风险评估:有目的的方法?

Christian Foussard, Cédric Denis-Rémis
{"title":"风险评估:有目的的方法?","authors":"Christian Foussard, Cédric Denis-Rémis","doi":"10.1504/ijpse.2014.070090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When considering three proven methods of risk assessment widely used within energy sector, PHA, FMEA and HAZOP, the question of the adequacy of the method to objectives is raised. After introducing the methodological framework for risk assessment, we take a look at an overview of the three methods. From a perspective shaped by systemic paradigm, we propose the concept of symptom, as thread running through of each method. After detailing the specific symptoms for each method, we put forward two hypotheses. First, a method is not neutral and symptoms are a sign of inclination and drive representations of the scenarios developed. Second, risk assessment workshops, seen as privileged locations for organisational learning, change the relationship between actors and hazardous situations. By locating each method within the triangulation of definition from the systemic paradigm, we invite risk assessment experts to make their tacit knowledge as explicit as possible in order to identify operational levers to control their activity.","PeriodicalId":360947,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Process Systems Engineering","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk assessment: methods on purpose?\",\"authors\":\"Christian Foussard, Cédric Denis-Rémis\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/ijpse.2014.070090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When considering three proven methods of risk assessment widely used within energy sector, PHA, FMEA and HAZOP, the question of the adequacy of the method to objectives is raised. After introducing the methodological framework for risk assessment, we take a look at an overview of the three methods. From a perspective shaped by systemic paradigm, we propose the concept of symptom, as thread running through of each method. After detailing the specific symptoms for each method, we put forward two hypotheses. First, a method is not neutral and symptoms are a sign of inclination and drive representations of the scenarios developed. Second, risk assessment workshops, seen as privileged locations for organisational learning, change the relationship between actors and hazardous situations. By locating each method within the triangulation of definition from the systemic paradigm, we invite risk assessment experts to make their tacit knowledge as explicit as possible in order to identify operational levers to control their activity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":360947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Process Systems Engineering\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Process Systems Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpse.2014.070090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Process Systems Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpse.2014.070090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

当考虑到在能源部门广泛使用的三种经过验证的风险评估方法,PHA, FMEA和HAZOP时,提出了方法对目标的充分性问题。在介绍了风险评估的方法学框架之后,我们来看看这三种方法的概述。从系统范式形成的角度来看,我们提出了症状的概念,作为贯穿每种方法的线索。在详细介绍了每种方法的具体症状后,我们提出了两个假设。首先,一种方法不是中性的,症状是所开发情景的倾向和驱动表征的标志。其次,风险评估研讨会——被视为组织学习的特权场所——改变了参与者与危险情况之间的关系。通过在系统范例的定义三角中定位每种方法,我们邀请风险评估专家使他们的隐性知识尽可能明确,以便确定控制其活动的操作杠杆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk assessment: methods on purpose?
When considering three proven methods of risk assessment widely used within energy sector, PHA, FMEA and HAZOP, the question of the adequacy of the method to objectives is raised. After introducing the methodological framework for risk assessment, we take a look at an overview of the three methods. From a perspective shaped by systemic paradigm, we propose the concept of symptom, as thread running through of each method. After detailing the specific symptoms for each method, we put forward two hypotheses. First, a method is not neutral and symptoms are a sign of inclination and drive representations of the scenarios developed. Second, risk assessment workshops, seen as privileged locations for organisational learning, change the relationship between actors and hazardous situations. By locating each method within the triangulation of definition from the systemic paradigm, we invite risk assessment experts to make their tacit knowledge as explicit as possible in order to identify operational levers to control their activity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信