Tips and Lessons Learned for Conducting Safety Review Board Meetings

Robert Smith
{"title":"Tips and Lessons Learned for Conducting Safety Review Board Meetings","authors":"Robert Smith","doi":"10.56094/jss.v56i2.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At some point during a safety program’s lifecycle, presenting to an Independent Safety Review Board is likely. For the program representatives, including their safety lead, program manager, and supporting representatives (e.g., design engineers, software developers, test directors, etc.), this could be comparable to a full-scale audit on their program - and in some cases, it is! The fear that program representatives have with presenting to Safety Review Boards is the unknown. They may ask themselves: \n \nWhat is going to be uncovered, or discovered? \nWill they be able to provide sufficient responses to address questions and concerns and defend our safety assessments? \nWill the Safety Review Board process delay the schedule? \nAre they going to miss a test event milestone? \nWill they make their Critical Design Review (CDR)? \nWill they meet their certification process? \nHow much is this going to cost? \nWhy do they need to provide all of this Objective Quality Evidence (OQE)? \n \nThis paper provides tips and highlights what programs should do, and should not do, based on lessons learned to have successful Safety Review Board meetings. The end goal of any successful Safety Review Board meeting is to ensure the safety program processes and analytical artifacts are adequate and well-established to properly identify and assess safety risks for the personnel, equipment and environment that will be exposed to potential hazards during the system’s lifecycle.","PeriodicalId":250838,"journal":{"name":"Journal of System Safety","volume":"135 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of System Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56094/jss.v56i2.22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

At some point during a safety program’s lifecycle, presenting to an Independent Safety Review Board is likely. For the program representatives, including their safety lead, program manager, and supporting representatives (e.g., design engineers, software developers, test directors, etc.), this could be comparable to a full-scale audit on their program - and in some cases, it is! The fear that program representatives have with presenting to Safety Review Boards is the unknown. They may ask themselves: What is going to be uncovered, or discovered? Will they be able to provide sufficient responses to address questions and concerns and defend our safety assessments? Will the Safety Review Board process delay the schedule? Are they going to miss a test event milestone? Will they make their Critical Design Review (CDR)? Will they meet their certification process? How much is this going to cost? Why do they need to provide all of this Objective Quality Evidence (OQE)? This paper provides tips and highlights what programs should do, and should not do, based on lessons learned to have successful Safety Review Board meetings. The end goal of any successful Safety Review Board meeting is to ensure the safety program processes and analytical artifacts are adequate and well-established to properly identify and assess safety risks for the personnel, equipment and environment that will be exposed to potential hazards during the system’s lifecycle.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
举办安全检讨委员会会议的技巧及经验教训
在安全项目生命周期的某个阶段,可能会向独立安全审查委员会提交报告。对于程序代表,包括他们的安全主管、程序经理和支持代表(例如,设计工程师、软件开发人员、测试主管等),这可以与对他们的程序进行全面审计相媲美——在某些情况下,确实如此!项目代表在安全审查委员会面前的恐惧是未知的。他们可能会问自己:什么会被发现或发现?他们是否能够提供足够的回应来解决问题和关注,并为我们的安全评估辩护?安全审查委员会的程序会推迟计划吗?他们会错过一个测试事件里程碑吗?他们会进行关键设计评审(CDR)吗?他们是否符合认证流程?这要花多少钱?为什么他们需要提供所有这些客观质量证据(OQE)?本文根据安全审查委员会会议的成功经验,提供了一些提示,并强调了项目应该做什么,不应该做什么。任何成功的安全审查委员会会议的最终目标都是确保安全程序流程和分析工件是充分和完善的,以正确识别和评估人员、设备和环境的安全风险,这些风险将在系统的生命周期中暴露在潜在的危险中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Proposing the Use of Hazard Analysis for Machine Learning Data Sets Review of the Latest Developments in Automotive Safety Standardization for Driving Automation Systems Human Reliability Analysis using a Human Factors Hazard Model Incremental Assurance Through Eliminative Argumentation System Safety Bookshelf
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1