Mapping of HSE culture: Implementing change management in a learning organisation Dr. Annette - S. Hoepfner 1) and Dr. Kathryn Mearns 2) 1)Naturkraft, Kårstø, 5565 Tysværvåg, Norway (formerly of Aker Kværner Offshore Partner) 2) Industrial Psychology Research Centre, University of Aberdeen, AB24 2UB, Scotland, UK

Background A company (2300 employees) consisting mainly of engineers and blue collar workforce, working with maintenance and modification for the oil and gas industry A corporate value set applicable as a baseline for expectations towards health & working environmental and safety attitude Buy-in and support from the senior management through an induction program

Goals Create a consistent HSE culture throughout the company Obtain in-depth information reflecting a cross section of the organisation Transform those results into a clear and easily understandable message, eventually identifying GAPs in the perception between / within different hierarchically layers Work with small teams to obtain buy-in and identification with results and to define necessary change (actions)

Collecting data CategoryLocationNumber Managing DirectorSite A1 Senior managementSite A2 Site B1 Department managersSite A2 Project managersSite A3 Discipline leadsSite A4 Offshore managers/ supervisors Different installations3 Workshop personnelWorkshop A3 Workshop B2 Offshore personnelDifferent installations4 Office personnelSite A5 Site B3 Comprehensive questionnaire Two interviewers –Optimal focus on interviewee –“Second opinion” on message sent (honesty) and message heard –“Second opinion” on allocation into system Data transformed after each interview –No loss of nuances, “fresh impressions” –Continuous evaluation of number of interviewees within categories

Interview focus Leadership Commitment / genuineness Role modelling Work force involvement Learning and continual improvement Individual learning and Improvement Organisational learning and improvement Communication Communication flow Communication direction Perceptions, attitudes and behaviour Own risk behaviour Correcting colleagues behaviour

Allocation of results against three dimensions Allocating against the dimension of corporate values –Openness and honesty –Development of work force –HSE mindset Allocating against the dimension of HSE awareness and maturity –Leadership approach: commitment, genuineness, communication flow –Individual learning and training / organisational learning and training –Own risk behaviour / correcting colleagues behaviour Allocating against the dimensions of the driving force for HSE development and performance –HSE leadership –Communication and dialogue in own organisational unit –Communication and dialogue across Company –Individual continuous improvement and learning –Organisational continuous improvement, learning and knowledge sharing

The value dimension: ‘walk the talk’ as best score

How to measure Maturity… ElementPathologicalReactiveCalculativeProactiveGenerative Leadership approach (Commitment Genuineness) Blame culture Zero not achievable Look to the other side Legal requirements met, Not more Participation in investigation Bonus contracts Improvements as result of accidents Improvements Due to clients/ authority demands Taking HSE seriously because expected Management systems solves it all If people act as told, we can avoid’ accidents Chasing statistics Planning up front activities Looking for leading indicators Finding HSE interesting Talking HSE if possible Interest for underlying causes Looking for human factor as well as “hard” evidence Business decisions based on HSE evaluations HSE natural part of all business No gaps in walk my talk HSE commitment in whole organisation Correcting Colleagues behaviour Who cares as long as I don’t get caught Focus on myself Look normally out for myself Concern for others after accidents I know what is right but I do not do it properly all the time I know what is right and I Continuously strive to be better I care for my colleagues I get it right all the time and I share my attitudes with my colleagues I know we all are genuine committed

The maturity dimension

Location of the driving force Management driven –Initiatives are defined, initiated and carried out bu the line management Employee involvement –Initiatives are defined, initiated and carried out by the line management including employees i.e. safety delegates Employee driven (as best score) –Initiatives are defined, initiated and carried out by employees in general Ignored –No evidence of focus

The driver dimension

The first meeting Results are presented and agreed upon one by for each group –Starting with corporate values (known, undisputable fixed values) –Changes are made for the position along the measuring scale, until group agrees on results for the elements Group chooses one specific element as most important to work with e.g. “all of us knows were we stand” –Satisfaction with the chosen element at date is evaluated on a scale from 0-10 –Actions for improvement defined as “what”, “who” and “when” in action plan The process is adapted to the different groups progress during the meeting (large variation)

The follow up meetings Actions on plan are evaluated for a given element –Action carried out? If not – WHY? Are other actions more applicable? Necessary changes are made. –Action suitable and still valid? –New action(s) ? Measuring satisfaction with the chosen element at date on a scale from –Status quo if actions were neglected, improvement if actions were carried out –Direct, rapid measurement visualizing strongly the connection between action and improvement Proceeding to the next group of results…

What did we achieve? A large variety of results depending on group dynamics –The process is based on voluntary participation –If strong resistance, the motivation phase is extensive –Groups open for the process (low initial resistance) quickly obtain results, further motivating to proceed Valuable discussions due to the group processes –Clarifying terminology and content –Clarifying of perception of performance levels –Raising maturity level for working environmental and safety factors Employee involvement in improving of the working environment –No action – no results –Understanding of necessity for own engagement and action A process tailored for the needs of each individual group

Concluding remarks Improving HSE has a long term perspective – no quick fixes The coaching process utilises the employees knowledge of ‘what is essential’ and ‘how to improve’ The coaching process guarantees employee involvement Time frame: three meetings (5 hrs in total) –Sufficient time between meetings (min. 4-5 weeks) Line management take over and include in regular HSE meetings –Line management to be trained in the process for take over –‘Less is more’ principle rather than switching to new elements –Long term perspective Improvement measurable through the regular annual / bi-annual employee satisfaction studies