WordPress.com prepared a 2014 annual report for the UPLOADS website. It gives an overview of how many times the website was viewed, and which countries are interested in the project. I thought I’d share it with you, because it shows you the reach that the project is having.
Here’s an excerpt:
A New York City subway train holds 1,200 people. This blog was viewed about 4,100 times in 2014. If it were a NYC subway train, it would take about 3 trips to carry that many people.
The aim of the UPLOADS Project is to develop reliable and valid incident reporting, storage and analysis tools for the outdoor education and recreation sector in Australia. This involves the development of: 1) tools to help organisations collect and analyse detailed information on near misses and adverse events; and 2) a National Dataset which will be regularly analysed and disseminated so that the sector can understand the risks it faces and take appropriate action.
Progress
The UPLOADS Software Tool has been developed, piloted and revised. The Software Tool now allows organisations to: 1) Track incident and participation data; 2) Analyse their own incidents using a systems analysis framework; 3) Generate automatic reports on the data they collect; and 4) Contribute deidentified data (i.e. names removed) to the National Dataset.
Following the initial pilot, a “Lite” version of the Software Tool was developed. UPLOADS Lite is an online survey which allows organisation to anonymously enter data into the National dataset. Organisations using Lite contribute participation data via an excel spreadsheet at the end of each reporting period. UPLOADS Lite was developed to support organisations that did not want to analyse their own data, but still wanted to participate in the project.
We have just passed the 6 month point for the National trial of the UPLOADS Software Tool and UPLOADS Lite. 43 organisations have signed up to participate (ACT = 1; NT = 2; NSW = 12; QLD = 8; SA = 7; TAS = 2; VIC = 14; WA = 6). At the 3 month point, 23 organisation contributed data (226 incident reports = 211 adverse outcomes, 15 near miss, 153 injuries, 75 illnesses, 19 social/psychological). We are currently collecting the 6 month data from organisations.
We plan to run a workshop presenting the analysis of the first 6 month of data on the 20th March 2015 at the Department of Sport and Recreation in Melbourne. An invitation to the event will be sent out in early 2015.
During the six month trial, we have been running a number of parallel studies to test the reliability and validity of the system. These studies are almost completed, and we plan to report the findings in February 2015.
We have also conducted a study to determine whether we should develop a website that allows people to access and explore the findings from the National dataset. The results indicate that there is a high degree of support from the sector for the website. Therefore, funding will be sought to develop and pilot the proposed website. The ideas and insights gained from this survey will be used to inform the development of the website. The full results are available to download here:
Click here to read the results in full.
New PhD Students
We now have three PhD students working on UPLOADS-related projects:
Clare and Eryn were lucky enough to receive Australian Postgraduate Awards, which are highly competitive scholarships open to all students in Australian universities. Clare started in October 2014, and Eryn will join us in March 2015.
Publications 2014
The full text and summaries of the following papers are available at uploadsproject.org:
The full text and summaries of the following papers will be available in early 2015:
Presentations 2014
Recently, the UPLOADS Research Team conducted a survey to determine whether we should develop a website that allows people within the outdoor education, recreation and adventure sector to access and explore the findings from the National Dataset.
Results at a glance:
The results indicate that there is support from the sector. Therefore, funding will be sought to develop and pilot the proposed website. The ideas and insights gained from this survey will be used to inform the development of the website.
by Clare Dallat, PhD Student (Human Factors), University of the Sunshine Coast Accident Research Centre
This video was recorded at a presentation by Clare Dallat and Natassia Goode at Hillbrook Anglican School.
Over the past decade risk assessments have become a non-negotiable part of outdoor programs. This is partly driven by WHS Legislation and increasing interest in organized outdoor activities from regulatory authorities, but also by a realization within the sector that a proactive approach to hazard identification and risk management is required to prevent serious injuries. Despite this, confusion remains at the planning and practice level regarding the most appropriate process to take. How can we ensure risk assessments are meaningful and not simply futile compliance exercises in ‘ticking the box’?
As a practitioner for the past twelve years in a risk management role I have experienced significant challenges around risk assessment. I have seen first-hand our adversarial legal system through expert witness and defendant duties and interacted with WHS inspectors. I’ve also worked regularly with schools and organization’s conducting outdoor excursions throughout Australia. Based on my experiences, the following questions seem critical:
The ‘Systems Thinking’ Approach
Exploring a ’systems thinking’ approach may provide answers to some of these questions. Fortunately for me, the opportunity has arisen to embark on a full-time PhD with Natassia Goode and Paul Salmon at the University of the Sunshine Coast Accident Research Centre (USCAR) to explore these challenges further.
It is now widely accepted that incidents are caused by multiple interacting factors across the overall system of work. This means that an incident reflects a systems problem and there is no such thing as a root cause. Accidents aren’t caused by individuals, they are caused by systems.
If, for example, we were to apply this ‘systems thinking’ approach to risk assessments in our own sector, additional layers outside the commonly focussed upon categories of ‘people’, ‘equipment’ and ‘environment’, would be viewed as providing potential causal factors and therefore in need of consideration. These additional layers, for example, would include: the role of the overall risk management processes and procedures, supervisors and wider organizational factors, parents, schools, Adventure Activity Standards (AAS), CARA/DEECD/DET guidelines etc., and VET and University training programs (that train future staff in risk assessment). A systems thinking approach would consider the potential risks at all of these levels, and importantly how they might interact together to create accidents.
Interestingly, this lack of systems thinking in risk assessment is not limited to the outdoor sector. The literature across other safety critical domains (e.g. aviation, healthcare, transportation) is not populated with significantly alternative approaches to risk assessment than what we find in our own domain. The inescapable conclusion is that risk assessment processes have not kept pace with what we know about accident causation. In short we are not assessing all of the risks present within our systems – we are just scraping the surface.
Across many domains, there continues to be a substantial focus on the work performance and hazards at the ‘sharp end’ – the people directly involved with the task. Within our own sector, this is generally the instructors and staff directly in front of participants, the environmental conditions and the equipment used. Whilst these elements are obviously vital in the overall program, there are, as we now know, multiple other contributing layers and ‘actors’ in the system which require consideration in any risk assessment process.
The aim of this PhD project is to design, develop and trial an alternative systems approach to risk assessment for application in the outdoor sector; the project having, as its ultimate intention, the reduction of injury-causing incidents to participants and staff on such programs.
Over the next few years, we will be looking for schools and organization’s to collaborate with us and assist in the development of the project. If you, or your organization is able to be involved, please contact me directly at Clare.Dallat@research.usc.edu.au or 0428 306 009.
Over the past five to ten years risk assessments have become a non-negotiable part of outdoor programs. This is partly driven by WHS Legislation and increasing interest in outdoor education from regulatory authorities, but also by a realisation from within the sector that a proactive approach to hazard identification and risk management is required to prevent serious injuries. Yet at the planning and practice level confusion remains as to how to approach this process in a meaningful way and not simply just a futile compliance exercise in ‘ticking the box’.
As a practitioner and risk manager for many years, Clare Dallat has witnessed this challenge and has initiated strategies within both her own organisation and those that she consults with regularly; to attempt to empower staff at all levels more in relation to risk assessment. This interest has now led to a full-time PhD with the Accident Research Team at the University of the Sunshine Coast (USCAR) to develop a risk assessment tool for organised outdoor activities that adopt a ‘systems thinking’ approach.
In this workshop, Clare and I will discuss approaches and methods for conducting risk assessments that: 1) Address compliance requirements; and 2) attempt to focus on meaningful outcomes that align and compliment the desired aims of the program. Socio-technical systems theory will be discussed as a potential underpinning framework that can drive a more holistic and collaborative approach to risk assessments.
We will aim to show that conducting a good risk assessment should not be a futile exercise; rather, that it can and should be an empowering, conscious and collaborative process of identifying and taking action to minimise the potential of serious injury or harm to participants and staff on your programs.
So come along and have your input into the actual development of a risk assessment process that aims to both comply with legislation, as well as being a successful tool for minimising harm and leading to the achievement of the fantastic desired aims of your programs.
When: 5pm, 11th November, 2014
Where: Hillbrook Anglican School
Follow the link below to sign up.
http ://qorf . org . au/whats-on/risk-management-workshop/
or contact the OEAQ office for more details – 5484 5433 or oeaq@oeaq.org.au
Thank you to OEAQ for organising!
Invitation to people working in the outdoor education, recreation and adventure sector: UPLOADS website scoping study (Ethics Number: A/14/604)
One of the goals of the UPLOADS Project is to develop a National dataset of incident reports and participation data so that the led outdoor activity sector can understand the risks it faces and take appropriate action.
The UPLOADS Research Team are considering developing a website that allows people within the outdoor education, recreation and adventure sector to access and explore the findings from the National dataset, enabling them to understand injury and accident trends across the Australian led outdoor sector and different led outdoor activities. The website would allow people to search for certain types of incidents (e.g. all high ropes incidents involving injuries) and generate summaries of the data which, for example, would show the causal factors involved across the set of incidents (e.g. in 23 out of 30 high ropes incidents across Australia equipment and risk assessment were identified as causal factors). In addition, the website could be used to identify strong relationships between causal factors (e.g. in 70% of led outdoor activity incidents there is a strong relationship between financial pressures and inadequate training programs).
To ensure confidentiality, the website would only present summaries of multiple incidents from multiple organisations. Individual reports or details on specific incidents would not be accessible. The report on the prototype trial is an example of the type of information that would be presented (https://uploadsproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/goode-et-al-2014-summary-of-uploads-prototype-trial-results-18th-march-2014.pdf)
The aim of this study is to: 1) Evaluate whether the control measures we have in place to ensure confidentiality are considered sufficient for the website; 2) Determine whether people within the outdoor sector would use the website; and 3) Identify desirable features.
Your contribution to this study will allow us to determine whether we should develop the website and, if so, the essential features it needs to include.
The survey will take no more than 20 minutes to complete.
If you work in the outdoor education, recreation or adventure sector, and would like to add your valuable contribution please complete the survey here:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/uploadswebsite
Thank you
The UPLOADS Project team
Click here to read the UPLOADS Project October Newsletter which includes an invitation to participate in a survey on how we should use data from the National Dataset.
A recent article by Nancy Leveson and Sidney Dekker discusses the problems associated with searching for the “root cause” of accidents.
The article argues that trying to identify, and eliminate, the “root cause” of accidents leads us to focus on symptoms, rather than the underlying causes of accidents. For example, in the outdoor context the symptom might be “participants doing the wrong thing”, while the underlying causes might be unclear instructions, design of the activity, and communication with the school about behavioural problems.
There’s also a good discussion of the common biases associated with understanding accidents, and how a systems thinking approach (like UPLOADS) can help overcome these biases.
The article was written for the Chemical Processing industry, but is useful for anyone interested in learning more from accidents.
In my last post I spoke about the dangers of focusing on a single root cause when investigating accidents.
However, while there is no doubt that accidents are caused by multiple contributing factors, one key element does continue to rear its ugly head in our research. This element is common across accidents, as well as across different types of causal factors in the same accident.
So what is this ubiquitous contributory factor?
Communication. In most accidents, there are often numerous communications issues or failures across all levels of the work system.
Critically, communication issues often occur within and across levels of the system. Within levels, for example, these issues are often evident when participants do not understand or misinterpret instructions from activity leaders. Across levels, field managers might provide overly complex instructions about risks and hazards to activity leaders. Inexperienced activity leaders might not ask their field manager the right questions about what to do in an emergency. Parents might misinterpret the questions on consent forms, or misunderstand the risks communicated about the activity. Schools might fail to communicate with the activity centre about behavioural issues. Communications issue are often present at the highest levels of the system; for example when government and regulatory bodies are not on the same page.
Importantly, it’s not only about people not talking to one another or telling each other the wrong thing; often it is poor communication within documentation, policy and procedures, training programs, risk management and incident reporting systems, and equipment. For example, an incident reporting system might contain information about recurring hazards. However, for whatever reason this information in not communicated to the people who need this information most. The end result is a system that is not aware of its own hazards.
So whilst the contributory factors themselves may be different in terms of their source, often they centre on safety-critical communication. Communication, it seems, has a lot to answer for when disaster strikes.
The important messages here are that it is it is good (for every ‘thing’ in the system) to talk (about everything that is important) to the right people: it is important to make sure that your system “talks”. Make sure you have processes in place that allow all the people within your system (participants, leaders, field managers, risk managers, admin staff, parents etc.) to talk about the important issues, to communicate the right information to the right people, and to monitor understanding. It’s not enough just to “send” the information, you have to know it has been heard.
Let’s repeat that. It is good for everything in the system to talk about everything that is important to the right people. Sounds simple doesn’t it? Unfortunately it is often not achieved across the safety critical domains, as evidenced by recent tragic events in other areas. The Air France 447 tragedy in which an Airbus A330 dropped into the Atlantic Ocean killing all on-board effectively happened because the aeroplanes systems couldn’t communicate with one another, the cockpit displays couldn’t tell the pilots what was going on, and the aircrew didn’t communicate particularly well about what they were doing in response to the situation. The Kerang rail level crossing tragedy of 2007 happened because the rail level crossing did not effectively communicate to the truck driver that a train was approaching. Moreover, the hazards around the crossing were not effectively communicated across the system.
How should organisations deal with this? The wrong approach is to send a memo around your organisation telling people to talk more often to one another. This will fix nothing much really, other than people might be chattier over lunch for a week or so. But it’s not safety critical information and remember it’s not just people that are the problem – it is ‘things’ too. The right approach instead is to work out what needs to be communicated to ensure safety, who needs to know it, and what or whom should be communicating the information. Only then can you identify where these ‘communication’ issues exist and fix them. Revise the policies, risk management programs, procedures, increase the communications channels, incorporate regular reporting into incident reporting systems etc. Get the system talking. It might just be the fundamental change it needs to supercharge safety.
The University of the Sunshine Coast Accident Research (USCAR) Team is offering two new PhD scholarships.
One of the scholarships available involves using the data from the UPLOADS national incident database as a starting point for developing methods to improve safety management in the outdoors. Areas of interest include accident analysis/prediction/prevention, incident investigation and near miss reporting processes.
The successful candidates will join USCAR’s team of Human Factors researchers and will be located at the University of the Sunshine Coast in Queensland. The scholarships are advertised for an immediate start.
The application deadline is the 24th October – so if you’re interested you need to act quickly!
The UPLOADS Project 