looking for you look for (An essential factor is one without “causes” “essential factors” which the final personal damage could not have occurred) There are good reasons why the term is not used. The idea is to look for essential factors where the various categories “cause” of the model above intersect. The model is very easy to use and usually at least 30 essential factors will be found in each personal damage occurrence. The author hears good reports on training in this technique conducted by Intersafe. American author Ted Ferry has written publications that provide practical, how to advice on this topic. Readers may find the advice on an investigation kit in Accident Investigation on ohschange.com.au of benefit. Analysis of experience “Accident” Many organisations analyse their experience in the hope of gaining insight into “Accident” how to prevent their problems. Most organisations will not have sufficient serious “Accident” experience to make statistically significant determinations. Damage to people at work has a number of adverse outcomes:- Financial loss to employer, worker and community Pain and suffering Dislocation of lives Permanence of death Damage to people from work falls naturally into one of three Classes. permanently alters the life and subdivides into Class I damage person’s fatal non-fatal Class II damage temporarily alters the life person’s Class III damage temporarily inconveniences the life (Geoff person’s McDonald & Associates) Taxonomy This is an incredibly simple technique that it is rare to find used. Essentially taxonomy is a collection of like. The most well-known taxonomy is the phylum of plants, their botanical names. Awhile back I was associated with taxonomy of the more significant personal damage occurrences in the Qld mining industry which I thought was particularly effective in setting priorities for the industry. It is important to do the taxonomy on an industry basis as it is
looking for “causes” you look for “essential factors” (An essential factor is one without which the final personal damage could not have occurred) There are good reasons why the term “cause” is not used. The idea is to look for essential factors where the various categories of the model above intersect. The model is very easy to use and usually at least 30 essential factors will be found in each personal damage occurrence. The author hears good reports on training in this technique conducted by Intersafe. American author Ted Ferry has written publications that provide practical, how to advice on this topic. Readers may find the advice on an investigation kit in Accident Investigation on ohschange.com.au of benefit. Analysis of “Accident” experience Many organisations analyse their “Accident” experience in the hope of gaining insight into how to prevent their problems. Most organisations will not have sufficient serious “Accident” experience to make statistically significant determinations. Damage to people at work has a number of adverse outcomes:- Financial loss to employer, worker and community Pain and suffering Dislocation of lives Permanence of death Damage to people from work falls naturally into one of three Classes. Class I damage permanently alters the person’s life and subdivides into fatal non-fatal Class II damage temporarily alters the person’s life Class III damage temporarily inconveniences the person’s life (Geoff McDonald & Associates) Taxonomy This is an incredibly simple technique that it is rare to find used. Essentially taxonomy is a collection of like. The most well-known taxonomy is the phylum of plants, their botanical names. Awhile back I was associated with taxonomy of the more significant personal damage occurrences in the Qld mining industry which I thought was particularly effective in setting priorities for the industry. It is important to do the taxonomy on an industry basis as it is
Guidance-FOR-the-beginning-OHS-professiona11.docx