the engineering stuff that we do about predicting the probability of things is no longer relevant. The accident has happened. Somebody has got hurt. All these probability arguments are dust in your in the wake of the accident. So, Codes of Practice are a reliable defence.



Secondly, the bit about evidence of what is known is significant, because when we're talking about what is reasonably practicable, the definition of reasonably practicable in Section 18 of the WHS act talks about what it is reasonable or what should have been known when people were anticipating the risk and managing it. Now, given that Codes of Practice were published back in 2012, there's no excuse for not having read them. So, they’re pre –existing, they're clearly relevant, the law has said that they're admissible in court. We should have read them, and we should have acted upon them. And there'll be no wriggling out of that. So, if we haven't done something that CoP guided us to do, we're going to look very vulnerable in court.  Or in the whatever court of judgment we're up against, whether it be public opinion or trial by media or whatever it is.



And thirdly, some CoP can be used to help determine what is SOFARP. So in some circumstances, if you're dealing with a risk that's described a CoP, CoP is applicable. Then if you followed everything in CoP, then you might be able to claim that just doing that means that you've managed the risk SFARP. Why is that important? Because the only way we are legally allowed to expose people to risk is if we have eliminated or minimized that risk so far as is reasonably practicable, SFARP. That is the key test, the acid test, of “Have we met our risk management obligations? “And CoP are useful, maybe crucial, in two different ways for determining what is SFARP. So yes, they’re guidance but it's guidance that we ignore at our peril.



Standards & Good Practice



So, moving on. Codes of Practice recognize, and I reemphasize this is in the introduction to every code of practice, they're not the only way of doing things. There isn't a CoP for everything under the sun. So, codes recognize that you can achieve compliance with WHS obligations by using another method as long as it provides an equivalent or higher standard of work, health and safety than the code. It's important to recognize that Codes of Practice are basic. They apply to every business and undertaking in Australia potentially. So, if you're doing something more sophisticated, then probably CoP on their own are not enough. They're not good enough.



And in my day job as a consultant, that's the kind of stuff we do. We do planes, trains and automobiles. We do ships and submarines. We do nuclear. We do infrastructure. We do all kinds of complex stuff for which there are standards and recognized good practice which go way beyond the requirements of basic Codes of Practice. And many I would say, probably most, technical and industry safety standards and practices are more demanding than Codes of Practice. So, if you're following an industry or technical standard that says “Here's a risk management process”, then it's likely that that will be far more detailed than the requirements that are in Codes of Practice.



And just a little note to say that for those of us who love numbers and quantitative safety analysis, what this statement about equivalent or higher standards of health and safety is talking about  –We want requirements that are more demanding and more rigorous or more detailed than CoP. Not that the end –result in the predicted probability of something happening is better than what you would get with CoP because nobody knows what you would get with CoP. That calculation hasn't been done. So, don't go down the rabbit hole of thinking “I've got a quantitatively demonstrate that what we're doing is better than CoP.” You haven't. It's all about demonstrating the input requirements are more demanding rather than the output because that's never been done for CoP. So, you've got no benchmark to measure against in output terms.



The primacy of WHS & Regulations



A quick point to note that Codes of Practice, they are only guidance. They do refer to relevant WHS act and regulations, the hard obligations, and we should not be relying solely on codes in place of what it says in the WHS Act or the regulations. So, we need to remember that codes are not a substitute for the act or the regs. Rather they are a useful introduction. WHS ACT and regulations are actually surprisingly clear and easy to read. But even so, there are 600 regulations. There are hundreds of sections of the WHS act. It's a big read and not all of it is going to be relevant to every business, by a long way. So, if you see a CoP that clearly applies to something that you're doing, start with the cop. It will lead you into the relevant parts of WHS act and regulations. If you don't know them, have a read around in there around the stuff that – you've been given the pointer in the CoP, follow it up.



But also, CoP do represent a minimum level of knowledge that you should have. Again, start with CoP, don't stop with them. So, go on a bit. Look at the authoritative information in the act and the regs and then see if there's anything else that you need to do or need to consider. The CoP will get you started.



And then finally, it's a reference for determining SOFARP. You won't see anything other than the definition of reasonably practicable in the Act. You won't see any practical guidance in the Act or the regulations on how to achieve SOFARP. Whereas CoP does give you a narrative that you can follow and understand and maybe even paraphrase if you need to in some safety documentation. So, they are useful for that. There’s also guidance on reasonably practicable, but we'll come to that at the end.



Detailed Requirements



It's worth mentioning that there are some detailed requirements in codes. Now, when I did this, I think I was looking at the risk management Code of Practice, which will go through later in another session. But in this example, there are this many requirements. So, every CoP has the statement “The words ‘must’, ‘requires’, or ‘mandatory’ indicate a legal requirement exists that must be complied with.” So, if you see ‘must’, ‘requires’, or ‘mandatory’, you've got to do it. And in this example CoP that I was looking at, there are 35 ‘must’s, 39 ‘required’ or ‘requirement’ – that kind of wording – and three instances of ‘mandatory’. Now, bearing in mind the sentence that introduces those things contains two instances of ‘must’ and one of ‘requires’ and one of ‘mandatory’. So, straight away you can ignore those four instances. But clearly, there are lots of instances here of ‘must’ and ‘require’ and a couple of ‘mandatory’.



Then we've got the word ‘should’ is used in this code to indicate a recommended course of action, while ‘may’ is used to indicate an optional course of action. So, the way I would suggest interpreting that and this is just my personal opinion – I have never seen any good guidance on this. If it says ‘recommended’, then personally I would do it unless I can justify there's a good reason for not doing it. And if it said ‘optional’, then I would consider it. But I might discard it if I felt it wasn't helpful or I felt there was a better way to do it. So, that would be my personal interpretation of how to approach those words. So, ‘recommended’ – do it unless you can justify not doing it. ‘Optional’ – Consider it, but you don't have to do it.



And in this particular one, we've got 43 instances of ‘should’ and 82 of ‘may’. So, there's a lot of detailed information in each CoP in order to consider. So, read them carefully and comply with them where you have to work and that will repay you. So, a positive way to look at it, CoP are there to help you. They're there to make life easy for you. Read them, follow them. The negative way to look at them is, ”I don't need to do all this says in CoP because it's only guidance”. You can have that attitude if you want. If you're in the dock or in the witness box in court, that's not going to be a good look. Let's move on.



Limitations of CoP



So, I've talked CoP up quite a lot; as you can tell, I'm a fan because I like anything that helps us do the job, but they do have limitations. I've said before that there's a limited number of them and they're pretty basic. First of all, it's worth noting that there are two really generic Codes of Practice. First of all, there's the one on risk management. And then secondly, there's the one on communication, consultation and cooperation. And I'll be doing sessions on both of those. Now, those apply to pretty much everything we do in the safety world. So, it's essential that you read them no matter what you're doing and comply with them where you have to.



Then there are other codes of practice that apply to specific activities or hazards, and some of them are very, very specific, like getting rid of asbestos, or welding, or spray painting – or whatever it might be – shock blasting. Those have clearly got a very narrow focus. So, you will know if you're doing that stuff. So, if you are doing welding and clearly you need to read the welding CoP. If welding isn't part of your business or undertaking, you can forget it.



However, overall, there are less than 25 Codes of Practice. I can't be more precise for reasons that we will come to in a moment. So, there's a relatively small number of CoP and they don't cover complex things. They're not going to help you design a super –duper widget or some software or anything like that. It's not going to help you do anything complicated. Also, Codes of Practice tend to focus on the workplace, which is understandable. They're not much help when it comes to design trade –offs. They're great for the sort of foundational stuff. Yes, we have to do all of this stuff regardless. When you get to questions of, “How much is enough?” Sometimes in safety, we say, “How much margin do I need?” “How many layers of protection do I need?” “Have I done enough?” CoP aren't going to be a lot of use helping you with that kind of determination but you do need to have made sure you've done everything CoP first and then start thinking about those trade –offs, would be my advice. You're less likely to go wrong that way. So, start with your firm basis of what you have to do to comply and then think “What else could I do?”



List of CoP (Federal) #1



Now for information, you’ve got three slides here where we've got a list of the Codes of Practice that apply at the federal or Commonwealth level of government in Australia. So, at the top highlighted I've already mentioned the ‘how’ to manage WHS risks and the consultation, cooperation, and coordination codes. Then we get into stuff like abrasive, blasting, confined spaces, construction and demolition and excavation, first aid. So, quite a range of stuff, covered.



List of CoP (Federal) #2



Hazardous manual tasks – so basically human beings carrying and moving stuff. Managing and controlling asbestos, and removing it. Then we've got a couple on hazardous chemicals on this page, electrical risks, managing noise, preventing hearing loss, and stevedoring. There you go. So, if you're into stevedoring, then this CoP is for you. The highlighted ones we're going to cover in later sessions.



List of CoP (Federal) #3



Then we've got managing risk of Plant in the workplace. There was going to be a Code of Practice for the design of Plant, but that never saw the light of day so we've only got guidance on that. We've got falls, environment, work environment, and facilities. We've got another one on safety data sheets for another one on hazardous chemicals, preventing falls in housing – I guess because that's very common accident – safe design of structures, spray painting and powder coating, and welding processes. So, those are the list of – I think it's 24 – Codes of Practice are applied by Comcare, the federal regulator.



Commentary #1



Now, I'm being explicit about which regulator and which set of CoP, because they vary around Australia. Basically, the background was the model Codes of Practice were developed by Safe Work Australia, which is a national body. But those model Codes of Practice do not apply. Safe Work Australia is not a regulator. Codes of Practice are implemented or enforced by the federal government and by most states and territories. And it says with variations for a reason. Not all states and territories impose all codes of practice. For example, I live in South Australia and if you go and look at the WorkSafe South Australia website or Safe Work – whatever it's called – you will see that there's a couple of CoP that for some reason we don't enforce in South Australia. Why? I do not know. But you do need to think about these things depending on where you're operating.



It's also worth saying that WHS is not implemented in every state in Australia. Western Australia currently have plans to implement WHS, but as of 2020 but I don't believe they've done so yet. Hopefully, it's coming soon. And Victoria, for some unknown reason, have decided they're just not going to play ball with everybody else. They've got no plans to implement WHS that I can find online. They're still using their old OHS legislation. It's not a universal picture in Australia, thanks to our rather silly version of government that we have here in Australia – forget I said that. So, if it's a Commonwealth workplace and we apply the federal version of WHS and Codes of Practice. Otherwise, we use state or territory versions and you need to see the local regulator's Web page to find out what is applied where. And the definition of a Commonwealth workplace is in the WHS Act, but also go and have a look at the Comcare website to see who Comcare police. Because there are some nationalised industries that count as a Commonwealth workplace and it can get a bit messy.



So, sometimes you may have to ask for advice from the regulator but go and see what they say. Don't rely on what consultants say or what you've heard on the grapevine. Go and see what the regulator actually says and make sure it's the right regulator for where you're operating.



Commentary #2



What’s to come? I'm going to do a session on the Risk Management Code of Practice, and I'm also, associated with that, going to do a session on the guidance on what is reasonably practicable. Now that's guidance, it’s not a Code of Practice. But again, it's been published so we need to be aware of it and it's also very simple and very helpful. I would strongly recommend looking at that guidance if you're struggling with SFARP for what it means, it's very good. I'll be talking about that soon. Also, I'm going to do a session on tolerability of risk, because you remember when I said “CoP aren't much good for helping you do trade–offs in design” and that kind of thing. They're really only good for simple stuff and compliance. Well, what you need to understand to deal with the more sophisticated problems is the concept of tolerability of risk. That’ll help us do those things. So, I'm going to do a session on that.



I'm also going to do a session on consultation, cooperation, and coordination, because, as I said before, that's universally applicable. If we're doing anything at a workplace, or with stuff that's going to a workplace, that we need to be aware of what's in that code. And then I'm also going to do sessions on plant, structures and substances (or hazardous chemicals) because those are the absolute bread and butter of the WHS Act. If you look at the duties of designers, manufacturers, importers, suppliers, and installers, et cetera, you will find requirements on plant, substances and structures all the way through those clauses in the WHS Act. Those three things are key so we're going to be talking about that.



Now, I mentioned before that there was going to be a Code of Practice on plant design, but it never made it. It's just guidance. So, we'll have a look at that if we can as well – Copyright permitting. And then I want to look at electrical risks because I think the electrical risks code is very useful.

#coursesafetyengineering #engineersafety #ineedsafety #Introduction #knowledgeofsafety #learnsafety #needforsafety #riskanalysis #riskassessment #riskmanagement #safetyblog #safetydo #safetyengineer #safetyengineerskills #safetyengineertraining #safetyengineeringcourse #safetyprinciples #safetytraining #softwaresafety #theneedforsafety #WHSAct #WHSCodeofPractice #WHSRegulations

Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/2020/09/13/introduction-to-whs-codes-of-practice/

Welcome to the New Website!

Welcome to the New Website! It has been professionally redesigned to provide a much better user experience by the awesome Sam Jusaitis. My thanks to him for doing such a great job.



The Main Pages



You can now browse through the main pages, which give you all the content that you might need, in the order that you choose it:



- Topics. This page showcases the main safety topics that I cover, so far they are:



- Start Here. Mostly free introductory videos for those new to safety;



- Safety Analysis. A complete and in-depth suite of lessons on this subject; and



- Work Health & Safety. All you need to know about Australian WHS legislation and practice.



- About. Some information about The Safety Artisan - why you would choose safety tuition from me.



- Connect. Here, you can sign up for free email newsletters, subscribe to our YouTube Channel, and follow us on social media.



- Frequently Asked Questions. The most commonly Googled questions are here, with links to posts and videos that answer them.



- Checkout. You'll get there if you purchase any of the downloadable videos and content - but there's plenty of free stuff too!



Welcome to the New Website Logo



Sam also designed the new logo, which reminds some people of the human eye. It was actually derived from the shapes of various warning signs, as shown below. Clever, eh?



Meet the Author



Learn safety engineering with me, an industry professional with 25 years of experience, I have:



•Worked on aircraft, ships, submarines, ATMS, trains, and software;



•Tiny programs to some of the biggest (Eurofighter, Future Submarine);



•In the UK and Australia, on US and European programs;



•Taught safety to hundreds of people in the classroom, and thousands online;



•Presented on safety topics at several international conferences.

#coursesafetyengineering #engineersafety #ineedsafety #knowledgeofsafety #learnsafety #needforsafety #safetyartisan #safetyblog #safetydo #safetyengineer #safetyengineerskills #safetyengineertraining #safetyengineering #safetyengineeringcourse #safetyprinciples #safetytraining #softwaresafety #theneedforsafety #Welcome

Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/2020/11/29/welcome-to-the-new-website/

Software Safety Principles Conclusions and References

Software Safety Principles Conclusions and References is the sixth and final blog post on Principles of Software Safety Assurance. In them, we look at the 4+1 principles that underlie all software safety standards. (The previous post in the series is here.)



Read on to Benefit From...



The conclusions of this paper are brief and readable, but very valuable. It's important for us - as professionals and team players - to be able to express these things to managers and other stakeholders clearly. Talking to non-specialists is something that most technical people could do better.



The references include links to the standards covered by the paper. Unsurprisingly, these are some of the most popular and widely used processes in software engineering. The other links take us to the key case studies that support the conclusions.



Content



We outline common software safety assurance principles that are evident in software safety standards and best practices. You can think of these guidelines as the unchanging foundation of any software safety argument because they hold true across projects and domains.



The principles serve as a guide for cross-sector certification and aid in maintaining comprehension of the “big picture” of software safety issues while evaluating and negotiating the specifics of individual standards.



Conclusion



These six blog posts have presented the 4+1 model of foundational principles of software safety assurance. The principles strongly connect to elements of current software safety assurance standards and they act as a common benchmark against which standards can be measured.



Through the examples provided, it's also clear that, although these concepts can be stated clearly, they haven't always been put into practice. There may still be difficulties with their application by current standards. Particularly, there is still a great deal of research and discussion going on about the management of confidence with respect to software safety assurance (Principle 4+1).



Standards and References



RTCA/EUROCAE, Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification, DO-178C/ED-12C, 2011.



CENELEC, EN-50128:2011 - Railway applications - Communication, signaling and processing systems - Software for railway control and protection systems, 2011.



ISO-26262 Road vehicles – Functional safety, FDIS, International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2011



IEC-61508 – Functional Safety of Electrical / Electronic / Programmable Electronic Safety-Related Systems. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 1998



FDA, Examples of Reported Infusion Pump Problems, Accessed on 27 September 2012,



http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/GeneralHospitalDevicesandSupplies/InfusionPumps/ucm202496.htm



FDA, FDA Issues Statement on Baxter’s Recall of Colleague Infusion Pumps, Accessed on 27 September 2012, http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm210664.htm



FDA, Total Product Life Cycle: Infusion Pump - Premarket Notification 510(k) Submissions, Draft Guidance, April 23, 2010.



“Report on the Accident to Airbus A320-211 Aircraft in Warsaw on 14 September 1993”, Main Commission Aircraft Accident Investigation Warsaw, March 1994, http://www.rvs.unibielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/DOCS/ComAndRep/Warsaw/warsaw-report.html  Accessed on 1st October 2012.



JPL Special Review Board, "Report on the Loss of the Mars Polar Lander and Deep Space 2 Missions", Jet Propulsion Laboratory”, March 2000.



Australian Transport Safety Bureau. In-Flight Upset Event 240Km North-West of Perth, WA, Boeing Company 777-2000, 9M-MRG. Aviation Occurrence Report 200503722, 2007.



H. Wolpe, General Accounting Office Report on Patriot Missile Software Problem, February 4, 1992, Accessed on 1st October 2012, Available at: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/gao/im92026.htm



Y.C. Yeh, Triple-Triple Redundant 777 Primary Flight Computer, IEEE Aerospace Applications Conference pg 293-307, 1996.



D.M. Hunns and N. Wainwright, Software-based protection for Sizewell B: the regulator’s perspective. Nuclear Engineering International, September 1991.



R.D. Hawkins, T.P. Kelly, A Framework for Determining the Sufficiency of Software Safety Assurance. IET System Safety Conference, 2012.



SAE. ARP 4754 - Guidelines for Development of Civil Aircraft and Systems. 1996.



Software Safety Principles: End of the Series



This blog post series was derived from ‘The Principles of Software Safety Assurance’, by RD Hawkins, I Habli & TP Kelly, University of York. The original paper is available for free here. I was privileged to be taught safety engineering by Tim Kelly, and others, at the University of York. I am pleased to share their valuable work in a more accessible format.



Meet the Author



My name’s Simon Di Nucci. I’m a practicing system safety engineer, and I have been, for the last 25 years; I’ve worked in all kinds of domains, aircraft, ships, submarines, sensors, and command and control systems, and some work on rail air traffic management systems, and lots of software safety. So, I’ve done a lot of different things!



Principles of Software Safety Training



Learn more about this subject in my course 'Principles of Safe Software' here.



My course on Udemy, 'Principles of Software Safety Standards' is a cut-down version of the full Principles Course. Nevertheless, it still scores 4.42 out of 5.00 and attracts comments like:



- "It gives me an idea of standards as to how they are developed and the downward pyramid model of it." 4* Niveditha V.



- "This was really good course for starting the software safety standareds, comparing and reviewing strengths and weakness of them. Loved the how he try to fit each standared with4+1 principles. Highly recommend to anyone that want get into software safety." 4.5* Amila R.



- "The information provides a good overview. Perfect for someone like me who has worked with the standards but did not necessarily understand how the framework works." 5* Mahesh Koonath V.



- "Really good overview of key software standards and their strengths and weaknesses against the 4+1 Safety Principles." 4.5* Ann H.

#basicprinciplesofsafety #issafetyimportant #principlesforsoftwaredesign #principlesofsoftwareengineering #principlesofsoftwarevalidation #safeprinciplesexplained #safesystemprinciples #safetyassessmentprinciples #safetyprinciples #safetyprinciplesandpractices #softwareanalysisprinciples #softwaredesignprinciplesexamples #softwaredevelopmentprinciple #softwaredevelopmentprinciplesandpractices #softwareengineeringprinciplesarebasedon #softwareengineeringprinciplesppt #softwareprinciples #softwareprinciplesinsoftwareengineering #softwarequalityprinciples #softwaresafetycertification #softwaresafetydefinition #softwaresafetyengineering #softwaresafetyexamples #softwaresafetyprinciples #softwaresafetyrequirements #softwaresafetyrequirementsexample #softwaresafetystandards #softwaresafetytesting #softwaresystemsafety #whataresoftwaredesignprinciples

Simon Di Nucci https://www.safetyartisan.com/2022/11/23/sw-safety-principles-conclusions-and-references/