1. 1 Knowledge Management : information sharing in risk culture creation, a matter of change management. Pitfalls to avoid, results to expect Jean Francois DAVID Consultant, Expert près la Cour d’Appel de Versailles

2. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 2 Why such a project ? Context  An uncertain context were new critical stake appear and develop for meat packing industry: Food safety BSE and animal by-products collection and elimination  Results of an assessment of corporate liability in animal by-products Crisis are preceded by forerunners events Incidents (operation, management), gaps however small, from rules may have a key role in development of corporate crisis  A strong conviction : Need for information sharing La nécessité d’un partage d’informations Need for an elaborate knowledge management system

3. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 3 Objective : Act upon a specific domain though a community of practitioners  Project content List an register incidents and minor gaps Analyse those events Set action plant aimed to prevention  Objectives : Avert mis functions and minor events which are fore runners of a major crisis (cf. next scheme)

4. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 4 Objective : Prevention and weak signals management Petty gaps Numerous occurence Critical event Crisis Risk control is applied along the whole scale of gaps and mis fucntionning Suppression or shrinkage of crisis

5. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 5 Scope and approach

6. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 6 The steps Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

7. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 7 As-is situation  Ten plants scattered in France :  Wide span of methods in environmental management Une grande diversité dans les méthodes de recensement et de description  Wide span in ranking incidents and in complying with corporate values Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

8. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 8 Method : gathering information – questionnaire based inquiry  An inquiry launched among plant managers disclosed : Practices :  Several opinions on sources of occupational casualties  Several ways and means of collecting information and deciding reactions Accidents reporting :  Different modes of ranking  An under estimations of risks associated to disregarding regulations  Corporate culture :  Estimation of direct & indirect costs and hindrance for corporate performance  Uneven ranking of incidents  Human & financial stakes Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

9. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 9 A common tool to collect and review  Common Template for event analysis  Scope of analysis : key words  Mode of analysis : linked with plant processes (common processes across the whole corporation)  Concatenation in a common document Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

10. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 10 Analyse and compare : Prepare Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

11. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 11 Analyze and compare : execute Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

12. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 12 Behavioural challenge  Drop worst practices and adopt best ones  Draft a genuine hazards prevention program  Erase “will never happen to me”  Correction is neither criticism nor a penalty Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

13. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 13 Results :  Behave compliantly with corporate rules and public regulations  Get watchful employees  Improve dialog about corporate performance : quality versus rough quantity  Initiate a rating approach concerning health and environmental hazards  Link with strategic goals  Identify common corporate objectives : shared through a common knowledge base Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

14. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 14 Common convictions  Progress : Share solutions and bests practices :  Success factors : Measure & analyse Feed back  Hindrance to overcome Historic practices Human relations and tacit corporate criteria Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

15. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 15 Hindrance appeared :  Look & feel of questionaire  Questions asked  Ways of treatment and concatenation Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

16. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 16 Gain from information sharing  Building a community of interest : a good partner is not a dumb partner  Those who have nothing to declare evolution of community opinion : From « all right » To « Have no progress in perspective » Understand As-is situation Analyze compare FixFeed back

17. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 17 ANNEX - Method : Cause & effect diagram (Ishikawa Tree or fish bone diagram) 1  Step 1 : I note, I declare Record accidents (as usual) Record gaps, near misses, non compliances  Step 2 : I declare what I know  Who (employee, individual)  What : task La tâche  How : Organisation (team, shift)  When : shift, step in the process Front to each of those items, I write down identified cause or relations

18. SRA Europe Ljubliana September 12 2006 18 ANNEX - Method : Cause & effect diagram (Ishikawa Tree or fish bone diagram) 2  Step 3 : I organise information & data (events, situations) :  To draw up the logical chain of incident or accident pour reconstituer la logique de l’incident ou l’accident  To find out causes, not obvious at first glance