Better ways to think about procedures and performance: From IOGP Learning From Normal Work

Some extracts from the IOGP document ‘Learning from Normal Work’.

These extracts focus on a different approach to thinking about procedures and performance:

· “Research on procedural non-compliance [4] shows there are two ways of thinking about the role of procedures in achieving safety, Approach 1 and Approach 2”

· “These approaches refer to how leaders think about the role of compliance in achieving success. Approach 1 views rules and work instructions as the best way of conducting activities safely and consistently. Under Approach 1, if work cannot be done without following the rules, people should stop and not find workarounds”

· “Approach 2 believes rules can never account for all scenarios and require ongoing adaptation to specific contexts”

· “Procedures are a support tool that are insufficient for creating safety, as operational work takes place in a context of limited resources and multiple pressures”

· “Procedures cannot possibly specify all circumstances and account for all eventualities. They are imperfect by default”

· “Operational safety requires workers to make judgement calls that may deviate from procedures”

· “Non-compliance is viewed as essential where rules are perceived to not match the actual situation”

· “Applying procedures successfully across different situations and dealing with unexpected, situational constraints is a skill [5] that needs to be developed and nurtured”

· “Leaders see noncompliance as a necessary adaptation to complete the work within the existing constraints and bridge the inevitable gap between static, linear sequence of steps and the day-to-day realities”

· “Leaders proactively ask about situations where compliance is difficult and support employees/contractors to adapt in a way that reduces risk”

· “Telling people to try harder or using punishment does not make sense and does not make work safer. The improvement is focused on understanding the constraints in place and what it takes to complete the job safely”

· “Leaders see blame as a barrier preventing improvement and leading to undesired behaviours and increased risk”