Skip to main content
Log in

Widening the scope of human factors safety assessment for decommissioning

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the nuclear industry, throughout the lifecycle of a nuclear plant or facility, operations vary in the degree of their tractability. Commissioned facilities should be relatively predictable in their operations, whereas decommissioning operations by their nature tend to be less predictable because they are a transition from one state to another, where safety systems, structures, components, and people serving safety may all change. Of course, different operations or states will have different characteristics and varying safety requirements. In this paper, we argue that by accounting for operations according to their relative tractability for their given phase in the lifecycle of a facility, a more targeted approach to managing safety is possible—one that recognises that the less tractable operation relies on human adaptation and resilience to a greater degree than the more tractable operation. From the outset, the safety of a decommissioning operation may therefore require a thorough account of the human and organisational factors that will support or impair human adaptation and resilience. High Reliability Organisation theory may provide a useful framework to consider how to engineer resilience in decommissioning and other operations of a less tractable nature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker DP, Day R, Salas E (2006) Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Serv Res 41(4, Part II):1576–1598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benn J, Healey AN, Hollnagel E (2007) Improving performance reliability in surgical systems. Cogn Tech Work 10(4):323–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke CS, Wilson KA, Salas E (2005) The use of a team-based strategy for organizational transformation: guidance for moving toward a high reliability organization. Theor Issue Ergon Sci 6(6):509–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick C, Hunter LW, Walston SL (2004) Effects of downsizing practice on the performance of hospitals. Strateg Manag J 25(2):405–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davey E (2005) Incorporating human factors in decommissioning projects—opportunities for adapting application

  • Eurocontrol (2009) A white paper on resilience engineering for air traffic management (ATM)

  • Guardian (2009) Sizewell nuclear disaster averted by dirty laundry, says official report Mark Gould. http://www.guardian.co.uk. Accessed 20 Apr 2011

  • Heinrich HW (1931) Industrial accident prevention. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann DA, Jacobs RR, Landy F (1995) High reliability process industries: individual, micro, and macro organizational influences on safety performance. J Saf Res 26(3):131–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E, Woods DD, Leveson N (2006) Resilience engineering: concepts and precepts. Ashgate, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • HSE (2000) Technical assessment guide: fault analysis. T/AST/044 issue 1, p 2

  • IAEA (2004) Technical report series no. 420, Transition from operation to decommissioning of nuclear installations, STI/DOC/010/420

  • La-Porte R (1996) High reliability organizations: unlikely, demanding and at risk. J Conting Crisis Manag 4(2):60

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • La Porte T, Consolini P (1991) Working in practice but not in theory: theoretical challenges of “high-reliability organizations”. J Public Adm Res Theory 1(1):19–47

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porte T, Consolini P (1998) Theoretical and operational challenges of “high-reliability organizations”: air-traffic control and aircraft carriers. Int J Public Adm 21(6–8):847–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leveson N (2004) A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Saf Sci 42(4):237–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinley W, Sanchez CM, Schick AG (1995) Organizational downsizing: constraining, cloning, learning. Acad Manag Executive 9(3):32–44

    Google Scholar 

  • New Energy Focus (2009) Magnox fined over 14-year leak at Bradwell nuclear site. http://www.NewEnergyFocus.com. Accessed 20 Apr 2011

  • ONR (2006) Safety assessment principles for nuclear facilities. Revision 1

  • Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts KH (1990a) Managing high-reliability organizations. Calif Manag Rev 32(4):101–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts KH (1990b) Some characteristics of one type of high reliability organization. Organ Sci 1(2):160–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts KH, Rousseau DM (1989) Research in nearly failure-free, high-reliability organizations—having the bubble. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 36(2):132–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rochlin GI (1993) Defining “high reliability” organizations in practice: a taxonomic prologue. In: Roberts K (ed) New challenges to understanding organizations. Macmillan, New York, pp 11–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochlin GI (1996) Reliable organizations: present research and future directions. J Conting Crisis Manag 4(2):55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E (1992) The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 22:1296–1308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasou K, Reason J (1999) Team errors: definition and taxonomy. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 65:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair MA (2007) Ergonomic issues in future systems. Ergonomics 50(12):1957–1986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The (Baker et al.) (2007) Report of the BP US Refineries Independent Safety Review Panel http://www.safetyreviewpanel.com

  • Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM (2001) Managing the unexpected: assuring high performance in an age of complexity. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Owen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Owen, C., Healey, A.N. & Benn, J. Widening the scope of human factors safety assessment for decommissioning. Cogn Tech Work 15, 59–66 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-012-0219-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-012-0219-6

Keywords

Navigation