危险分析过程中分析人员的行为和团队流程:制定观察协议和评估 HAZOP 会议的初步结果

IF 4.7 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Safety Science Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106694
Per Øivind Braarud, John Eidar Simensen
{"title":"危险分析过程中分析人员的行为和团队流程:制定观察协议和评估 HAZOP 会议的初步结果","authors":"Per Øivind Braarud,&nbsp;John Eidar Simensen","doi":"10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Analyst behaviour and team processes are important factors in the quality of expert-driven hazard-analysis techniques and methods, such as HAZOP (Hazard and Operability Analysis) and STPA (System-Theoretic Process Analysis). Beyond the support provided by the analysis method, the literature suggests, for example, that facilitating creativity, awareness of human judgement limitations, and consistency of method application can substantially impact the completeness and outcome of the analysis. However, empirical research on these factors and their effect on hazard analysis is almost nonexistent. To address this gap, we (the authors) have developed an observation protocol consisting of 27 items on analyst behaviour and team processes. We developed the protocol based on a literature review and analyst interviews, utilising methods frequently employed to develop psychological tests. Two studies, with the participation of four analysts in each, found sufficient clarity and relevance of the protocol items and identified refinements and adjustments to the protocol. The analysts stated the protocol would be useful for analyst team self-evaluation in addition to its use in empirical studies. Future studies should verify our findings and could utilise the protocol in systematic studies of analyst behaviour and how it impacts the hazard analysis and the analysis outcome. Analyst teams could use the protocol for self-assessment in their professional development and as an indicator of the quality of their team processes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21375,"journal":{"name":"Safety Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analyst behaviour and team processes during hazard analysis: The development of an observation protocol and initial results from evaluating HAZOP sessions\",\"authors\":\"Per Øivind Braarud,&nbsp;John Eidar Simensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106694\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Analyst behaviour and team processes are important factors in the quality of expert-driven hazard-analysis techniques and methods, such as HAZOP (Hazard and Operability Analysis) and STPA (System-Theoretic Process Analysis). Beyond the support provided by the analysis method, the literature suggests, for example, that facilitating creativity, awareness of human judgement limitations, and consistency of method application can substantially impact the completeness and outcome of the analysis. However, empirical research on these factors and their effect on hazard analysis is almost nonexistent. To address this gap, we (the authors) have developed an observation protocol consisting of 27 items on analyst behaviour and team processes. We developed the protocol based on a literature review and analyst interviews, utilising methods frequently employed to develop psychological tests. Two studies, with the participation of four analysts in each, found sufficient clarity and relevance of the protocol items and identified refinements and adjustments to the protocol. The analysts stated the protocol would be useful for analyst team self-evaluation in addition to its use in empirical studies. Future studies should verify our findings and could utilise the protocol in systematic studies of analyst behaviour and how it impacts the hazard analysis and the analysis outcome. Analyst teams could use the protocol for self-assessment in their professional development and as an indicator of the quality of their team processes.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21375,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Safety Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Safety Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753524002844\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753524002844","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

分析人员的行为和团队流程是影响专家驱动的危险分析技术和方法(如 HAZOP(危险与可操作性分析)和 STPA(系统理论过程分析))质量的重要因素。除了分析方法提供的支持外,文献还表明,例如,促进创造性、意识到人类判断的局限性以及方法应用的一致性,都会对分析的完整性和结果产生重大影响。然而,关于这些因素及其对危害分析的影响的实证研究几乎不存在。为了填补这一空白,我们(作者)制定了一项观察协议,其中包括 27 个有关分析师行为和团队流程的项目。我们在文献综述和分析师访谈的基础上,利用开发心理测试时经常使用的方法制定了这一方案。两项研究各有四名分析师参与,研究结果表明,协议项目足够清晰和相关,并确定了对协议的完善和调整。分析师们表示,除了在实证研究中使用外,该协议对分析师团队的自我评估也很有用。未来的研究应验证我们的发现,并可在分析师行为及其如何影响危害分析和分析结果的系统研究中使用该规程。分析师团队可以在其专业发展中使用该协议进行自我评估,并将其作为团队流程质量的指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Analyst behaviour and team processes during hazard analysis: The development of an observation protocol and initial results from evaluating HAZOP sessions
Analyst behaviour and team processes are important factors in the quality of expert-driven hazard-analysis techniques and methods, such as HAZOP (Hazard and Operability Analysis) and STPA (System-Theoretic Process Analysis). Beyond the support provided by the analysis method, the literature suggests, for example, that facilitating creativity, awareness of human judgement limitations, and consistency of method application can substantially impact the completeness and outcome of the analysis. However, empirical research on these factors and their effect on hazard analysis is almost nonexistent. To address this gap, we (the authors) have developed an observation protocol consisting of 27 items on analyst behaviour and team processes. We developed the protocol based on a literature review and analyst interviews, utilising methods frequently employed to develop psychological tests. Two studies, with the participation of four analysts in each, found sufficient clarity and relevance of the protocol items and identified refinements and adjustments to the protocol. The analysts stated the protocol would be useful for analyst team self-evaluation in addition to its use in empirical studies. Future studies should verify our findings and could utilise the protocol in systematic studies of analyst behaviour and how it impacts the hazard analysis and the analysis outcome. Analyst teams could use the protocol for self-assessment in their professional development and as an indicator of the quality of their team processes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Safety Science
Safety Science 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
335
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: Safety Science is multidisciplinary. Its contributors and its audience range from social scientists to engineers. The journal covers the physics and engineering of safety; its social, policy and organizational aspects; the assessment, management and communication of risks; the effectiveness of control and management techniques for safety; standardization, legislation, inspection, insurance, costing aspects, human behavior and safety and the like. Papers addressing the interfaces between technology, people and organizations are especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
Effects of physical fatigue superimposed on high temperatures on construction workers’ cognitive performance Impact of non-driving related task types, request modalities, and automation on driver takeover: A meta-analysis “I probably feel slightly more invincible”: The impact of technology that discloses enforcement locations on drivers’ behaviours Numerical simulation on the compartment safety of solid propellant storage under accidental jet fire Identifying risk factors in handing and lifting loads by the analysis of near-miss and accident reports
×
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