WORKSHOP SCHEDULE

Workshop on Safety-II in Practice

Florida, February 25-27, 2019

Monday February 25, 2019
AM Introduction to S-II in practice. (30-45 minutes) A general introduction, including a clear demarcation to Safety Differently, HOP, and other trends, perhaps even a demarcation to Resilience Engineering.
Presenters: Erik Hollnagel, additional presenters to be announced
  Theme I: The implications of Safety-II for reporting and analysing significant events. In Safety-I, significant events are by default associated with the occurrence of adverse outcomes, primarily accidents and incidents. These are diligently analysed in order to determine their causes so that these can be eliminated as far as possible (cf., Theme III). In Safety-II, a significant event is anything that contributes to the successful accomplishment of a task or an activity. Significant events will typically be small rather than large and frequent rather than infrequent. Since significant events in Safety-II are useful, they should be supported and augmented rather than eliminated. Presenters: Ron Gantt, Tom McDaniel, additional presenters to be announced
Lunch  
PM Theme II: The implications of Safety-II for performance measurements and KPIs Performance measurements serve several purposes. One is to know how well an organisation (a department, a group, etc.) does as part of assessing the status and progress made (cf., Theme V). The other is to be able to compare performance to a norm or reference or to rank organisations relative to each other. Performance measurements in Safety-I have mainly been in terms of unwanted outcomes (accidents, incidents, working days lost, etc.). Since the essence of Safety-II is that as much as possible goes well, we need meaningful performance measurements that can further that purpose.
Presenters: Presenters to be announced
  Open (structured) discussion
Moderator: Chris Nemeth
  Q&A based on questions collected during the day.
Tuesday February 26, 2019
AM Theme III: The implications of Safety-II for learning (organisational and individual) The focus of learning in Safety-I has been on accidents and other things that went wrong in order to eliminate their causes and thereby prevent them from occurring again. Learning has therefore taken place in response to random cases where the organisation did not function as it should. Safety-II proposes that learning should be proactive and continuous and serve to ensure that work goes well, hence to increase safety, productivity, and quality at the same time. Learning must therefore include the significant events that make work go well (cf., Theme I).
Presenters: Ron Gantt, additional presenters to be announced
  Theme IV: The implications of Safety-II for standards, guidelines, and procedures. Standards, guidelines, and procedures (SG&P) are needed by people who are responsible for the work of others at a distance (such as managers, regulators and authorities). SG&P should enable people at the sharp end to do their work as well as make them aware of possible risks and hazards. In Safety-II, SG&P are not just a feeble guarantee against “unsafe practices” but provides a constructive way to ensure that work goes well. This has important consequences for how SG&P should be developed and implemented (cf., Theme V).
Presenters: Beth Lay, David Provan, additional presenters to be announced
Lunch  
PM Theme V: The implications of Safety-II for managing and developing an organisation (S-II as a management principle) Managing and developing an organisation can be likened to steering a vessel through treacherous waters. In order to succeed it is necessary to know the current position (cf., Theme II), the target or goal, and how to change the organisation so that it develops in the right direction and with the right “speed”. While there are many theories and models that help us “understand” how organisations fail, there are few that can be used constructively to bring about genuine performance improvements. There are as yet no fully developed Safety-II management principles, but the direction is clear.
Presenters: Erik Hollnagel, additional presenters to be announced
  Theme IV: The implications of Safety-II for standards, guidelines, and procedures. Standards, guidelines, and procedures (SG&P) are needed by people who are responsible for the work of others at a distance (such as managers, regulators and authorities). SG&P should enable people at the sharp end to do their work as well as make them aware of possible risks and hazards. In Safety-II, SG&P are not just a feeble guarantee against “unsafe practices” but provides a constructive way to ensure that work goes well. This has important consequences for how SG&P should be developed and implemented (cf., Theme V).
Presenters: Beth Lay, David Provan, additional presenters to be announced
  Open (structured) discussion
Moderator:Moderator to be announced
  Q&A based on questions collected during the day.
  Conclusions and the way forward
Wednesday February 27, 2019 –Resilience Track
AM Sacrifice Decision Workshop: Explore patterns of resilience and trade-offs using the Oroville Dam Spillway event case study and a NASA Space Station event role play simulation.
How do systems become brittle (hint: production pressure plays a role)?
How do people discount emerging evidence that trouble lies just ahead?
How is safety created in fundamentally ‘messy’ systems (Hint: people turn out to be essential)?
What builds resilience in human-technological systems — and what undermines resilience (Hint: Tempo matters everywhere)?
These questions become real in the decisions participants will have to make acting as astronauts, flight directors and NASA safety managers, as they need to ‘get stuff done’ despite emerging problems on space station.
The case and follow up panel discussions highlight the new synthesis that lies at the intersection of cognitive, social, computational, and engineered systems.

Panel Discussion 1:
Does the Oroville Dam Spillway event reveal the same patterns about resilience and safety as the NASA Space Station event?

Panel Discussion 2:
Provocation: Engineering can build more robust systems; only people can provide the capability for resilient performance.
Are people essential if a system is to be capable of resilient performance?
Given the patterns in the 2 cases, the panel and participants will explore the intersection of human systems, adaptive systems, and engineered systems.

Presenters:
Tom Seager, Arizona State University
Daniel Eisenberg, Naval Post-Graduate School
E. Asher Balkin, Ohio State University
Beth Lay, Lewis Tree Service
David D. Woods, Ohio State University
David Provan, Griffith University
Lunch  
PM Presenters: ...
  Theme IV: The implications of Safety-II for standards, guidelines, and procedures. Standards, guidelines, and procedures (SG&P) are needed by people who are responsible for the work of others at a distance (such as managers, regulators and authorities). SG&P should enable people at the sharp end to do their work as well as make them aware of possible risks and hazards. In Safety-II, SG&P are not just a feeble guarantee against “unsafe practices” but provides a constructive way to ensure that work goes well. This has important consequences for how SG&P should be developed and implemented (cf., Theme V).
Presenters: Beth Lay, David Provan
  Open (structured) discussion
Moderator:Moderator to be announced
  Q&A based on questions collected during the day.
  Conclusions and the way forward