benchmarking industrial safety culture and performance · mary k. o’connor process safety center...

Copyright © 2010 DuPont. All rights reserved. The DuPont Oval Logo, DuPont™, and The miracles of science™ are registered trademarks or trademarks of DuPont or its affiliates.

Benchmarking Industrial Safety Culture and Performance

Tom Lemm

Regional Manager

DuPont Sustainable Solutions

College Station, TX

26 October 2010

Mary K. O’Connor Process Safety Center International Symposium

2


US Petroleum and Petrochemical Industries report some of the best safety performance...

0.1 0.2 0.2

1.1

1.4 1.4

1.7 1.7

2.0 2

2.42.6

5.2

0.1

0.2

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

DuPont **

OGP Avg

Refining

Petrochemica

l

Nuclear P

ower

Electric

T&D

Health Care

Food Mfg

Crop Production

Construction

Warehousing

Wood Mfg

Urban Transit

Coal Mining

Sched Air Transp

US IndustryAverage (1.3)

Injuries & Illnesses – Cases With Days Away

From Work Rate per 100 Employees*

* U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008 Data — Injuries & Illnesses

3


… But high profile incidents are troubling.

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

1988: Piper Alpha (Occidental)

167 killed

Cost: US$1.2 billion

1991: Sleipner A Platform

Collapse (Statoil)

Cost: US$1.2 billion

1995: Nigerian Oil Rig

Explosion (Mobil)

13 killed, 25 injured

1996: Gas Pipeline Explosion

(Enron)


1998: Longford Gas

Explosion (Esso)


Cost: US$1 billion

2001: P36 Sinking

Platform (Petrobras)

10 killed

Cost: US$515

million

2005: Texas City

Refinery (BP)


Cost: US$3.5 billion+

2005: Bombay High

North Platform (ONGC)

22 killed

Cost :US$195 million

2006: Pipeline

Explosion (Nigerian

National Petroleum

Corp)

200 killed

Enchova Central Platform

(Petrobras)

1984: Explosion, 37 killed

1988: Gas Blowout

Cost: US$461 million

2010: Oil Rig

Explosion, Gulf

of Mexico (BP)

11 killed

Cost: >US$12.5

billion

4


Some define “safety culture” as how people behave when no one is looking?

State of

Implementation

=

State of

Operational

Effectiveness

State of

Safety

Standards

Safety Management

Standards

Operational Discipline

Operational Effectiveness

x

Operational effectiveness is a function of your

standards and the level of execution

5


The Case for Safety Culture and Operational Discipline

Do you experience incidents when failure to have or follow good procedures is an important cause/contributor?

OD Involvement in Year 2000 Incidents

Yes

53%

No

47%

• In 2001, DuPont

initiated a Six Sigma

project to assess

causes for

significant Process

Safety Incidents in

2000.

• OD was identified as

a dominant factor in

53% of the incidents.

6


2. Build Safety Culture as a

Core Value

1. Leadership Commitment & Governance

Our experience is that Commitment, Governance and Safety Culture set the foundation for Operational Excellence.

3. Implement

Operations Risk

Management Program

Leadership and Expectations

Accountability and Consequences

Right Metrics

Right Organization and Structure

4.

Operational

Excellence

7


Today’s Topic

Key Questions

What are the differences in safety management

between Refining/Chemicals and other

industries?

Where can we improve?

What separates refining/chemical companies

from the very best in industry?

Benchmarking

Injury rates

Injury types

Managing systems

Safety Culture

……….

8


DuPont Safety Culture Perception Survey

• 500,000+ Survey Responses

• 52 Industriesbroad range including: energy, food, paper,

chemicals, manufacturing, transportation, and

mining – 20 Upstream companies

• 41 Countries

• 9+ years of Relative Cultural Strength

(RCS) Data

• 24 Questions

9


Survey data can be sorted and analyzed in a number of formats.

7

Report: ConocoPhillips Created: 26Jul2010 Survey: ConocoPhillips 2006 Survey

Copyright© 2010 DuPont. All rights reserved. The DuPont Oval Logo and DuPont™ are registered trademarks or trademarks of DuPont or its affiliates.

All Responses

Percent of Respondents: % % % % %

Selves 88 94 87 91 89

Managers < 88 94 51 73 68

Supervisors < 75 100 62 68 72

Hourly Workers < 88 100 74 68 79

All Respondents 83 98 62 70 73

Count of Responses Above: 8 16 39 22 85

< Indicates what response or responses are grouped together for Benchmarking.

All

RespondentsManagers Supervisors

Hourly

WorkersProfessionals

Managers 83 91

Supervisors 98 91

Hourly Workers 62 91

Professionals 70 91

Survey

Score

Benchmark

Best

% %

All Respondents 73 91

Question 2: Indicate the priority that others give to safety.

Percent of respondents that said others ranked safety first:

0% 100%

88% of managers say they

themselves give safety top

priority while 51% of workers

think managers give safety top

priority.

AA

A

B

B

B

C

C

C

These are perception gaps.

This is the most important

question in the survey!

94% of supervisors say they


priority while 62% of hourly

workers think supervisors give

safety top priority

87% of workers say they


priority while only 74% of

workers say that other workers

give safety top priority

Take the time to review and understand this bottom table for Question 2 in your report.

You may value safety as top priority but how does your organization perceive this?

Example

Data

11

Report: Example Company Created: 29Jul2009 Survey: Example Company Survey

Copyright© 2009 DuPont. All rights reserved. The DuPont Oval Logo and DuPont™ are registered trademarks or trademarks of DuPont or its affiliates.

Survey Results by Job Category

A: Managers B: Supervisors C: Hourly Workers D: Professionals

A B C D Leadership

Q1 Priority individuals give to safety

Q2 Priority respondents think others give to safety

Q3 Belief that injuries can be prevented

Q6 Extent that safety is built in

Q7a Presence of safety values

Q7b Influence of safety values

Q9a Involvement in safety activities

Q14 Extent safety rules are enforced

Q19 Recognition for safety achievements

A B C D Structure

Q4 Effect of a drive for safety on business performance

Q5 Level of safety where the cost-benefit break-point occurs

Q8 Extent line management is held accountable for safety

Q13a Quality of safety rules

Q13b Extent that safety rules are obeyed

Q21 Knowledge of safety performance

Q22 Rating of the safety organization

Q23 Rating of the safety department

Q24 Satisfaction with the safety performance of the organization

A B C D Processes and Actions

Q10 Extent individuals feel empowered to take action in safety

Q11 Extent of safety training

Q12a Frequency of safety meetings

Q12b Safety meeting attendance

Q12c Quality and effectiveness of safety meetings

Q15 Thoroughness in investigation of injuries and incidents

Q16a Extent of involvement in safety audits

Q16b Quality of safety audits

Q17 * Rating of modified duty and return-to-work systems

Q18 The presence of off-the-job safety programsQ20 Rating of the safety of facilities and equipment

10


Relative Culture Strength (RCS) as Predictor of Total Recordable Rate (TRIR)

Score of 0-100%

‘Benchmark Best’ Companies

TRR < 1 over a 5-year period

No fatalities over a 5 year period

Lost Workday Frequency Rate < 0 .25 over a 5-year period

Site population > 200 employees

Verification by DuPont field assessment

10 companies, at least one in each region of the world

100Worst BenchmarkBest Benchmark

Worst BenchmarkScoreAverage Site StrengthCulture Relative

11


As RCS improves, TRR (average and variability) improves.

2

4

6

8

40 60 80 1000

Tota

l R

ecord

able

Rate

Relative Culture Strength

*

NOTE: Data is from >25,000 survey responses from 53 sites in the 4 key industries

ReactiveSafety by Natural InstinctCompliance is the GoalDelegated to Safety ManagerLack of Management Involvement

DependentSupervisor Control, Emphasis, and GoalsManagement CommitmentCondition of EmploymentFear/DisciplineRules/ProceduresValue All PeopleTraining

IndependentPersonal Knowledge, Commitment, & StandardsInternalizationPersonal ValueCare for SelfPractice, HabitsIndividual Recognition

InterdependentHelp Others ConformOthers’ KeeperNetworking ContributorCare for OthersOrganizational Pride

12


Industry Averages in DuPont’s Database

2

4

6

8

40 60 80 1000

Tota

l R

ecord

able

Rate

*

20

08

BLS

Ind

ustr

y A

ve

rage


Average of Survey Respondents in Industry

Benchmark Best

*TRR based on 200,000 hours.

NAICS Industry

Avg

TRR*

Avg

RCS

211 Oil and Gas Extraction 1.4 54

212 Mining (except Oil and Gas) 3.5 61

221 Utilities 3.5 52

2211 Electric Gen., Transmission, and Distribution 3.2 46

2212 Natural Gas Distribution 4.3 59

311 Food Manufacturing 6.2 35

322 Paper Manufacturing 3.7 40

324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 1.9 47

325 Chemical Manufacturing 2.7 64

327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 5.9 55

331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 7.2 45

336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 6.0 44

424 Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods 4.7 55

481 Air Transportation 8.7 29

48-49 Transportation and Warehousing 5.7 42

4862 Natural Gas Pipelines 2.3 57

* TRR based on 200,000 hours

13


DuPont’s Refining and Chemical Industry Database

40 60 80 1000

To

tal R

eco

rda

ble

In

jury

Ra

te

pe

r 2

00

,000 h

ou

rs


14 Companies in the DuPont Database 2005 – 2009

Employees and Contractors

Benchmark Best

2

6

8

A 44 2.1

B 70 0.5

C 86 0.3

D 48 1.2

E 47 2.5

F 72 0.7

G 21 6.6

H 49 4.0

I 72 1.9

J 55 1.8

L 80 0.5

M 43 1.3

N 57 2.0

O 60 1.7

Ind. Avg. 65 1.54

Company RCS TRIR

14


Refining and Chemical Survey Findings

Strongest Cultural Elements

Extent Line Management is held Accountable for Safety

Extent that people say they obey safety rules

Presence of Safety Values/Principles

Attendance at Safety Meetings

Safety Values Up-to-Date and Influential

Investigation of incidents

Weakest Cultural Elements

Extent of Involvement in audits/observations and other activities

Satisfaction with the Safety Performance of the Organization

Recognition for Safety Achievements

Management or promotion of off-the-job safety

15


High Scoring Results from a US “Super-major” integrated petroleum company


A B C D Leadership










A B C D Structure



















Q17 Rating of modified duty and return-to-work systems


16


Results by level for a top performing chemical company


A B C D Leadership










A B C D Structure



















Q17 Rating of modified duty and return-to-work systems


17


Top Performers vs. Best in Class

Strong accountability and policies, execution of tools

Alignment issues – leadership to employees and

professionals

Employees and Professionals may not embrace core safety

values such as Goal Zero, etc., and may have difficulty

accepting that safety is manageable.

Employees and Professionals may not understand that

working safely is good business. Many believe that the extra

effort on safety is contributing to lack of competitiveness.

While everyone says they follow the rules, there is an

indication that many rules are not enforced.

Insufficient recognition of safety achievements

Professionals may not be involved

Little off the job safety – Total safety culture

18


Continuing the journey

Vehicle

Struck by

Fire/Expl

Fall

Drowning

Air Trans

Caught Between

Electrical

Other

2008 Breakdown of

of Petroleum Industry Fatalities

We need to improve

Driving Safety

Process Safety

Inherently Safe Design


Core Value


Core Value

1. Leadership Commitment & Governance1. Leadership Commitment & Governance

Our experience is that Commitment, Governance and Safety

Culture set the foundation for Operational Excellence.

3. Implement

Operations Risk

Management Program

3. Implement

Operations Risk

Management Program

Leadership and Expectations

Accountability and Consequences

Right Metrics

Right Organization and Structure

4.

Operational

Excellence

4.

Operational

Excellence

Our experience is that Commitment,

Governance and Safety Culture set the

foundation for Operational Excellence.

19


Conclusions

A strong safety culture is the foundation to

achieve operational excellence.

Safety culture can be measured, compared, and

correlated with injury performance.

Measurement techniques allow us to target

improvement efforts.

Our industry has far lower injury rates than most

US industry, but we have room to improve safety

culture.

Continued focus on safety culture and operational

risk/process safety systems will be required to

eliminate fatalities.

Tom Lemm

Regional Manager/Client Executive

Houston, TX

[email protected]

281-360-8655 office

281-381-6496 cell

Thank You!

mailto:[email protected]

benchmarking industrial safety culture and performance · mary k. o’connor process safety center...

Documents