Investor Presentaiton
My Perspectives:
Safety in Design – 2 of 2
●
•
•
-
The surprising revelations of the harmonised WHS laws
.
•
Previous OH(W)&S laws covered duties of designers, but less explicitly
The usage of SiD as a 'thing to do' and code of practice
Not a concern, if you have an engineering management system / process
Recognising the value of labelling "SiD" as a 'thing to do', because it does
not appear to be done well otherwise
Splitting-out SiD in my generic Engineering Process Map
Developing the ideas, testing and refining
Cultural barriers to eliminating hazards / reducing risks SFAIRP:
●
Too much to do; too costly
What value does this add?
We don't need it
Current status:
•
SiD has a place, because the profile needs to be raised to address the
statistically significant safety problems
I still believe it reflects 'not doing things properly in the first place'
.
It would be nice to SiD 'melt-away into' doing things properly.
•
There is still confusing between SiD, PHA, HAZOP, FMEA, risk assessment, etc
Copyright Engineering. Systems. Management. Pty LtdView entire presentation