Problem_Solving

ILM Level 3 course Problem Solving The Westgrove Group are an independent company founded in 1998 by the Group Managing Directors and we now employ over 1000 people at more than 70 sites across the UK. Our growth from our north-west base to a national organisation has come from concentrating on quality rather than volume and forging long-standing partnerships with blue-chip clients. As an integrated facilities management company, we provide cleaning strategies, bespoke security solutions, strategic waste management and planned maintenance services. As a site security manager I have the sole responsibility to maintain and deliver all aspect of the contract and service level agreement, this includes managing staff, health and safety, data protection and emergency procedures. When I arrived at my current site one of the first areas of concern I had found was the centre’s outdated emergency and disaster plans. The problem with these outdated procedures is that staff, shoppers and the managing agents of the building are all placed under unnecessary risks. In dealing with a major incident a number of factors have to remain at the forefront of your planning, these are: • Public safety • Effective delivery of emergency procedures • Staff training on and awareness of emergencies • Business continuity • Support from the emergency services In the existing plans no current methodology had been applied to adapt to the threats that we face today. Emergency and disaster planning, is what outlines how we deal with the management and curtailing of risk. On the surface it involves preparing, supporting and rebuilding our facilities when human made or natural disasters occur. However it is an intensive exercise that continuously involves individuals, management teams and the emergency services in hazard management with a goal of avoiding or reducing the disasters impact. The decision on plan support and management in response to a given risk depends in part on the perceptions of those involved. The response to risk, the responsibility and management of hazards involves the integration of emergency plans at all levels of our business structure. The impact of poor emergency planning leaves everyone who works, visits or manages the centre in a vulnerable position. As a managing agent for the centre there is a legal and moral obligation to uphold the health and safety of the whole centre. As the threat of terrorist activity has heightened over the past decade and the range of sophistication within individual threat groups has improved there is an expectation that we should have adapted too, but this has not been the case. Shopping centres have become an inevitable target for terrorism, with high foot-flow and the possibility of maximum damage, press coverage, fatalities and financial loss with a minimal risk to the attackers themselves. It was decided the best way forward would be to establish a working group to carry out the review process. This team included representatives from both the emergency services and local authority. The primary tasks for the team to were: • To identify the problems • To determine the action steps needed to solve the problem • To monitor both planning and implementation • To communicate and encourage acceptance of the recommended changes To identify the problems the team was invited to a brainstorming session to determine how to reduce the risk the existing plans placed upon us and to view the different methods and planning procedures that are currently seen as best practice. As a result of the brainstorming, the team came up the following causal table of results: Causal Table: |Immediate Cause |Root Cause | |Contingency information |After a number of major construction projects the floor plans needed to be modified to mirror| | |the current centre layout | |Lack of knowledge |Existing evacuation points were found to be inaccessible and as a result not fit for purpose | |Individuals responsibilities |The plans had no command structure and lacked in roles and responsibilities. | |No factored support from working |No joint working methods existed and the role of the emergency services had been omitted | |partners | | |Out-of-date plans not fit for |Current risk factors had not been planned for terrorist attacks, bomb searches and dealing | |purpose |with suspect packages and vehicles etc. | |Skills gaps |Staff lacked in operational knowledge and emergency procedure training | With this information a Cause and Effect diagram was compiled to identify and formula possible solutions. [pic] Now that the team has identified the most important cause’s poor contingency plans, the work will begin on identifying and selecting appropriate interventions to resolve them. The team will now function as a task force to develop strategies and possible solutions. The need for up-to-date records of the physical structure is seen as the building blocks of any emergency planning. Staff managing any major incident will be fully reliant on the tools they have at their disposal. The need for current and correct contingency information it was agreed as integral to producing a more pro-active set plans. The emergency services and local authority requested that this process be completed and each group should be issued with copies for their records. It was also discussed that this would form past for the evacuation planning and give valuable information regarding vulnerable areas within the centre. It was also suggested command base should be created and copies of the plans made available there. Resources have to be taken into consideration as the cost implications needs to be assessed against the budget available to the centre; the expense of such a project was discussed and referred the managing agents for approval. No single organisation can address every aspect of emergency planning. Common thinking sees disasters as complex problems demanding a collective response. Co-ordination even in conventional emergency management is difficult, for many different organisations may converge on a disaster area to assist. Across the broader spectrum of emergency planning, the relationships between different types of organisation and between different sectors become much more extensive and complex. Emergency planning requires strong vertical and horizontal linkages, central-local relations become important. All agreed that strong working relationships needed to be forged to improve the management of emergency planning. The options available to the team to develop these bonds are for each individual body to provide a point of contact to act as liaison when working on new strategies. This process is aimed at strengthen the whole communities approach to dealing with major incidents A systematic approach to emergency planning requires defining the role of individual’s responsibilities and the chain of command. It was generally agreed that local management team should be main source of leadership in a command mode: they have a duty to ensure the safety of it visitors and staff, the resources and capacity to implement large-scale evacuations, a mandate to direct or co-ordinate the work of others, and they create the necessary policy and legislative frameworks within its own domain. Within operational emergencies the emergency services command any given incident through a dedicated command structure formed of Gold (Incident Manager), Silver (scene manager) and Bronze (direct workforce). This structure was discussed and it was fully agreed that this is a best practice model. There are however training and resource implications that have to be considered, there is no recognised training package that highlights any of the requirements of each of the elements. Local training will have to be formulated with the support of the local authority and the emergency services which again will carry cost implications. ----------------------- Poor emergency planning Lack of knowledge Contingency information Improved emergency planning Individual’s responsibilities Out-of-date plans Skills gaps Partner support Update floor plans Defined job specs Build stronger working relations Update local knowledge Training and mentoring Update site specific planning