Seth Bartrug
Comprehensive Examination
3/30/2015
Comprehensive Examination
Question #1
With regards to Dan Petersen’s philosophy on safety management, he believed that safety is a “people problem”. The two main factors that Petersen believed you needed to have a prosperous safety program was to make the line organization accountable for safety performance and to have employee involvement. Petersen did not see eye to eye with OSHA, he didn’t agree with the principle of “accidents are caused by things and not by people.” Petersen always stressed that “safety is another management function and should be managed in the same way.” He also said “As I look at what we, as safety practitioners, have done to the best concepts for possible …show more content…
The most common topics concerning cognitive ergonomics include; mental workload, vigilance, decision making, skill performance, human error, human- computer interaction, and training. For example, a poorly designed automated program can cause major issues. Although it may not cause an accident, it may cause great frustration on workers and result in poor production/ quality. If an automated program isn’t user friendly it causes high mental strain on everyone that has to work with the system. The lack of production and quality then puts mental strain and frustration on upper management and the …show more content…
In most cases organizations say that but somehow safety tends to fall to the waste side. Other issues take precedence over safety such as production, quality, and more production. I like the simplicity of Dan Petersen’s philosophy that the two keys to having a successful safety management program is to make the line organization accountable for safety performance and to have employee involvement. Most commonly in the workplace the safety field has developed its own ideals insisting on using these measures of performance such as injury frequency and severity rates that aren’t that meaningful to company executives. For that reason executives have come to the conclusion that the same techniques that work for improving quality and productivity can’t be used toward safety because it isn’t the
Comprehensive Examination
3/30/2015
Comprehensive Examination
Question #1
With regards to Dan Petersen’s philosophy on safety management, he believed that safety is a “people problem”. The two main factors that Petersen believed you needed to have a prosperous safety program was to make the line organization accountable for safety performance and to have employee involvement. Petersen did not see eye to eye with OSHA, he didn’t agree with the principle of “accidents are caused by things and not by people.” Petersen always stressed that “safety is another management function and should be managed in the same way.” He also said “As I look at what we, as safety practitioners, have done to the best concepts for possible …show more content…
The most common topics concerning cognitive ergonomics include; mental workload, vigilance, decision making, skill performance, human error, human- computer interaction, and training. For example, a poorly designed automated program can cause major issues. Although it may not cause an accident, it may cause great frustration on workers and result in poor production/ quality. If an automated program isn’t user friendly it causes high mental strain on everyone that has to work with the system. The lack of production and quality then puts mental strain and frustration on upper management and the …show more content…
In most cases organizations say that but somehow safety tends to fall to the waste side. Other issues take precedence over safety such as production, quality, and more production. I like the simplicity of Dan Petersen’s philosophy that the two keys to having a successful safety management program is to make the line organization accountable for safety performance and to have employee involvement. Most commonly in the workplace the safety field has developed its own ideals insisting on using these measures of performance such as injury frequency and severity rates that aren’t that meaningful to company executives. For that reason executives have come to the conclusion that the same techniques that work for improving quality and productivity can’t be used toward safety because it isn’t the