Safe_-_Steady_-_Consistent_-_Code

Safe Steady Consistent (S.S.C.) Code Fred Trevisan Introduction During the last couple of weeks I have done some research and spoken to a few people regarding the S.S.C. code. To my surprise I found somebody that knew something about it but had never researched it. My first question to him was, "why is it referred to as a code'" The answer was that it had to be because it was a system that was contrary to their propaganda (in East Berlin) at the time. Just being caught talking about it would result in a jail sentence if not death. It actually makes sense if you think about it. Safety in the work place was never an important consideration in any industry during that time. Working steady was unheard of because the bigger the workload was the harder you were expected to work. Consistency was a term that could never be used around the industrial front because it represented a limitation of production to a schedule. Instead, these guys worked their workers until they dropped. As a result of my finding it wasn't that hard to reflect about what it was like in those days and why this guy was so successful by implementing the S.S.C. management technique in a positive way. It is amazing to think that it has taken decades for the employer to become vigilant in looking after the employee's welfare. However many still find it hard to implement safety measures at times because the employees ignore procedures. According to a psychologist there is a simple explanation for such ignorance. Mankind has always worked towards self preservation as seen in everyday tasks which are full of hazards for example, making a cup of coffee or cutting a loaf of bread, where in every instance a Take 5 is mentally completed. However, man (as a gender) does not like to be told. It is for this reason that I believe we need to take a different approach and invite the guys to join us in having an incident free approach rather then telling them how things are going to be. Do you get the picture of the difference in approach' I think we will get a more positive response. We need to make sure that all the guys believe that doing a Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) and Take 5 could prevent an incident from happening to themselves or a mate rather than have them thinking they have to do all this paperwork because it is a requirement by the client. Safe There are numerous ways that we can control safety to a point, and every site will vary. If all managers had to do a study of what works for them it is possible that we could find a common factor. We all have our own ideas. I can only talk from my own experience. One system that has been used before and I have been implementing is the buddy system. I have found that everybody puts in a great effort towards being safe. The guys started to realise that there is personal gain by working safe. JHA’s and Take 5’s are no longer considered to be a hinder and a waste of time as it was the attitude previously. We have started to change the culture. Group Take 5’s are also being introduced at present with positive results. The work groups that are working on a particular task are now doing a take 5’s together and more hidden hazards are identified. I have managed to prove this by checking each individual take 5 when they were done independently and how different they were in identifying different hazards. There wasn't one that had covered all hazards. Yet when they were combined all the hazards had been collectively identified. Duty of care is another factor to be considered and if combine it with the Buddy System we will finish up with a complimentary formula. However special attention must be given to the presentation and approach. The foundation of these two is very similar but the reasons why we choose to implement one and not the other are totally different. When evaluating Duty of Care we find that it is very direct and obligatory to be exercised pending legal action whereas the Buddy System is voluntary. Furthermore from the positive results achieved with the Buddy System team bonding is also achieved. At times whilst every care is taken for a job to be carried out successfully something still goes wrong and it is at this time is where the danger of an incident happening is at it's peak. This could be due to one or more of several emotions such as frustration or embarrassment. Not to mention the expectation what the supervisor is going to say and how is he going to react' The heart will start to race and all of a sudden the immediate focus goes to how he is going to fix it before anybody finds out. This all happens at the expense of loosing focus of the first priority, working safe. This guy is no longer interested in being safe, rather fixing his error is now his priority. This is where the supervisor has to step in and instead of looking to blame, should start looking for solutions. The damage has been done and further damage will result if the supervisor wants to thrive on blame. The employee is already an emotional wreck and instead of instilling the blame on him, the supervisor needs to genuinely offer help him by giving ideas on how to fix the problem. After a solution is found and the employee has calmed down you can ask the questions to investigate what happened and take the steps to ensure the same mistake does not repeat itself in the future. We can look at a lot of examples like the scenario I have just presented which could easily have been less serious and had a lesser effect on the guy's emotional reaction if the Buddy System had been implemented at the time. He would have known that he needed to correct the mistake he made without compromising his own or others safety. Furthermore he would have other work group members around him with in a neutral emotional state to offer advice. Steady Steady is a term that we sometimes use to indicate that we did not have any problems on a particular day. Sometimes this is a far cry from the other days. So we should stop to think, “What did we do today that was different from any other day'” The problem lies in that we don't stop to analyse our successes and we simply put it down to, "we had a good day.” A lot of lessons could be learnt from this good day. If only we stopped to take notice we would find the answers, but the majority of us don't. If we stopped to see what made it such good day it is more than likely we would find that it was a well planned day that made it such a good day. Planning has always been the key to the success of any task and the outcome of the day is a direct reflection of how much effort was put in to planning it. It is undoubtedly one of the essential control measures that we can implement to have a good day. Planning the day can be quite an achievement at times because of the numerous factors that need to be taken into account. One of the most important factors in planning a day that we tend to forget is who is going to work on the different tasks at hand. Questions such as, “Have any of these guys done this job before' Are we going to have a personality clash' What is their pace of work and are they compatible' All of these questions have to be taken in consideration and formulated as to get a STEADY flow of work in the safest and most productive manner. It is practically impossible to find two guys that work at the same speed but it is not impossible to match a group of guys that compliment each other in their skills, speed and above all temperament. It is the supervisor's responsibility to interact with the guys and get to know the guys to the point where he can successfully make that judgement. The supervisor himself needs to be very careful whilst making this judgement not to let his own personal emotions arising from any past personal clashes have a bearing over his group leaders selection. I have seen it first hand when a guy is not picked for a promotion, not because he was incapable but because of a personality clash with the person that has the authority to promote him. In this situation every body has lost something. The decision was not made in the best interest of the company as the best man was not selected for the job, harmony in the work place has been jeopardised and steady is no longer a factor because the guy knows why he didn't get his promotion. Not to mention that the supervisor has now lost all respect from his fellow workers and he is left with a team leader that is going to be undermined by all because he did not earn his position and the work crew know why he got this new position. Most of the guys, if not all, work at different pace. It is very hard to establish the speed at which they work and it is up to the supervisors to take notice and record this. Doing this will enable us to create work groups that are mutually beneficial enabling the job to be completed safely and to a forecasted schedule without having to put extra pressure on the guys at closure time. I have seen many times when one or two guys are carrying the rest of the group especially towards the end of the project. This is where incidents are bound to happen. We must also educate our supervisors into following this trend and not to let personal egos blur their vision of a safe work practice for the sake of finishing the project earlier than scheduled. This is a common trend amongst supervisors. Managers have to be vigilant in making sure that this does not happen. You will find that the guys tend to work at a more productive pace if they know that the expectations are not beyond their capacity. We have to keep in mind that applying pressure will defiantly result in stress and that will lead to incidents. Above all the job will also suffer. From my personal experience the key to success is planning as far ahead as possible. This will also minimise the chance of falling behind, eliminating the need to push the work group to make up lost time. There is always going to be the question of how fast is fast enough for the work group to work. Every job has got an estimated schedule for completion as well as estimated manning levels to finish the job in that scheduled time. Managers and the supervisors should take a close look at the time frame given and decide weather it is a realistic time frame to complete the job. If so, then planning should progress to ensure that all requirements to finish the job successfully are readily available on the day. Such planning considerations will result in a STEADY flow of work in the safe and productive manner. Consistent Consistency has always seemed to be a hard factor to track. The reason for this is that every job is different and requires a different approach. Everything that we have looked at in order to provide steady work on a job needs to be applied plus more in order to maintain consistency. It is human nature to relax after completing a job successfully but to think that the next job is going to be easier than the first without being as vigilant would be a fallacy. We should all learn from past jobs as far as what systems worked and what caused time to be lost. Any old issues that look like reoccurring need to be addressed. Supervisor-Manager meetings are a must. These meetings are a proven tool to achieve consistency. Through these meetings we learn whether the systems that are being implemented are working or failing by exchanging opinions with other supervisors. The meeting doubles as an interaction session between all management staff giving everyone a feeling of contribution and that is always good. Managers, supervisors and team leaders are the driving factor in achieving consistency. The guys will follow and respond very enthusiastically to any well organised job. It is also a proven fact that the guys feel let down when they can see that their superiors were not prepared enough to do the job in a professional manner. To be consistent we need to do a lot of forward planning to cover the work for a number of weeks or sometimes a number of months. Planning will start with looking closely at the work packs, consumables and required machinery etc. and deliveries will need to be closely monitored and tracked. This flow of work may be maintained for a period of time before something goes wrong and we tend to lose our focus. We need to recognise this so as to regroup and take note of what went wrong. The signs that it is going to happen will be there and it is up to us to recognise them and act accordingly so as to bring the project back on track or prevent the mishap all together, rather then putting it down to "Having a Bad Run". There are a few reasons why consistency breaks down sometimes. The supervisors need to play a big part to have a consistent undisturbed flow. A lot of the time the supervisors are the cause of the break down. Miscommunication and lack of consumables are a very common factor. This again comes back to planning and following up of key factors once they have been put in place. One way to minimise these disruptions is by having supervisor-manager meetings and interactions with client on a regular basis. Informing personnel of the particular task they are going to be involved in and actually including them to eyeball the job a few days before the starting date and asking for their opinion on the job will result in a higher feeling of value within the guys. You will be amazed with the results once these guys start feeling that they are a part of the project and not just a tool in a supervisor's hand to complete the job. In conclusion I think that if the code is to be followed to the letter S.S.C. can stand for SAFE-------PROFITABLE------PRODUCTIVITY Written by: Fred Trevisan (2006)