Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Safety of Machinery: Significant Differences in Two Widely Used International Standards for the Design of Safety-Related Control Systems
Previous Article in Journal
Integration of Safety in IFMIF-DONES Design
Previous Article in Special Issue
How Cognitive Biases Influence the Data Verification of Safety Indicators: A Case Study in Rail
Open AccessArticle

Development and Validation of Plain English Interpretations of the Seven Elements of the Risk Management Process

by Garry Marling 1,2,3,*, Tim Horberry 4 and Jill Harris 2
1
School of Systems Engineering, College of People Technology and Systems, 4000 Brisbane, Australia
2
Sustainable Minerals Institute, The University of Queensland, 4072 Brisbane, Australia
3
School of Environment and Safety Engineering, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu 610066, China
4
Human Factors Team, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia and Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Safety 2019, 5(4), 75; https://doi.org/10.3390/safety5040075
Received: 18 July 2019 / Revised: 11 October 2019 / Accepted: 21 October 2019 / Published: 29 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Occupational Health and Safety New Challenges for Industry)
A fundamental problem with risk management standards and other associated guiding documents is that the definitions and descriptors of the seven elements of the risk management process within these documents are commonly at odds with each other and are difficult to understand. An implication is that personnel within and across organisations interpret the process in different ways. This has led to some companies developing their own interpretations of the elements in their risk/work health and safety (WHS) management systems and thereby exacerbating the problem. A standard set of definitions, terminology and language are vital for addressing WHS issues efficiently and effectively to result in better outcomes. This study aimed to develop a set of plain English interpretations (PEI) for each of the seven elements of the risk management process. These seven elements sit between the scant and technical definitions contained in standards (primary and secondary) and the voluminous guidance in the handbooks and codes of practice. The Delphi-technique was used with 20 risk-experts to evaluate, over two iterations a set of draft PEIs—developed by the researchers. These were finally reviewed for readability and understandability by 24 operators/workers. The implications for these new PEIs is that they could be considered for future standards and guidance documents by the ISO Working Group Risk Management Standard and similar committees and used by organisations for their risk/WHS management systems. View Full-Text
Keywords: risk management; definitions; plain English interpretations risk management; definitions; plain English interpretations
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Marling, G.; Horberry, T.; Harris, J. Development and Validation of Plain English Interpretations of the Seven Elements of the Risk Management Process. Safety 2019, 5, 75.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop