Wednesday 23nd November 2016 - Conference
Track 3: Workplace and Occupational Risk (Chair: Steve Corin)
The Y of Decision Context
Keywords: Decision Making, Organizational Influences, Social Context, Situational Factors
Author: Dr Chris Bearman
Affiliation: Central Queensland University, Appleton Institute
Email address: c.bearman@cqu.edu.au
Lay summary:
A model of risk-based decision making is proposed. This model considers the organizational, social, situational and personal context that surrounds a person making a decision. This provides a more complete understanding of how decisions about risk are made in real world situations.
Abstract:
A person who is considering the riskiness of a particular event does not do so in a vacuum, but in the context of on-going social, organizational and personal aspects of their past, current and future situation. Decisions about risk are never taken in isolation, but always as part of a regulated social and historical milieu. Various aspects of the context in which decisions about risk are made may exert pressure leading to poor decisions. To account for some of these influences on risk based decision making a framework is proposed, known as the Y of Decision Context. The development of the framework and three studies that led to its formation will be discussed. Each of the studies used semi-structured interviews to investigate the decision making of people who operate in high reliability domains. Two studies examined the decision making of pilots flying remote operations, and the third examined the decision making of emergency management incident controllers. These studies were analysed using a thematic analysis technique. The different pressures identified in these studies could be grouped into the following themes: organizational, social, situational and personal. These themes form the main categories of the Y model. In the framework pressures are considered to be present to greater or lesser degrees and can mutually interact with each other. These different pressures may be strong or weak, subtle or coercive, direct or indirect. Within the framework pressures are not necessarily bad, but merely exist in a person’s operational world. Thus, pressures are likely to be part of the normal working environment of most people. The model then is designed to specify some of the broader contextual factors that influence risk-based decision making. As such it overlays other models of decision making that are focused more on the cognitive processes of an individual (such as the behavioural and naturalistic models of decision making). This provides a more complete understanding of how decisions about risk are made in the context of the on going flow of events in high reliability domains.
A model of risk-based decision making is proposed. This model considers the organizational, social, situational and personal context that surrounds a person making a decision. This provides a more complete understanding of how decisions about risk are made in real world situations.
Abstract:
A person who is considering the riskiness of a particular event does not do so in a vacuum, but in the context of on-going social, organizational and personal aspects of their past, current and future situation. Decisions about risk are never taken in isolation, but always as part of a regulated social and historical milieu. Various aspects of the context in which decisions about risk are made may exert pressure leading to poor decisions. To account for some of these influences on risk based decision making a framework is proposed, known as the Y of Decision Context. The development of the framework and three studies that led to its formation will be discussed. Each of the studies used semi-structured interviews to investigate the decision making of people who operate in high reliability domains. Two studies examined the decision making of pilots flying remote operations, and the third examined the decision making of emergency management incident controllers. These studies were analysed using a thematic analysis technique. The different pressures identified in these studies could be grouped into the following themes: organizational, social, situational and personal. These themes form the main categories of the Y model. In the framework pressures are considered to be present to greater or lesser degrees and can mutually interact with each other. These different pressures may be strong or weak, subtle or coercive, direct or indirect. Within the framework pressures are not necessarily bad, but merely exist in a person’s operational world. Thus, pressures are likely to be part of the normal working environment of most people. The model then is designed to specify some of the broader contextual factors that influence risk-based decision making. As such it overlays other models of decision making that are focused more on the cognitive processes of an individual (such as the behavioural and naturalistic models of decision making). This provides a more complete understanding of how decisions about risk are made in the context of the on going flow of events in high reliability domains.
What is Going to Happen Next? Exploring Practitioners’ Perceptions and Experiences of Safety Concerns During Equine-Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP)
Keywords: Equine-assisted psychotherapy (EAP), safety, horse-related risk, human-horse interaction, experiential therapy.
Author: Rebecca Abbott
Affiliation: Australian Catholic University
Email address: abbottbecki@aol.com
Lay summary:
A growing area of psychology is the use of horses as a tool for mental health treatment and personal growth, called Equine-Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP). Horses however are big animals, and many people are injured daily in horse-related accidents. The current study therefore investigated how practitioners perceive, deal with and manage risks when they bring together horses and humans in a therapeutic context.
Abstract:
Horse-related activities pose a risk of serious injury, particularly for individuals with little knowledge of horse behaviour. Safework Australia reported up to nine people are injured every day by horses. Under professional standards and guidelines, the safety of clients in the therapeutic context is central. As horses are being increasingly used for therapeutic work with individuals, in a therapeutic model called Equine-Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP), it is therefore important to understand how safety is perceived, managed and experienced by EAP practitioners, where horses and clients interact. This qualitative study explored how those working in the equine therapy industry conceptualise and manage risks and safety. Seventeen Australian EAP practitioners, certified in the Equine Assisted Growth and Learning Association (EAGALA) model of equine-therapy were interviewed. The EAGALA model uses a dual-practitioner approach of a Mental Health Professional (MHP) and an Equine Specialist (ES) and both types of equine practitioner were included in this study. Thematic analysis identified three manifest themes: dealing with safety concerns the EAGALA way, managing safety concerns moment by moment, the intricacies of keeping everyone safe, and a latent theme continual preparation. Key findings indicated that there is a complexity to managing safety in and out of the arena that may increase the cognitive load experienced by equine-assisted therapy practitioners, with shared expertise and collaborative assessment between the MHP and ES playing a central role in the management of safety. A certain degree of controlled risk was seen as facilitative of therapeutic outcomes, with MHP’s juggling ethical prerogatives around risk and safety with potential clinical benefits derived from exposure to well-contained physical and psychological risks. In addition, the wellbeing and safety of therapy horses was argued to be just as important as the safety of clients and practitioners. Results also highlighted that using a structured model to understand and think about risk provided EAP practitioners with more confidence when making risk related decisions. Further, in risk-based situations the idea of slowing down time aided practitioner decisions around risk management when they allowed time to reflect on their own perceptions of risk, and also when they considered risk in the context of the imminent risk-related situation. Finally, results indicated that risks are complex and difficult to enunciate, particularly in this therapeutic context where risks is evident for multiple parties. The current study therefore provides important initial insights for understanding risk further, particularly in the context of therapy.
A growing area of psychology is the use of horses as a tool for mental health treatment and personal growth, called Equine-Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP). Horses however are big animals, and many people are injured daily in horse-related accidents. The current study therefore investigated how practitioners perceive, deal with and manage risks when they bring together horses and humans in a therapeutic context.
Abstract:
Horse-related activities pose a risk of serious injury, particularly for individuals with little knowledge of horse behaviour. Safework Australia reported up to nine people are injured every day by horses. Under professional standards and guidelines, the safety of clients in the therapeutic context is central. As horses are being increasingly used for therapeutic work with individuals, in a therapeutic model called Equine-Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP), it is therefore important to understand how safety is perceived, managed and experienced by EAP practitioners, where horses and clients interact. This qualitative study explored how those working in the equine therapy industry conceptualise and manage risks and safety. Seventeen Australian EAP practitioners, certified in the Equine Assisted Growth and Learning Association (EAGALA) model of equine-therapy were interviewed. The EAGALA model uses a dual-practitioner approach of a Mental Health Professional (MHP) and an Equine Specialist (ES) and both types of equine practitioner were included in this study. Thematic analysis identified three manifest themes: dealing with safety concerns the EAGALA way, managing safety concerns moment by moment, the intricacies of keeping everyone safe, and a latent theme continual preparation. Key findings indicated that there is a complexity to managing safety in and out of the arena that may increase the cognitive load experienced by equine-assisted therapy practitioners, with shared expertise and collaborative assessment between the MHP and ES playing a central role in the management of safety. A certain degree of controlled risk was seen as facilitative of therapeutic outcomes, with MHP’s juggling ethical prerogatives around risk and safety with potential clinical benefits derived from exposure to well-contained physical and psychological risks. In addition, the wellbeing and safety of therapy horses was argued to be just as important as the safety of clients and practitioners. Results also highlighted that using a structured model to understand and think about risk provided EAP practitioners with more confidence when making risk related decisions. Further, in risk-based situations the idea of slowing down time aided practitioner decisions around risk management when they allowed time to reflect on their own perceptions of risk, and also when they considered risk in the context of the imminent risk-related situation. Finally, results indicated that risks are complex and difficult to enunciate, particularly in this therapeutic context where risks is evident for multiple parties. The current study therefore provides important initial insights for understanding risk further, particularly in the context of therapy.
Engaging businesses in OHS risk: Building safety in Small to Medium Sized Enterprises through Risk Profiling
Keywords: Risk profile, OHSMS, hazard, risk criteria
Author: Frank Bogna
Affiliation: Central Queensland University
Email address: f.bogna@cqu.edu.au
Lay summary:
Small businesses can struggle to develop and use safety systems that suit their operation and circumstances. Rather than using an ‘off the shelf’ product that requires the completion of templates and input of information, businesses can map out their activities in a risk profile, and then build their own safety system that suits the ways in which they operate. This process can also be used to assist in identify and manage risks in other parts of the business.
Abstract:
The creation of risk profiles is a useful starting point in contributing to the establishment of an Occupational Health and Safety Management System (OHSMS) for Small to Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Current knowledge regarding the use and effectiveness of OHSMS within SMEs is limited, with approaches reflecting a scaling of policies and approaches used by larger businesses. Resources and expertise in systems based approaches and the development of management systems can be limited in SMEs due to the size of the operation.
Recent research suggests that the development of an OHSMS by following an “off the shelf” system does not sufficiently address the risk profile or business systems of the enterprise, leading to a lack of alignment between the SME’s risk profile and the selected pre-existing framework. Alternatively, it is more constructive to commence with a risk profiling exercise and then select or build the desired OHSMS framework suited to the enterprise. Risk profiling aims to identify the hazards and consequent risks in broad categories, with outputs including enterprise wide risk registers and legal compliance registers.
Risk profiling aligns with the requirements of risk based Work Health and Safety legislation and assists in the identification and management of occupational health and safety risks. A risk profile that aligns risks with the parameters of the business can assist stakeholders to make relevant connections between risks and the systems required for managing them. This process can transcend many operational parameters if relevant risk criteria are utilised within the organisations’ risk management framework.
Small businesses can struggle to develop and use safety systems that suit their operation and circumstances. Rather than using an ‘off the shelf’ product that requires the completion of templates and input of information, businesses can map out their activities in a risk profile, and then build their own safety system that suits the ways in which they operate. This process can also be used to assist in identify and manage risks in other parts of the business.
Abstract:
The creation of risk profiles is a useful starting point in contributing to the establishment of an Occupational Health and Safety Management System (OHSMS) for Small to Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Current knowledge regarding the use and effectiveness of OHSMS within SMEs is limited, with approaches reflecting a scaling of policies and approaches used by larger businesses. Resources and expertise in systems based approaches and the development of management systems can be limited in SMEs due to the size of the operation.
Recent research suggests that the development of an OHSMS by following an “off the shelf” system does not sufficiently address the risk profile or business systems of the enterprise, leading to a lack of alignment between the SME’s risk profile and the selected pre-existing framework. Alternatively, it is more constructive to commence with a risk profiling exercise and then select or build the desired OHSMS framework suited to the enterprise. Risk profiling aims to identify the hazards and consequent risks in broad categories, with outputs including enterprise wide risk registers and legal compliance registers.
Risk profiling aligns with the requirements of risk based Work Health and Safety legislation and assists in the identification and management of occupational health and safety risks. A risk profile that aligns risks with the parameters of the business can assist stakeholders to make relevant connections between risks and the systems required for managing them. This process can transcend many operational parameters if relevant risk criteria are utilised within the organisations’ risk management framework.
Toward Resilience Analytics: If Risks Could Talk, We Could Not Understand Them
|
|
|
