Background: This paper presents the findings of a pilot research survey which assessed the degree of balance between safety and productivity, and its relationship with awareness and communication of human factors and safety rules in the aircraft manufacturing environment.Methods: The study was carried out at two Australian aircraft manufacturing facilities where a Likertscale questionnaire was administered to a representative sample. The research instrument included topics relevant to the safety and human factors training provided to the target workforce. The answers were processed in overall, and against demographic characteristics of the sample population.Results: The workers were sufficiently aware of how human factors and safety rules influence their performance and acknowledged that supervisors had adequately communicated such topics. Safety and productivity seemed equally balanced across the sample. A preference for the former over the latter wasassociated with a higher awareness about human factors and safety rules, but not linked with safety communication. The size of the facility and the length and type of employment were occasionally correlated with responses to some communication and human factors topics and the equilibrium between productivity and safety.Conclusion: Although human factors training had been provided and sufficient bidirectional communication was present across the sample, it seems that quality and complexity factors might have influencedthe effects of those safety related practices on the safety-productivity balance for specific parts of the population studied. Customization of safety training and communication to specific characteristics of employees may be necessary to achieve the desired outcomes.
Various tools for safety performance measurement have been introduced in order to fulfil the need for safety monitoring in organisations, which is tightly related to their overall performance and achievement of their business goals. Such tools include accident rates, benchmarking, safety culture and climate assessments, cost-effectiveness studies, etc. The current work reviews the most representative methods for safety performance evaluation that have been suggested and applied by a variety of organisations, safety authorities and agencies. This paper discusses several viewpoints of the applicability, feasibility and appropriateness of such tools, based on the viewpoints of managers and safety experts involved in a relevant research that was conducted in a large aviation organisation. The extensive literature cited, the discussion topics, along with the conclusions and recommendations derived, might be considered by any organisation that seeks a realistic safety performance assessment and establishment of effective measurement tools.
Safety is monitored by various proactive and reactive methods, including the investigation of adverse accidents and incidents, which are collectively known as safety investigations. In this study we demonstrate how accident and incident investigation reports can be useful to identify implicit safety views and accident investigation approaches. An analysis framework was developed based on contemporary safety literature. The framework incorporates aspects such as hindsight bias, judgemental approach, proximal or distal focus, and the application of systemic versus sequential accident causation models. The framework was piloted through the analysis of sixteen (16) accident investigation reports published by a Nuclear Power Plant (NPP). The comments of independent researchers lead to framework refinements that increased the inter-rater reliability substantially. The initial results were validated through interviews with the staff of the NPP. Afterwards, the framework was applied to 52 air accident reports published by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) from 1999 to 2013. Frequency calculations revealed the extent of new safety thinking embracement from the DSB, and Fisher’s Exact Test showed that none of the modern safety aspects has changed over time. The framework can be used to analyse accident investigation reports published by various organisations as means to identify implicit safety views and evolution of accident investigation practices over time. Further research will explore the reasons for potential gaps between theory and practice and contribute to minimizing such distance. Safety is monitored by various proactive and reactive methods, including the investigation of adverse accidents and incidents, which are collectively known as safety investigations. In this study we demonstrate how accident and incident investigation reports can be useful to identify implicit safety views and accident investigation approaches. An analysis framework was developed based on contemporary safety literature. The framework incorporates aspects such as hindsight bias, judgemental approach, proximal or distal focus, and the application of systemic versus sequential accident causation models. The framework was piloted through the analysis of sixteen (16) accident investigation reports published by a Nuclear Power Plant (NPP). The comments of independent researchers lead to framework refinements that increased the inter-rater reliability substantially. The initial results were validated through interviews with the staff of the NPP. Afterwards, the framework was applied to 52 air accident reports published by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) from 1999 to 2013. Frequency calculations revealed the extent of new safety thinking embracement from the DSB, and Fisher’s Exact Test showed that none of the modern safety aspects has changed over time. The framework can be used to analyse accident investigation reports published by various organisations as means to identify implicit safety views and evolution of accident investigation practices over time. Further research will explore the reasons for potential gaps between theory and practice and contribute to minimizing such distance.
Every year the police are confronted with an ever increasing number of complex cases involving missing persons. About 100 people are reported missing every year in the Netherlands, of which, an unknown number become victims of crime, and presumed buried in clandestine graves. Similarly, according to NWVA, several dead animals are also often buried illegally in clandestine graves in farm lands, which may result in the spread of diseases that have significant consequences to other animals and humans in general. Forensic investigators from both the national police (NP) and NWVA are often confronted with a dilemma: speed versus carefulness and precision. However, the current forensic investigation process of identifying and localizing clandestine graves are often labor intensive, time consuming and employ classical techniques, such as walking sticks and dogs (Police), which are not effective. Therefore, there is an urgent request from the forensic investigators to develop a new method to detect and localize clandestine graves quickly, efficiently and effectively. In this project, together with practitioners, knowledge institutes, SMEs and Field labs, practical research will be carried out to devise a new forensic investigation process to identify clandestine graves using an autonomous Crime Scene Investigative (CSI) drone. The new work process will exploit the newly adopted EU-wide drone regulation that relaxes a number of previously imposed flight restrictions. Moreover, it will effectively optimize the available drone and perception technologies in order to achieve the desired functionality, performance and operational safety in detecting/localizing clandestine graves autonomously. The proposed method will be demonstrated and validated in practical operational environments. This project will also make a demonstrable contribution to the renewal of higher professional education. The police and NVWA will be equipped with operating procedures, legislative knowledge, skills and technological expertise needed to effectively and efficiently performed their forensic investigations.
