Talking about Safety during Safety Month

Thread Content

Recently, during Safety Month, several accidents occurred in the industry, drawing significant attention and prompting reflection from everyone. To this end, the Safety Production Office of the Petrochemical Federation organized online discussions with HSE experts, asking them to share their insights based on practical work experience regarding the current bottlenecks in industry safety management, possible solutions, and recommendations, in order to provide assistance and guidance for the effective implementation of safety production measures. (The following are the expert’s exact words.) Expert A had good intentions regarding the Safety Month initiative, aiming to get everyone to pay attention to safety at least during that month. However, the outcome was the opposite of what was desired: various superficial management measures were implemented on a large scale during that month, consuming a great deal of the limited professional resources available in frontline companies. **At the group level as well, many special initiatives were carried out, with subordinate units required to implement them and submit reports and summaries. These actions provided no real benefit to safety at the frontline level; rather, they were harmful. Additionally, as most areas entered the hot weather period, the vaporization of chemicals increased, which naturally led to an increase in accidents. Only by designating every month as a Safety Month, carefully analyzing the risks in various operational activities, thoroughly strengthening preventive measures, and providing comprehensive training for managers and workers at all levels (including contractors), can we turn every month into a \"Safety\" Month. The original intention of Expert B’s Safety Production Month was to raise people’s awareness of safety; it was created due to the high number of accidents across the country. Indeed, there are now more various forms of such initiatives, but there are also objections arguing that it isn’t necessary to carry them out at all. It is socialism now; **ism is our ideal, and the same goes for safe production and efficiency. We all believe that safety serves efficiency – how can there be any contradiction? ! But at this stage, we still have a socialist system. In reality, or in most enterprises, safety and efficiency indeed contradict each other... Simply stating that there is insufficient investment in safety doesn’t solve the problem; most businesses are already struggling to operate. Where will the money come from? Merely citing a lack of technical means and skilled personnel isn’t enough; currently, chemical companies are finding it increasingly difficult to hire workers. Nowadays, young people are reluctant to work in the chemical industry. Simply hiring a few highly educated individuals with relevant certifications won’t solve the problem... The C-Expert Safety Month is merely a pretext for everyone to pay special attention to and discuss safety issues. Safety can be talked about every day, at all times, and by everyone. Before doing anything, before holding any meeting. Having meetings isn’t scary; what’s scary is having meetings without solving any problems. There will be more state-owned enterprises, and even more foreign-funded enterprises. The difference is whether to shout slogans together or work together to overcome challenges. If a mechanic or operator pays more attention to safety than a safety officer, there’s no reason why safety can’t be properly managed. Currently, trace management among D-experts has become severely distorted. Numerous enterprises are allocating their limited HSE resources to paperwork, which truly poses a major blow to current safety efforts. The HSE personnel are all tied down in front of their computers; I remember that 10 years ago they were conducting inspections on the equipment. Upon conducting an inspection of the company, it was found that there were a large variety of inspection and reporting forms required by various departments, both internal and external, many of which overlapped with each other. This resulted in frontline employees having to perform repetitive tasks and bearing a heavy burden of paper-based work. At present, most of the security managers working on the front line as experts spend their time dealing with inspections, organizing various checks as required, formulating plans for making corrections, filling out numerous almost meaningless reports, and attending or organizing various training sessions (usually, for a single initiative, there are at least 3 or 4 briefing meetings); so where does there remain any time to be on site? Is there still time for risk identification and control? Many security workers these days feel not only physical exhaustion from the heavy workload, but also mental strain caused by not knowing what to do! With the current number of regulations established by Expert F, even we can no longer keep track of how many there are; numerous rules are issued from various sources. Different departments – those responsible for safety, infrastructure, and operations – have varying requirements for the same matters, which poses a real challenge for frontline employees. Inspections and training by G-experts are important, but they shouldn’t take over other responsibilities. The current form of inspections focuses more on procedure than on substance, and it has severely disrupted the daily work at the grassroots level. When there are inspections, there must be preparations to meet them, and such preparations inevitably lead to neglect of other aspects. The content of the training is undeniably comprehensive, but the problem is that it’s too comprehensive. If one person gets sick, everyone has to take medicine; if the medicine given to the sick person isn’t suitable for their condition, it can drive even healthy people crazy. Expert H, many of our enterprises are not doing well in their operations; they’re not as well-funded as we had imagined before. Companies that are not performing well will inevitably be reluctant to invest in safety. Last week, I attended a conference where I found the curve on national income and accident rates presented by Director Hao Shui to be very inspiring. Perhaps this is just growing pains – a stage that is **inevitably experienced** during development. As professionals in the field of safety, our task is to transfer as quickly as possible the good experiences and effective tools that have been developed during the industrialization process to our country, so that companies and employees can avoid unnecessary detours. I have worked in foreign companies for 20 years, changing jobs several times; I’ve found that companies with good management take safety seriously. From risk identification and control to training for employees and contractors, it is all part of a systematic approach that requires ongoing efforts over the long term. We’re not doing enough now. In key areas like training, most efforts are merely to meet time requirements. Without training for trainers, the training materials lack relevance, and the format of the training is monotonous and uninteresting. As a result, workers and managers fail to learn or remember the professional requirements related to safety, which inevitably leads to various mistakes at work. Let’s not complain about anyone; let’s each do our best. I’m an expert with many years of experience working in both foreign and state-owned enterprises. Based on my personal observations, I’d like to share them frankly with you all. If this offends any of you, please forgive me. As an older safety officer who believes in Buddhism, I have no intention of attacking or harming anyone. I simply wish to share some of my own immature opinions, hoping they’ll be of some help to everyone. Over the years since we started working in enterprises, we have learned external *management systems for many years, but few of us have managed to implement them effectively; in most cases, these systems remain separate from actual operations, and accidents still occur frequently. I’ve realized that there is one aspect that we haven’t taken seriously enough, and our performance in this area is still far from satisfactory – that is training. No one is born knowing this, and few are willing to learn safety on their own, except for those of us who are professionals in this field; therefore, training is a very important management tool. Only by carrying out proper training can safety concepts, knowledge, and skills be effectively conveyed to employees at all levels, ensuring that the safety protection layer established does not have any gaps. I’d like to share my findings: 1. Leadership training. We have spent too much time emphasizing responsibilities and consequences; leaders believe that people are now afraid, so they try to distribute these responsibilities across various levels, with the safety teams bearing the brunt of it. Yet there has been no significant improvement in people’s capabilities. The advanced safety management experiences and knowledge accumulated by countries around the world through industrialization have not been systematically taught or learned, as a result. There is plenty of talk, but little actual action – it’s not that people don’t want to act, but they don’t know how. Personally, I believe there are three additional areas of capability that need to be improved in order to truly enhance safety leadership: a. Being well-versed in modern safety theories; without an understanding of theories such as Murphy’s Law, the Cheese Model, and the Bow Tie Model, judgments and directions given in work often turn out to be incorrect. For example, leaders who have not learned the cheese model often criticize the employees who made mistakes (including those who died) during accident reviews, saying that they failed to follow the rules, while ignoring their responsibilities and roles as managers. I won’t go into details here; everyone should understand. b. There is a lack of knowledge regarding the management of major risks; understanding of process safety, safety when working at heights, and safety in confined spaces is also lacking (one does not need to be an expert, but at least one should understand that in companies with strong safety practices, most managers have some knowledge of safety – I can attest to this from personal experience). As a result, such individuals can provide very limited support to the safety team in their work. At the mention of these topics, I stay well away. And no one can make arrangements for the leaders. c. There is a lack of training on how to exercise leadership, how to divide tasks and work together (how to reduce the workload on the security team), how to provide positive motivation (since there is too much negative motivation at present), how to build a security culture, and how to set a good example; without such training, one does not know how to proceed. It’s too slow to draw lessons on one’s own. 2. There is also a significant gap in the training and development of professional teams. Most of us started working in this field later in life, transitioning from other industries to the safety sector; once we did so, we naturally became safety section chiefs, department heads, managers, or directors. There was no organized internal or external training provided, and as a result, we lack a systematic and comprehensive understanding of the specialized knowledge related to safety (I might offend some people here, so please don’t yell at me). This hinders our ability as professional teams from helping others identify and manage risks. Even those who have graduated from a safety engineering program face a significant gap between what they learn in school and what actually happens in the workplace (sorry). All of us need some systematic training to improve both our theoretical knowledge and practical skills. But over the years, how many companies have systematically provided in-house or external training for frontline security personnel? Even at the group level, such training programs are rarely organized. Everyone knows that work permits are important, as they relate to operations involving significant risks. However, the training provided for those who sign these permits usually lasts only half a day; it’s unlikely that time is sufficient even for reading through all eight types of work permits in detail. How can it be ensured that such individuals are able to identify and manage risks during operations? This is just one example. I am creating a training package based on the common risks faced by enterprises; it consists of around twenty modules. I recommend dedicating one week per year to in-person training*, and taking two to three years to convey professional knowledge and management concepts to frontline security personnel. If this is not done, learning piecemeal from accidents and various inspections lacks a systematic approach. Without mastering professional knowledge and theories, one will lead the blind by the blind. (Please don’t criticize me just yet; think back to how much training we have received since starting to work in safety, and you’ll understand.) ) Besides, any security position is a management position, and domestic companies provide far too little training to managers in general management knowledge and skills. How to communicate, how to persuade people, how to handle conflicts, how to manage time and stress, how to teach, and so on – only a few companies and individuals have learned these skills. It is possible to do this through self-study, but how many people can guarantee such self-study? In companies with good safety standards, whether domestic or foreign, extensive training is provided. 3. The training for frontline staff is even worse. Most of them aim to meet the time requirements set by law; the trainers lack training (training is a skill that has a significant impact on its effectiveness). The training materials are often in Word format or as web pages copied into PPTs, containing large amounts of text with no images or videos, few examples, and little interaction (let alone games). The training is essentially a one-way presentation, with participants either sleeping or looking at their phones. Exams consist only of written tests, and they are often open-book. The pass rate is above 95 points. Additionally, the lack of targeted JSA implementation means that the training content does not align with the operational risks; all these factors fail to effectively help workers identify and control risks. That’s why many managers oppose training, saying that people forget what they’ve been taught as soon as they leave; in fact, it’s because the instructions aren’t explained clearly enough. If the instructions are clearly presented along with proper training, then employees and contractors can truly understand the safety requirements. I have personal experience to share with you all, showing just how amazing the training is. 4. Training on process safety is even more scarce. If process engineers are not familiar with common analysis methods for process safety, such as HAZOP, it is difficult for them to utilize these tools in design and management, which inevitably leads to various mistakes or the creation of potential hazards within the process. The above are the common issues and pain points that I personally observe among us (please stop criticizing those things that are already done well). Although I have worked for foreign companies for a long time, I have a strong sense of national pride; I do not blindly admire foreign things, nor do I want us to be overly confident. Hurry up and learn from the valuable achievements accumulated by industrialized countries, create our own miracles in terms of security, and achieve a leapfrog development. It should be noted that there’s no need to rush. Safety is a systematic endeavor; those who excel at it have been working on it for decades. We shouldn’t expect to surpass them in just a few years. First, ensure that the training is done well – it is the foundation for any change. Whether others believe it or not, I certainly do. Accidents mostly occur at weak points and vulnerabilities; training is necessary to fill those gaps in the minds of every employee, manager, and contractor. Other measures will not be effective, as a vulnerability on the part of any individual can lead to an accident (for example, a cleaner might fall while cleaning windows due to a lack of knowledge about safety, resulting in death). I have no intention of making generalizations or suggesting that training alone can replace all other measures. Rather, I want to share with you the shortcomings I’ve observed, hoping to spark further discussion. Of course, this might also invite a lot of criticism in return. Fortunately, we had a safety helmet at home; feel free to give your feedback. Expert J believes that the key to safety lies first and foremost with managers at all levels. If managers pay attention to it – and by this, he means comprehensive attention that includes hiring and personnel management, salary and benefits, the working environment, the corporate culture, and the development of institutional frameworks – then only can the employees at the grassroots level carry out their responsibilities properly. The reason we always talk about safety first is that safety isn’t really the top priority. The reason we don’t say efficiency first is because it truly is the top priority; whether we mention it or not, it remains the top priority. As for the army and soldiers, we can take the example of the Northern Song Dynasty to see whether the adjustments among frontline soldiers and officers affect the course of war. Of course, no method can solve all problems once and for all, and the prerequisite for freeing one’s mind remains seeking truth from facts. Soldiers are able to win battles thanks to sound mechanisms in place for support; of course, from the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression to the Korean War, even when such support mechanisms were not fully developed, our soldiers still possessed a strong sense of patriotism for their country. But looking at our economic situation and our security workers, do they still need to, or are they even capable of, bearing such a solemn sense of patriotism and devotion to the country? As I understand it, the safety production responsibility system is meant to clarify what each level and each individual is required to do, with responsibilities, rights, and interests being aligned. The current situation is that those in higher positions take on the power while shifting responsibilities, while those in lower positions bear the responsibilities without any authority. An accident happened, and it’s still the one who died who is at fault. Safety and supervision serve similar purposes; in \"In the Name of the People,\" the issue of oversight at the same level was raised. The reason why addressing violations of command instructions is given priority among the various types of violations is that doing so requires both courage and effort! Expert inspections and training are both important tools in safety management, but at the current stage, there are too many inspections, and front-line staff report being overwhelmed. Relatively speaking, more investment is required for training, but frontline staff like it. Companies come in various sizes; some lack sufficient internal training resources and are not used to obtaining external training. It is precisely by having the parent company or relevant organizations organize professional-level training that help these companies. Recently, one of our senior security experts said in a training session that in the future, companies should focus their investments on the following three areas: 1. Inherent safety. 2. Training and drills. 3. Procure external consulting services. I believe it was because they saw this pain point. Expert-level security management cannot rely on strict regulations, as humans are advanced \"animals\" with souls; respect and trust are their most fundamental intrinsic needs! Humans also possess an \"independent will\"; obeying out of fear is only temporary or false, and it is impossible to gain loyalty through threats. The consequence of continuously tightening such systems is that everyone lives in fear, focusing only on fulfilling the requirements of the system rather than working towards true security! It should be understood that culture is the soul of institutions; institutions must be established on the basis of good values. A positive culture enables institutions to function more effectively. Institutions should serve as a set of rules that guide people in working better, playing a role in supporting work activities and promoting the practice of values as well as the development of an excellent culture. If a system is based on punishment and violates the principles of respect and trust, such a strict system will cause people to lose their ideals, beliefs, passion, and enjoyment in work, turning everyone into puppets of the system – which is a truly terrifying thing! Therefore, culture is the foundation; it must never be destroyed. It’s worth thinking about. Expert M believes that those in charge of safety should truly love their work in this area; it’s quite stressful these days as people are punished as soon as something goes wrong. An accident-oriented safety mindset and an accountability-driven accident investigation inevitably lead to safety practices motivated by avoiding blame. A liability-driven approach is itself a form of interest-driven motivation. Expert N used a story to summarize the current state of safety management and the ways to address it: a giraffe ran away from the zoo; the keeper brought it back and reported the incident to the zoo director. The park director decided to raise the fence surrounding the giraffes to 5 meters. The next day, the giraffe ran away from the zoo again, so the director decided to raise the fence surrounding the giraffe to 6 meters. On the third day, the giraffe ran away from the zoo again, so the zoo director decided to raise the fence surrounding the giraffe to 7 meters high. The giraffe’s neighbor, the elephant, asked the giraffe, “Do you think they will build the wall even taller?” ”The giraffe replied, “Yes, if the keeper keeps forgetting to close the door!” The above are excerpts from the views, opinions, and suggestions of some experts, for reference only!