Improving the robustness and resilience properties of maintenance

Abstract Industries with major accident potential, e.g. the process industries, are usually characterized by high degree of technological and organizational complexity, and hence are fortified with layers of protection (barriers). The energy-barrier risk control model is dominant and tends to be applied by such industries over time, sometimes without paying attention to the vulnerability of the complex organizational setting encompassing production, maintenance, support and the environment. In the same vein, process industries may prioritize production at the expense of safety systems and the organizational network. Maintenance is known to be a key means of keeping safety systems functional, yet, in this paper we wish to explore how its values can be further uncovered to improve the robustness and resilience of the socio-technical system as a whole. This paper intends to investigate what robustness and resilience properties exist in maintenance and how these can be improved in relation to maintenance interaction with other areas such as production and support and in turn improve the robustness and resilience of the process industries organization. The objective is to improve the robustness and resilience of the organization as a whole. This is realized on the basis of the perspectives of organizational accidents: energy-barrier model, normal accident theory (NAT), high reliability organizations (HRO) theory, man-made disaster (MMD) theory, conflicting objectives, adaptation and drift (COAD) theory and resilience engineering. Based on this, recommendations for improving the maintenance robustness and resilience were proposed.

[1]  Robin Pitblado,et al.  Global process industry initiatives to reduce major accident hazards , 2011 .

[2]  David D. Woods,et al.  Resilience and the Ability to Anticipate , 2017 .

[3]  Andrew Hopkins,et al.  The limits of normal accident theory , 1999 .

[4]  B. Turner.  Man Made Disasters , 1995 .

[5]  A. J. Grimes.  Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies , 1985 .

[6]  David I Blockley,et al.  VULNERABILITY OF SYSTEMS , 2001 .

[7]  Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld,et al.  Engineering resilience into safety-critical systems , 2012 .

[8]  Peter Okoh,et al.  Maintenance-related major accidents: Classification of causes and case study , 2013 .

[9]  Eirik Homlong.  Reliability, availability, maintainability and supportability factors in an Arctic offshore operating environment : issues and challenges , 2010 .

[10]  Peter Okoh,et al.  The Influence of Maintenance on Some Selected Major Accidents , 2013 .

[11]  N. McDonald.  Organisational Resilience and Industrial Risk , 2017 .

[12]  Scott D. Sagan.  The Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons , 1993 .

[13]  Nicholas Rescher,et al.  Cognitive Harmony: The Role of Systemic Harmony in the Constitution of Knowledge , 2005 .

[14]  Peter Okoh.  Maintenance Concept Database Solution (MCDS) , 2010 .

[15]  Janis Grabis,et al.  Supply Chain Configuration: Concepts, Solutions, and Applications , 2010 .

[16]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem , 1997 .

[17]  Laura Swanson.  An empirical study of the relationship between production technology and maintenance management , 1997 .

[18]  Efstathios Bakolas,et al.  Highlights from the literature on accident causation and system safety: Review of major ideas, recent contributions, and challenges , 2010, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[19]  David Woods,et al.  Essential Characteristics of Resilience , 2017 .

[20]  John Wreathall,et al.  Properties of Resilient Organizations: An Initial View , 2006 .

[21]  James T. Reason,et al.  Managing the risks of organizational accidents , 1997 .

[22]  Harold D. Foster,et al.  Resilience Theory and System Evaluation , 1993 .

[23]  Stephen J. Wallace,et al.  Know when to say “when”: A review of safety incidents involving maintenance issues , 2003 .

[24]  Erica Jen,et al.  Stable or robust? What's the difference? , 2003, Complex..

[25]  Sidney Dekker,et al.  Resilience Engineering: Chronicling the Emergence of Confused Consensus , 2017 .

[26]  Peter Okoh,et al.  A study of maintenance-related major accident cases in the 21st century , 2014 .

[27]  Simona Chera,et al.  The Hydra model: disclosing an apoptosis-driven generator of Wnt-based regeneration. , 2010, Trends in cell biology.

[28]  M. Gell-Mann.  A Theory of Everything. (Book Reviews: The Quark and the Jaguar. Adventures in the Simple and the Complex.) , 1994 .

[29]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  A Framework to Analyze the Robustness of Social-ecological Systems from an Institutional Perspective , 2004 .

[30]  Peter Okoh,et al.  Application of Inherent Safety to Maintenance-related Major Accident Prevention on Offshore Installations , 2014 .

[31]  Rommert Dekker,et al.  A Dynamic Policy for Grouping Maintenance Activities , 1997 .

[32]  Bjorn Egil Asbjornslett,et al.  Assess the vulnerability of your production system , 1999 .

[33]  Salih O. Duffuaa,et al.  Maintenance and quality: the missing link , 1995 .

[34]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Resilience Engineering : New directions for measuring and maintaining safety in complex systems Final Report , November 2008 , 2008 .

[35]  P. Jonsson.  The status of maintenance management in Swedish manufacturing firms , 1997 .

[36]  Jean Pariès.  Resilience and the Ability to Respond , 2017 .

[37]  M. Gell-Mann.  Books-Received - the Quark and the Jaguar - Adventures in the Simple and the Complex , 1994 .

[38]  Julie Dugdale,et al.  Design of robust socio-technical systems , 2006 .

[39]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  States of Resilience , 2006 .

[40]  T. Laporte,et al.  Working in Practice But Not in Theory: Theoretical Challenges of “High-Reliability Organizations” , 1991 .