All PublicationsPage 1234567891011

Editorial

After over a month of lockdown, it is frightening to think how much Coronavirus has changed our world in such a short space of time. In the intervening time between two newsletter editions, we’ve witnessed unprecedented events that have affected everybody’s lives in some way, and likely to have long lasting impacts at both a local and global level. There is also much novelty in our experiences now: who would previously have commonly used terms such as: ‘self-isolation’, ‘furlough’, ‘social distancing’ and ‘flattening the curve’, or practised those careful avoidance manoeuvres on our streets and supermarkets?

These novel circumstances have brought the art of safety assessment right into the public domain. Venturing outside is now done only after careful assessment of the potential hazards and available risk controls and mitigations. However, we find ourselves with an unfortunately tricky form of risk assessment. In practical terms, the likelihood of contracting the disease in lockdown is very low, but the criticality, death is, of course, very high. This equates to that awkward corner of the risk matrix; should some hazards therefore be eliminated entirely, or can we countenance an ALARP discussion on whether to order a take-away, open the mail or pet the next-door neighbour’s cat?

Also, a critical aspect of the crisis has been the data on which everyone, including governmental policy makers are basing their safety-related decisions. There has been no shortage of data from a wide variety of sources: epidemiological data of course, but also other critical data such as the acceptable social distance to maintain and the length of time the virus can survive on different surface types. These are critical influencing factors when applied to large populations, but the data has been conflicting at times and there are often polarised ‘expert’ opinions on how it is to be interpreted.

To help make sense of this uncertain landscape, the SCSC has set up a Working Group that is meeting weekly to see what a systems and assurance view of the situation can bring. Visit the working group page scsc.uk/gv to find out more, and for details of how to join the group.

This edition covers a diverse range of topics, but they share a common theme: how organisations themselves approach and manage risk is equally important to managing the technical system risks. In our first article, Professor Harold Thimbleby, discusses his concerns with the reliability of the epidemiological modelling currently being undertaken to combat Coronavirus. John Ridley discusses the organisational approach to risk management adopted by the Highways Agency in developing Smart Motorways. Andrew King then discusses how tool-based GSN enhancements can help an organisation manage complex safety cases. Nicholas Hales looks at the organisational structures in place during the Chernobyl incident and assesses these from a data perspective. We conclude with insights from the Service Assurance Working Group on how organisations can assure Services.

There is a summary report of SSS’20 and I have great pleasure in including the transcript of Tim Kelly’s entertaining and thought-provoking after-dinner speech.

Our 60 second interview is with Professor Erik Hollnagel.

Stay safe!

Paul Hampton SCSC Newsletter Editor
paul.hampton@scsc.uk

Contents