Safety and Reputational Risk
Since the Nimrod accident and the subsequent inquiry, the Defence market has seen some feverish activity both in the MoD and in industry to address the findings. Ask any senior MoD official what keeps them awake and Haddon-Cave is never far from their lips. Since the publication of the Nimrod report, safety is much more visible on the agenda of industry Board meetings, not least because of its ability to significantly impact reputation.
What are our Motives?
Across the Defence enterprise there is a perceptible demand for improved assurance that safety risks are under control. The motivation for this, however, is represented by a continuum between two desires: the protection of people; and the protection of reputation. At one end of the spectrum, nearer to where accidents impact individuals, the emphasis is more on keeping our forces safe, albeit balanced with commitment to the operational goal. Here, the safety culture is generally stronger - we know there is good practice and good intention. At the other end of the spectrum, further from the front line, reputational risk and its associated commercial impact becomes the driving motive, potentially undermining your safety culture.
At whichever end of the spectrum we find ourselves, we should all understand that the two motives are not mutually exclusive. The management of safety risk is a critical activity wherever your priorities lie. Both the MOD and safety-aware Defence companies include explicit objectives relating to reputational risk and improved safety assurance in their plans and this should draw us together.
How do we Assure Ourselves and Improve?
The key to making Mr. Haddon-Cave’s vision come true is being able to make real change to improve safety management effectiveness. The only way to do this is to be able to consistently measure how effective you are and be capable of implementing the necessary changes.
The combined efforts of the entire Defence enterprise should therefore be focused on measurable improvements in how safety is managed, because everybody benefits. We are very good at projecting how likely accidents are, what the hazards are and the theory of managing and controlling them. As an enterprise however, we are not so good at working together to prioritise where to put our efforts in mitigating them and managing them together across organisational boundaries.
Regulation is changing, but in itself, will not make the world safer. It certainly won’t convince a savvy industry that all they need do is comply with a new set of rules. Haddon-Cave has shown that is not enough.
As the Nimrod report recommends, and in reality we all knew already, effective safety management comes down to strong leadership, the right people doing the right things, keeping process simple and having independent assurance that it is all working. Our collective reputations depend upon our ability to measure and improve how effectively we manage the safety of our personnel from the factory to the front-line effectively - so we’re all in it together.
Where Harmonic fits in?
At Harmonic, we are taking a fresh approach to these difficulties, keeping step with the regulatory changes that are happening in Defence and looking at ways to join up how the Defence enterprise can assure itself that we are managing safety effectively. We have established a way of measuring it and working with you to deliver improvement, wherever you sit in the Defence enterprise or the motivational spectrum. So, whether your priority is improving your safety management, protecting your reputation or both, come and talk to us about how we can help you do it.
About the Author
Toby Waters is a Principal Consultant and Head of Assurance Services at Harmonic. He has over 25 years industry experience in the safety-critical systems domain as a chartered engineer, programme manager and consultant. Having been the CEO of pioneering companies delivering high integrity solutions to the Defence, Security, Aerospace, Transportation and Air Traffic Control markets, he has a perspective on both the technical and business issues surrounding safety.
- Safety and Reputational Risk (.PDF, 1.11 MB)