![\"projects\"](\"https:\/\/b-spoke.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/08\/projects.png?w=150\")
<\/a>during execution and their surprise at said time and expense. The poor contractors\u2019 defense was simply, \u201cWe need to make sure the workers are being \u2018safe.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\nIt\u2019s a perfectly reasonable-sounding response, but as the project was in Week 11 of a nine-week implementation phase, it was being offered at least 16 weeks too late.<\/p>\n
I\u2019ve worked with companies \u2013 mines, gas refineries, nuclear power plants, etc. \u2013 where industrial \u201csafety\u201d is a guiding Still, the best project managers at safety-minded companies tend to make the same critical mistakes as this committee I watched last week. And, like those poor bureaucrats, their projects suffer.<\/p>\n Project managers often focus their risk-management attention on the outcome of the project \u2013 the hazards of operating a new piece of equipment, fire suppression in a server room, smartphone batteries that don\u2019t explode, that Project managers should carefully review the project plan iteself, looking for work packages that have the most potential risk while the work is being completed. It\u2019s easy to find \u201cobvious\u201d hazards such as working at heights or enclosed spaces. Literally going line-by-line through the work breakdown structure, though, can identify otherwise-missed areas.<\/p>\n To get the creative mind flowing, ask \u201cWhen we\u2019re doing [this piece of work<\/em>], what can go wrong?\u201d Homing in on the specific work, and asking that question, tends to get people thinking. \u201cSpecific\u201d is key: yes, \u201cpeople could get hurt\u201d, but what specifically is the concern?\u00a0 \u201cSlipping and tripping\u201d or \u201cdirty\/dusty air\u201d? Or both? Visualize the work, including the location, potential weather conditions (“Opening a New Sales Territory” may seem a risk-free project, from a safety perspective, but… that recruiting trip in January? Has the HR director driven on snow before?), and what else is happening in the area.<\/p>\n Look for \u201ccollisions\u201d between work packages. On one project, we discovered that two simultaneously-scheduled tasks were in direct conflict with each other; both could be done safely, but not at the same time.<\/p>\n It helps, too, to do some problem-solving in advance and get to the root cause of the concern. \u201cIt just is\u201d isn\u2019t good enough. We tend to be prescriptive in our solutions without fully understanding the hazard: Seeing \u201cdirty\/dusty air\u201d immediately leads to the solution \u201cwear a respirator\u201d; first asking, \u201cwhat is the cause of the dirty\/dusty air\u201d may lead to mitigations that are actually better solutions.<\/p>\n A recent project did just that, diving into the cause of potential slips and trips \u2013 which led us to discover not only that they would need auxiliary power to see where they were stepping, but underneath the top ground cover was broken glass, rusted metal, and other discarded construction materials. We were able to plan well in advance and prepare the crews.<\/p>\n If we hadn\u2019t had done that, this would still have been discovered and managed – but probably not until the morning of implementation, which leads to\u2026<\/p>\n Toolbox Talks and pre-shift safety shares are great, and lots of organizations require a daily job-walk or certification process to refresh the safety-consciousness of the On a recent demolition project, our risk analysis discovered concerns about the grounds\u2019 ability to support weight; this meant that we had to stagger our equipment deliveries, and even limit the number of vehicles allowed to park onsite. No doubt the job\u2019s supervisor would have seen this as work began… But hundreds of tons of machinery would already be lining up, and dozens of king cabs parked in the lot; this review allowed for a balancing of the equipment schedule and other precautionary moves.<\/p>\n Faced with information at the last minute, workers will debate whether to continue, versus incurring penalties and delays for making the correct, safe decision; don\u2019t put them in that situation.<\/p>\n Good project managers know pre-emptive activities take time, and can lead to further preparations that consume project slack. That\u2019s why they build these safety analysis discussions early in the planning process. Good project managers also know that there is a lot they don\u2019t know, which is why it\u2019s a great idea to\u2026<\/p>\n This entire process can feel like a blinding glimpse of the obvious. Any decent PM is thinking, \u201cI do this already,\u201d (and she likely does). It is a rare jobsite where I personally find concerns and the PM doesn\u2019t reply, \u201cWhat we do is\u2026\u201d or \u201cIf Safety planning benefits from groupthink, from brainstorming and other dynamic interactions that allow experts to riff off each others\u2019 thinking. Designated facilitators can keep the discussion from getting bogged down. Get the discussions documented, build agreement, and share the information.<\/p>\n Fight the temptation to allow the bureaucracy to render visible thinking in<\/u>visible. Risk Assessment forms, Management of Change orders, and the like quickly become just paper to shuffle \u2013 objects of administration rather than active planning documents. Remember, the objective is to keep people safe, not cover anyone\u2019s ass.<\/p>\n Safety Planning is not the time to worry about Scope Creep.<\/p>\n During risk analysis discussions, the team will identify resources (human, material, equipment) needed This is not \u201ccreep\u201d; if it is necessary to ensure the safety of the team, it is part<\/u> of the scope. Safety activities may increase the time required or the cost of the project: the conversation, then, is not \u201cDo we blow the scope and do these safety activities\u201d but rather, \u201cIs it worth this time and cost to do this work? Or do we need to go back to the drawing board?\u201d Which, incidentally, are the primary questions good project managers continue to ask about the scopes of their projects<\/a> throughout.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n All projects \u2013 not just major industrial construction jobs \u2013 face some level of risk; it pays to think through these points ahead of time.<\/p>\n During Planning, time needs to be set aside to have those risk-based discussions, both so the job can be appropriately resourced and workers prepared. Active project managers scour the project plan \u2013 in collaboration with experts \u2013 to find safety hotspots, complete root cause analyses, and build pre-corrections into the schedule. They ensure that this information is actively shared with everyone who relies on it, and test for understanding. And they make sure that the project scope accommodates what\u2019s needed.<\/p>\n Being better prepared saves time, saves money, and (seriously) saves lives.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When people get up in the morning to work on your projects, they expect to come home that evening.<\/p>\n![\"3f1f7365-36fc-4172-8409-b4d851dc23b3\"](\"https:\/\/b-spoke.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/3f1f7365-36fc-4172-8409-b4d851dc23b3.jpg?w=300\")
principle – and even more companies that treat the \u201cSafety Committee\u201d as a joke mandated by the insurance company (but at least an opportunity for cookies). Away from heavy machinery, it\u2019s easy to forget how suddenly someone can get hurt, on any<\/em> project. Whether the deliverable is a piece of capital equipment, a 26-story building, a new sales territory, or new backup servers, there are elements of risk that can \u2013 and should be \u2013 mitigated well in advance.<\/p>\nFocus on the Project Not the Result<\/h4>\n
![\"index\"](\"https:\/\/b-spoke.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/index.jpg\")
sort of thing. Engineers spend time preparing HazOps to accomplish this. The actual execution of the project, though, is frequently ignored.<\/p>\nIt\u2019s Never Too Early to Plan Appropriately<\/strong><\/h4>\n
![\"current_28446id_300_large\"](\"https:\/\/b-spoke.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/current_28446id_300_large.jpg?w=300\")
crew. All of that is effective, and should continue, but this should confirm<\/em> and review<\/em> conversations that have taken place much earlier in the process, not<\/u><\/em> replace them. During project planning, time needs to be set aside to have those risk-based discussions, in sufficient detail that work teams can actually prepare.<\/p>\nShow Your Work<\/h4>\n
![\"pen-writing\"](\"https:\/\/b-spoke.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/pen-writing3.png?w=130\")
that happens, we will\u2026\u201d And it\u2019s great that the PM has thought about it, but does everyone on site know, understand, and agree with that plan? Are they prepared? Having the safest solution in someone\u2019s head does no one any good.<\/p>\nRebalance the Scope<\/h4>\n
![\"triangle\"](\"https:\/\/b-spoke.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/triangle.png?w=215\")
<\/a> to safeguard the project. These may range from getting people with certain skills, to renting a shuttle van from an assembly site, to adding entirely new work packages. This all needs to be added into the project plan, and scheduled, priced, and communicated thoroughly.<\/p>\n