Book chapter and author(s)

What was presented in the chapter

Why use it?

How to use it?

Why is it relevant to IO?

2. IO concepts and their impacts on major accident prevention (Albrechtsen)

A reasoning framework that shows a) how IO solutions improve assessment and management of risk and b) new issues that must be considered in risk assessment in an IO context.

To understand the core aspects of IO and to understand the link between different elements in risk management and how these are linked to IO concepts.

As a conceptual model to understand IO and how IO influences risk assessment and management.

Indicates how the various IO concepts and their integration influence major accident prevention both in a positive and negative direction.

3. Using human and organizational factors to handle the risk of a major accident in IO (Andersen)

A reasoning framework that identifies operative IO-based human and organizational factors that may increase a major accident risk.

To understand how human and organizational factors may increase a major accident risk.

As a conceptual description of what may go wrong in an IO environment.

Shows how specific IO concepts create safety challenges

(Ch.3 cont.)

A tool (a set of diagnostic questions) to assess human and organizational factors in an operative IO context.

To assess safety issues in terms of what can go wrong related to human and organizational factors in IO-based drilling operations.

As a list of IO-relevant questions to diagnose safety. It can be used in various safety assessment methods (e.g. risk analysis, audits, accident investigation).

Provides a list of questions to study IO-based impacts on risk and safety. The list can be modified and applied to other activities than drilling. 

4. Assessing risks in systems operating in complex and dynamic environments (Grøtan)

A reasoning framework that identifies the signs of different types of complexity, relevant to design, planning and operation.

To understand and identify various complex and dynamic issues.

As a conceptual framework for a priori identification and understanding of complexity. 

Increases awareness of how IO can produce complex situations, e.g. many actors involved with different agendas.

6. The usefulness of risk analysis in light of Deepwater Horizon and Gullfaks C (Vatn and Haugen)

A reasoning framework that identifies deficiencies in current risk analysis practice related to both design and operation. 

To understand some of the weaknesses of risk analysis and how it can be improved. 

As an input to improving the quality of risk analysis.

Shows how IO solutions can improve operative risk analyses.

7. Assessing the performance of human-machine interaction in eDrilling operations (Besnard)

A reasoning framework identifying potential human-machine pitfalls in design and operation.

To understand potential pitfalls in human-machine interaction for highly automated tasks.

As a conceptual description of what may go wrong in human-machine interaction in an IO environment.

IO solutions generate automated tasks as well as remote control and supervision, which create the possibility of human-machine interaction failures.

(Ch.7 cont.)

A method (including a set of diagnostic questions) to assess the operative performance human-machine interaction in drilling-related control and supervision tasks.

To assess potential pitfalls in human-machine interaction for highly automated tasks. 

As a tool to assign scores to elements of human-machine interaction, which are aggregated into an overall score.

IO solutions generate automated tasks as well as remote control and supervision, which create the possibility of human-machine interaction failures.

8. Measuring resilience in integrated planning (Apneseth et al.)

A method (including a checklist) for assessing the resilience of integrated planning.

To assess the resilience of integrated planning processes.

As a tool to evaluate critical functions that must deliver wanted outcomes. Scores are assigned to these functions to express the level of resilience.

Ensuring adequate resilient performance is necessary for complex socio-technical systems such as IO. The method can be adjusted to other IO-based activities. 

9. Resilient planning of modification projects: The implications of using FRAM for risk assessments (Tveiten)

A method for assessing latent failures and potential variability that can lead to unwanted outcomes in the planning phase of modification projects.

To analyze unwanted consequences due to performance variability in order to develop countermeasures to dampen performance variability.

As a framework to model and describe functions for evaluating potential variability and identify functional resonance.

The method is well-suited for studying functions in complex socio-technical systems such as IO.

10. Promoting safer decisions in future collaboration environments using technology (Rindahl et al.)

A tool for visualizing risk-related information in the planning of maintenance operations.

To present risk-related information by use of visualization technology.

As a prototype for visualizing risk-related information in a collaborative environment.

Demonstrates how IO solutions (collaboration and visualization technology) can improve risk management.

13. Steps and principles for assessing and expressing risk in an IO setting (Vatn)

A method for assessing the impact of change on major accident risk by expressing the uncertainty of occurrence and severity of events. 

To assess uncertainty regarding the occurrence and severity of unwanted events due to changes.

As a set of steps to identify, analyze and evaluate risk and express it as the uncertainty of occurrence and severity of events.

To manage the change process that IO implies. 

14. A Resilience Engineering approach to assess major accident risks (Hollnagel)

A method for assessing the impact of change on a system’s resilience and how this influences risk.

To assess how change impacts the performance of safety management decisions, which in turn influence risk. 

As a survey-driven analysis of the impact of change. 

Ensuring an adequate resilient performance is necessary for complex socio-technical systems such as IO.

15. Assessing Risk in IO: It’s About Choice (Albrechtsen and Besnard)

A reasoning framework to bridge resilient-based and uncertainty-based assessments of risk.

To understand why and how multiple assessment approaches should be integrated. 

As an example of how different approaches to, and perspectives on risk can be aligned.

IO is a socio-technical change that requires an interdisciplinary approach to understand, assess and manage safety and risk.