Process Improvement Based on a Gap Assessment of NASA and O&G Risk Management Processes

Abstract

What can the aerospace safety and systems engineering community teach the commercial Oil and Gas (O&G) industry about streamlining risk management processes when NASA is not known for its streamlined practices and how much improvement can be realized by the O&G industry, if any? Addressed in this paper are these basic questions. This assessment identifies improvements to risk management requirements for an O&G company. The methods of performing the assessment and developing recommendations for improvements are provided. These recommendations clearly show the benefit of incorporating these processes for O&G communities. Through the mishap investigation reports due to lost Space Shuttles and other similar incidents, NASA has developed mature processes associated with risk management. In a similar manner, the O&G industry has had to develop its own processes through mishaps they likewise have encountered. A detailed and holistic examination was conducted of a major O&G company’s risk management procedure requirements, starting with risk planning, then risk assessment, risk response, monitoring and control of the risk, risk learnings and closure, and finally, risk governance. Upon completing the assessment, recommendations for improvement to the company’s risk management procedure requirements were made. NASA’s risk management process and Systems Engineering handbook were used to examine the O&G company’s risk management procedure. Each requirement within the procedure was placed into a spreadsheet and examined for appropriateness, with roles and responsibilities mapped to each of the requirements. Areas of benefit were identified and examined for feasibility, with recommendations for improvement presented to the company’s risk management personnel. The paper presents the findings of the assessment, and recommends improvements based on this assessment. Experts within both the O&G and aerospace industries, with extensive experience in mishap investigations, reviewed the results of the assessment and the recommended improvements. Feasibility of implementation was determined by examining the recommendations from a cost, resource and technical perspective.