Non-technical Risks Research Articles

Analisis Faktor Kunci dan Tantangan dalam Pemenuhan Standar Keselamatan dan Kesehatan Kerja (K3) untuk Mencapai Infrastruktur yang Berkualitas: Sebuah Literatur Review

he construction sector is a dynamic industry that produces projects in terms of infrastructure and buildings. This sector faces challenges, particularly in worker safety and health (K3) in every project. Statistics show that the increase in fatalities and permanent disability cases due to accidents at construction sites in Indonesia is among the highest compared to other industrial sectors. This study examines the key factors and challenges in meeting occupational safety and health (K3) standards to achieve quality infrastructure. The method used in this study is a literature review conducted through databases such as PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. After selection, 42 articles were used as sources for analysis in this study. The results indicate that technical aspects, both Internal Risks and Project Risks, are the most influential causes of health and safety risks in a building construction project. Meanwhile, External Non-Technical Risks are the least influential causes of health and safety risks in a building construction project. Risk control can be carried out through good working methods, the use of tools according to warning signs, the appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE), and clear explanations of accident risks and risk control methods by the contractor.

Approach to Severe Mitral Annular Calcification Using Ultrasonic Aspiration

Severe mitral annular calcification (MAC) is perhaps the greatest challenge faced in mitral valve surgery. Valve replacement in the setting of severe MAC carries with it the risk of numerous surgical complications and modes of technical failure, including catastrophic atrioventricular (AV) groove disruption. In the face of these challenges, a variety of surgical approaches to severe MAC have been described but without clear consensus. We describe an approach using the Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA) emphasizing minimal, focal disruption of annular calcium. Ultrasonic aspiration is applied only when needed and only at the precise site of valve suture placement to aspirate away or merely soften dense calcium such that sutures can be placed through or around the calcified annulus. Our approach is simple and eliminates the need for complete annular decalcification which risks avoidable AV groove destabilization and requires complex annular reconstruction. In our experience of 55 cases of high-risk mitral replacement in the setting of very severe MAC, we report two cases of AV groove disruption (4%), two cases of coronary injury (4%), and two cases of stroke (4%), with no cases of paravalvular leak worse than mild. In-hospital mortality was 16%, due largely to significant underlying cardiac and non-cardiac comorbidity and underscoring the often underestimated non-technical risks inherent in these cases. While no single approach may be optimal in every case of severe MAC, we feel our technique of limited ultrasonic aspiration is an important tool in the mitral surgeon's armamentarium.

Analisis Risiko Proyek Pada Konstruksi Bangunan: Tinjauan Literatur

Risk is defined as an uncertain event or condition that, if it occurs, can have either a positive or negative effect on the project objectives. This effect can be avoided by using risk management methods, to identify risks, assessing risks either quantitatively or qualitatively, and choosing the appropriate method for handling risks will minimalized the effects. In the study, the scope was to identify the potential risk occurs on steel building work based on the previous research. Using sources based on the previous research, here will be identifying what types of risk factors are most commonly occurs for steel building work. The types of risk that will be discussed here will be divided into three types based on internal risk, external risk, and project risk. Each type of risk includes technical and non-technical risks. Based on the data this study identify that internal risk with technical aspects is the most common type of potential risk occurs on steel structure building work.

NAVIGATING NON-TECHNICAL RISKS IN THE OIL & GAS INDUSTRY: INSIGHTS AND FRAMEWORKS - A REVIEW

Non-technical risks play a critical role in the oil and gas industry, influencing operational efficiency, financial performance, and stakeholder trust. This review explores key insights and frameworks for understanding and managing non-technical risks in the oil and gas sector. The review begins by defining non-technical risks and highlighting their significance in the industry. It then discusses various types of non-technical risks, including regulatory, environmental, social, and geopolitical risks, and their impact on oil and gas operations. The review also examines the interconnected nature of non-technical risks and how they can escalate into larger crises if not managed effectively. It emphasizes the importance of adopting a holistic approach to risk management that considers the interplay between different risk factors. Furthermore, the review identifies several key frameworks and methodologies for assessing and managing non-technical risks in the oil and gas industry. These include risk assessment tools, scenario planning, and stakeholder engagement strategies. The review concludes by highlighting the need for oil and gas companies to proactively identify, assess, and mitigate non-technical risks. It emphasizes the importance of integrating risk management into overall business strategies and decision-making processes. Overall, this review provides valuable insights and frameworks for navigating non-technical risks in the oil and gas industry. It offers practical recommendations for industry practitioners and policymakers to enhance risk management practices and ensure the long-term sustainability of the sector.
 Keywords: Oil and Gas, Insights, Frameworks, Navigating, Non- Technical Risks

Risk Management in Medical Device Industry

In spite of the fact that risk management has developed into an essential component of the process of developing medical devices, as mandated by both domestic and international regulations and standards, there is still no all-encompassing model that describes how risk management in the development of medical devices ought to be approached, particularly in terms of the types of risks that ought to be addressed. This is due to the fact that risk management has developed into an essential component of the process, which is mandated by both domestic and international regulations and standards. The present focus of risk management in the industry of developing medical devices is on technical risks, such as product, usability, and development process hazards. This is done in compliance with the norms and laws of standards. On the other hand, non-technical risks, such as those associated with businesses and projects, are not given nearly enough consideration. This review focuses on the risk management in medical device industry.

Technology Focus: Health, Safety, and Environment (August 2023)

This year’s HSE Technical Focus feature showcases environmental sustainability. Offshore hybrid renewable power generation, electrically driven well abandonment in urban and natural settings, and the use of remotely controlled, low-carbon-footprint underwater intervention/inspection drones demonstrate HSE- and sustainability-conscious planning and successful implementation in the field. Environmental, social, and governance guidelines, as well as regulatory and sustainability-related frameworks, provide guidance to achieve the social license to operate. Risk management and stakeholder engagement practices help predict nontechnical risks and keep the community informed. In paper SPE 204901, which involves using renewable energy sources for offshore oil and gas platform power generation, one operator proposes harnessing wind energy in weak-wind areas by replacing gas-turbine generators with offshore wind turbines adapted to low-wind-speed regions, thereby lowering maintenance costs and carbon exposure. In paper OTC 31394, a service company, acting as project management lead, and an operator collaborate to use fully electrified equipment to abandon wells in sensitive areas such as urban and natural settings where smell and noise are significant issues. In paper OTC 32481, an operator advocates the use of underwater intervention/inspection drones for offshore projects and describes their advantages, including operational risk reduction, lower carbon footprint, lower costs, reduced intervention time, and improved quality and frequency of inspection data. One of the recommended-reading papers, SPE 210788, describes how an operator advocates for mental health or “mental hygiene,” a “preventive measure for sustaining good emotional health” to mitigate workers’ distress in the oil and gas industry and an indication of the growing emphasis upon total wellness. Many more examples of recent notable achievements in HSES can be found in the list of recommended additional reading and in the OnePetro online library. Knowledge sharing, on the local and global levels, encourages collaboration and solutions generation. See the SPE Health, Safety, Environment and Sustainability website for more information and to learn how you could be involved. Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. SPE 210788 Shifting Paradigm of Mental Hygiene—A Novel Approach To Mitigate Workers’ Distress in the Oil and Gas Industry by Adeela Khalid, RPM, et al. SPE 212791 An Improved Work Flow in Mass-Balance Approach for Estimating Regional Methane Emission Rate Using Satellite Measurements by Jeffrey Y. Bian, University of Alberta, et al. SPE 210245 Insights From Benchmarking Methane Emissions of Oil and Natural Gas Production in the United States by Tom Curry, ERM, et al.

Risk assessment for the prevention of managed aquifer recharge (MAR) facility failure during the operation and the expansion phases

This comprehensive risk assessment, done for a MAR facility in Tarnów, southern Poland, covers two MAR techniques: infiltration ditches and induced bank filtration during the operation and planned potential expansion phases. Two methods were applied: the semi-quantitative risk assessment matrix and the probabilistic risk assessment – fault tree analysis (PRA-FTA), and their advantages and limitations analysed. Both methods examine a range of technical and non-technical risks that may pose a threat to the efficient functioning of the MAR facility in Tarnów, which supplies about 25% of the city’s population with drinking water. It was found that 34 of the 65 risks analysed could pose a low to high risk for the Świerczków well field. The predominant risks potentially reducing MAR efficiency or leading to MAR failure are technical ones. According to the PRA-FTA method, if no preventive measures are taken, there is a 99.5 and 99.3% probability of the MAR system failing during the operational and expansion phases, respectively. The results indicate that the most serious risk is associated with the insufficient initial removal from the recharge river water of suspended solids, which clog infiltration ditches. The risks scored as medium relate to the threat of groundwater inflow from an extensive industrial zone, lying to the east of the well field, and to climate change negatively affecting the quantity of groundwater resources. This is the first example in Poland of a risk assessment for an existing MAR facility and its expansion, based on a broad spectrum of technical and non-technical risks present at the Świerczków well field, using two methods: the risk assessment matrix and PRA-FTA. This case study is a practical example of how to perform a risk analysis for a MAR site. It can make an important contribution to existing knowledge in this field and enrich the subject literature, a particularly relevant aspect given the widespread use of MAR techniques in Central Europe for the supply of drinking water to the public.

Lost in translation: inadequate non-technical risk assessment within major project teams in mining

Infrastructure projects increasingly encounter delays due to non-technical risks (NTR), those risks arising from interactions between business and external stakeholders with the potential to create future negative impacts on society and the environment. One sector where NTR is having a significant adverse impact is the global mining sector, where industry leaders rank NTRs as the leading cause of business risk. We investigate how NTRs are assessed during project pre-feasibility using semi-structured interviews with 20 respondents from major mining companies. We find four main factors contribute to the problem of NTR assessment: there is lack of clarity about what constitutes a NTR; there are different interpretations of how NTR is defined and evaluated; there are disciplinary silos within project teams that impede a holistic assessment of risk; and there is conflation between risk and root cause. These factors contribute to striking differences in perceptions of non-technical risks between professionals in project management versus their sustainability colleagues. A four step process is proposed to improve non-technical risk assessment, align project and sustainability professionals, and identify opportunities for mitigation measures. This work seeks to improve NTR management within mining, a sector that is under-represented in existing literature, by adding empirical research examining how project teams identify and assess non-technical risk and contributes to theory at the nexus of project management and sustainability.

Risk Identification and Analysis in the Development of Medical Devices Among Start-Ups: Towards a Broader Risk Management Framework.

IntroductionWhilst risk management has become fundamental in the development of medical devices, enforced by regulations and international standards, there is still no comprehensive model that explains how risk management in medical devices’ development should be tackled, especially with regard to the type of risks that should be addressed. Risk management in the medical devices’ development field is currently focused on technical risks, comprising product, usability, and development process risks, in alignment with standards’ requirements and regulations, without giving enough attention to non-technical risks, which include business and project risks. Start-ups within this heavily regulated domain have a key role in the innovation process, yet they suffer a structural lack of tangible, such as financial capacity, and intangible resources such as development, risk management, and regulations’ compliance. Nonetheless, they can still optimize their risk identification coverage beyond the enforced requirements to increase their products’ chances of success.MethodsA set of qualitative interviews, serving the adopted grounded theory building research method, with seven start-ups who are involved in the development, commercialization, and quality control of medical devices was accomplished. The purpose was to determine the applied risk management practices and most importantly identify the risk types covered by them. Since every start-up is a project by itself, a sample of project risks, as identified by the project management institute, was utilized to scope the risk coverage and flag missing non-technical risks by the participating start-ups.ResultsUn-identified risk types, lack of involvement of the right teams, and other related loopholes were presented.DiscussionA list of requirements was developed and sketched in a user-friendly risk management framework, which is believed to be crucial in helping start-ups attain successful, safe, and regulatory compliant medical devices production, is shared in the discussion and proposed framework section of this paper.

Occupational Health and Safety Risk Analysis in Construction Projects: A Systematic Literature Review

The construction service business world always wants the best results in every project activities carried out. One of the best desired outcomes is the timely completion of a construction project, but this is often not achieved for several reasons, one of which is occupational health and safety incidents that occurs in a construction project. Based on the background of the problem and the results of a literature review sourced from 40 journals from 2011-2021, the journals collected and reviewed discussed occupational health and safety in construction projects. Therefore, it is very necessary to implement an OHS (Occupational Health and Safety) management system during construction work. Occupational health and safety aims to create conditions that support work comfort for workers, so as to improve risk management. Using sources based on previous research, the following will identify the types of occupational safety and health risk factors that most often occur in construction work. The types of risks that will be discussed here will be divided into three types based on internal risk, external risk, and project risk. Types of risk are divided into two types, namely technical and non-technical risks. Based on data from a total of 40 studies that have been reviewed, there are 22 studies that have Project Risk as the risk that causes 76% of risk in a building construction project.

Project Risks Identification of Steel Construction on Industrial Buildings : A Systematic Literature Review

Risk is defined as an uncertain event or condition that, if it occurs, can have either a positive or negative effect on the project objectives. This effect can be avoided by using risk management methods, to identify risks, assessing risks either quantitatively or qualitatively, and choosing the appropriate method for handling risks will minimalized the effects. In the study, the scope was to identify the potential risk occurs on steel building work based on the previous research. Using sources based on the previous research, here will be identifying what types of risk factors are most commonly occurs for steel building work. The types of risk that will be discussed here will be divided into three types based on internal risk, external risk, and project risk. Each type of risk includes technical and non-technical risks. Based on the data this study identify that internal risk with technical aspects is the most common type of potential risk occurs on steel structure building work.

The interaction between non-technical and technical risks in upstream natural gas project schedule overruns: Evidence from Australia

Upstream natural gas projects are extremely complex and encounter a range of non-technical risks (NTRs) and technical risks (TRs) that frequently get in the way of timely project delivery. Despite their economic and social importance and the massive investments underpinning them, these projects are frequently plagued by significant schedule overruns. Risks are considered during project planning, but the interactions between NTRs and TRs on project performance remain largely anecdotal and theoretically underdeveloped. In this paper, we apply structural equation modelling to data collected from natural gas projects in Australia to empirically investigate the relationships between NTRs, TRs, and project schedule delay. The results indicate that NTRs are much more significant than TRs in influencing delays, and have a stronger influence on TRs, thereby exacerbating delays. The moderation effect of project complexity related to project size is also found to have a significant effect on the relationship between risks and delays. These findings provide insight on the direct, indirect, and mediating effects of risks that decision-makers should take into consideration when assessing project risks. By shedding a useful amount of new light on these interactions and complexities, this contribution will deepen the theoretical understanding of these phenomena and help practitioners to improve project schedule performance within the extractive industries.

System dynamic modeling of risk management in construction projects: A systematic literature review

This literature review discusses risk management research with System Dynamic modeling. Literature is reviewed by summarizing the research that has been done and examining research findings, research relationships, and research problems that require further research. The risk management paper with System Dynamic modeling (2000-2020) is reviewed by dividing risk into 3 groups, namely: internal risk, external risk, and project risk. Each group is further divided into technical risks and non-technical risks. The results of the study stated that risk management with System Dynamic modeling has not been widely used as evidenced by research (2000-2020); there are only 25 papers that match the keywords and can be written reviews. Ten internal risk papers include: project members, location risk, document risk & information. External risk papers are only found in 2 papers that discuss: weather risk and social risk, while the project risks are found in 13 papers discussing: cost risk, time risk, work quality risk, and construction risk.

Application of Fuzzy FMEA to Assess Non-Technical Risks Linked to a Power Station’s Operations

The energy and power industry has seen significant growth across different countries because of increased demand for consumption and market conditions including deregulation. However, due to high level of complexities and uncertainties associated with a power plant’s operations, the management must tackle with risks that may negatively impact business’s overall growth and performance. In this regard, managing non-technical potential risks is as important as handling technical ones because non-technical risks may result in hindrances in the supply process of the power plant. In this paper, a risk management approach, Fuzzy Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, has been used to identify potential non-technical risks linked to a power station’s operations that should be dealt with high priority. This technique is an advanced approach of classical Failure Mode and Effect Analysis which incorporates a fuzzy system to reduce the chances of errors; and helps the management to avoid costly damages by timely responding to the potential risks and taking appropriate corrective actions

The challenges of the oil and gas industry in the era of climate change: technical, non-technical and ESG risks

The challenges of the oil and gas industry in the era of climate change: technical, non-technical and ESG risks

Developing a systematic methodology to build a systems dynamics model for assessment of non-technical risks in power plants

In a dynamic business environment like the energy sector, power plants face several complex risks, including both technical and non-technical risks. These risks are not isolated, as their impact may affect a series of interrelated risks. Those risks may change with time, which in turn, makes the strategic decision-making process less effective. Understanding the dynamic behaviour of a complex system is very important to achieve a more sustainable overall performance of the power plants. Thus, it is important to further develop a systematic risk assessment methodology that could help to identify and analyse the interdependencies among risks and to understand the dynamics of these risks in complex systems. This paper develops a system dynamics (SD) methodology to support the development of risk assessment models. This paper highlights the environmental perspective. The first step to develop a SD model will be applied, while the final SD model will be discussed in another paper.

Sustainability is the New Safety

Editor’s Note: The oil and gas industry is under public scrutiny like never before on a host of health, safety, and environmental issues. These concerns are already affecting how companies operate and interact with the public. This series is intended to shed light on how the industry is actively confronting these challenges or how it should address them going forward. I recently completed my season as SPE Distinguished Lecturer on the topic of managing nontechnical risks, or, in other words, managing business delivery in alignment with the broader interests of the societies in which we operate. It was a distinct privilege that took me to 18 countries and 30 engagements with oil and gas professionals around the world. Among my many takeaways, three stand out: Everywhere, independent of geography, culture, or political situation, the oil and gas industry is facing ever more regulatory scrutiny, higher expectations for responsible business conduct, and an increasingly vocal population. Many in my audiences saw this as a bigger challenge than technical and commercial ones. There is no universal and proven approach to effective management of societal expectations and relationships. Companies large and small are experimenting their way forward, with as many successes as failures. Nobody can guarantee success up front. There is no common terminology. Sustainability, sustainable development, corporate social responsibility, social license, societal or nontechnical risk management are all used in this universe and, by and large, have the same goal, i.e., developing and maintaining long-term, mutually beneficial relationships with societies in which we operate thanks to responsible social and environmental performance. I am not too worried what it is called as long as it yields the desired results. In this article I will be using both the terms “sustainability” and “societal relationships.” Implementing Sustainability is Tough Most companies realize that a glossy annual sustainability report or a charity program directed from headquarters is no longer enough. Society expects deeds and not words. A real contribution to sustainability needs to be expressed in the way we design, construct, and operate; in other words, it needs to be fully integrated in the way we do business. However, as the spectrum of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals shows, sustainability covers a broad array of topics, from respecting human rights, delivery of clean and affordable energy, supporting climate action, to protecting the environment and supporting communities. Every discipline and department in the company, from drilling site to corporate office, has a stake in the contribution to sustainability.

Developing a systematic methodology to build a systems dynamics model for assessment of non-technical risks in power plants

Developing a systematic methodology to build a systems dynamics model for assessment of non-technical risks in power plants

Unconventional trade-offs? National oil companies, foreign investment and oil and gas development in Argentina and Brazil

These are turbulent and uncertain times for the global oil and gas industry. This paper examines the industry's emerging new political economy in terms of competition (or a trade-off) both between and within International Oil Companies (IOCs) for rival oil and gas prospects. A qualitative cross-case analysis of Argentinian shale and Brazilian deep-water finds that unconventional and deep-water projects are complementary rather than competing assets of an IOC's portfolio. Further, despite the technical challenges IOCs face in developing these reserves, it is the non-technical risks and uncertainties that are more pressing for these companies and are the greater inhibitors to investment.

Hybrid Framework of, EWGM-FMEA, Analytical Hierarchy Process and Risk Balance Score Card for Risks Assessment in Energy Sector

Power plants are very important for continuous electricity energy supply and have been affected by many disruptions. Furthermore, the power grid is a critical item for both economy and society. Accordingly, the aim of this paper is to adopt a risk assessment tool combining an improved Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA), Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and enhanced Risk Balance Score Card (RBSC) to model nine risk categories in the energy sector. The outputs of the improved FMEA methodology will be utilised as the inputs for the BSC-AHP framework. The improved FMEA methodology combines the exponential and weighted geometric mean to overcome some drawbacks of the conventional FMEA. The approach helps the top management in prioritising 84 risk indicators particularly, in power plants. The results of this model elucidate that the highest priority (most risky perspective) is for the supply chain perspective with 24.2% of the influence, followed by the internal and operational business process perspective with 18.4%. In this perspective, the technical risk is the key risk with 10.4% followed by the disruption risk with 9.4% while the lowest priority risk in this perspective is the project neglect risk with 2.5%. The sustainability perspective coming as the third priority perspective with 17.7%, where the environmental and safety health category covers about 41.7%, followed by the technological pillar with 35.5% and the social pillar with 22.8%. At the fourth level, the customer/demand perspective is coming with 14%, where the load forecasting risk has the highest priority in this perspective with 49%. The learning and growth perspective stay at the fifth level with 13% where the human resources risks category has more influence than the management risks category. The lowest risk perspective priority is the economic perspective with 12.7%. These results will help the top management in taking a holistic view of various non-technical risks at the strategic level and the priority for each one then, the suitable decision can be taken. The significance of this research is in presenting a novel improved for the traditional FMEA and combining it with the BSC-AHP methods to improve the risk assessment process of 84 risks of six perspectives of BSC in power plants at the strategic level.