Unsafe acts (UA) and unsafe conditions (UC) are commonly considered as accidents pre-cursors. Several methods can be applied to collect accident pre-cursors in different working environment. Re-porting results will be generally influenced by the methodology applied and by the analyst culture. In order to investigate the influence of the above aspects on the reporting results, this study compares two procedures for reporting UA and UC. Both are based on root cause analysis, but the method derived from industrial experience is based on a less structured delayed analysis, while the second model, derived from the HFACS (Hu-man Factors Analysis and Classification System) methodology is more structured and requires an early classi-fication of the event observed and a short interview with the workers involved. The experimental data collection has been carried on in an automotive plant during which the second model has been applied by an external team of analysts, while the on-site personnel were collecting data with the internal methodology. The results compared allows to highlight the effectiveness and the sensitivity of the methodologies.

Comparison of two methodologies for occupational accidents pre-cursors data collection / Comberti, Lorenzo; Baldissone, Gabriele; Bosca, Serena; Mure', Salvina; Dapan, Marko; Petruni, Alberto; Cencetti, Simone. - CD-ROM. - (2015), pp. 3237-3244. ((Intervento presentato al convegno European Safety and Reliability Conference - ESREL 2015 tenutosi a Zurich nel 7-10 September 2015.

Comparison of two methodologies for occupational accidents pre-cursors data collection

COMBERTI, LORENZO;BALDISSONE, GABRIELE;BOSCA, SERENA;MURE', SALVINA;DAPAN, MARKO;
2015

Abstract

Unsafe acts (UA) and unsafe conditions (UC) are commonly considered as accidents pre-cursors. Several methods can be applied to collect accident pre-cursors in different working environment. Re-porting results will be generally influenced by the methodology applied and by the analyst culture. In order to investigate the influence of the above aspects on the reporting results, this study compares two procedures for reporting UA and UC. Both are based on root cause analysis, but the method derived from industrial experience is based on a less structured delayed analysis, while the second model, derived from the HFACS (Hu-man Factors Analysis and Classification System) methodology is more structured and requires an early classi-fication of the event observed and a short interview with the workers involved. The experimental data collection has been carried on in an automotive plant during which the second model has been applied by an external team of analysts, while the on-site personnel were collecting data with the internal methodology. The results compared allows to highlight the effectiveness and the sensitivity of the methodologies.
9781138028791
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11583/2619273
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo