Learning from Successes in Nuclear Power Plant Operation: Intermediate Report from the NKS-R LESUN

Learning from experience is essential to achieve safe and efficient operations at nuclear power plants. In the nuclear industry, licensees are required to collect lessons from unwanted events in order to prevent the recurrence of similar events. This implies focus on learning from failures, which may limit the opportunities of the organisation to develop. Modern safety theories such as Resilience Engineering suggest that also using successes as sources for learning may be beneficial. In this project we elaborate the concept of success in nuclear industry and how it can be utilized for learning purposes. The scope of this intermediate report is to provide insights to how successful actions and decisions can be captured and how learning processes from successes and failures differ from each other. To achieve this we carried out an extensive literature review and two case studies in nuclear power plants. We found that success is a complex and multidimensional concept that can take many forms. We identified three broad categories of success: normal performances, extraordinary performances and recoveries. We also observed that success can have properties such as time and situation-dependence and that it relates to the objective or subjective expectations of multiple stakeholders. Based on our findings we formulated a preliminary framework for capturing successes. We propose that this framework can be useful to identify successful situations for learning purposes. We also found that successes are often less salient and less likely to trigger intentional learning processes than failures. Regardless, we found in our empirical studies that there was clear interest in successes at the power plants: existing methods, albeit not very refined, were already in place that could be utilized to learn from successes more systematically. Further developing these activities is also important in order to avoid unwanted side-products of learning from success such as organisational drift or complacency. In addition, because lessons learned from success are often tacit, exploring the possibilities of developing learning that relates to tacit knowledge may be useful. Operating experience activities have a central role in facilitating the development of these learning activities.

[1]  I. Nonaka,et al.  BUILDING A FOUNDATION FOR KNOWLEDGE CREATION , 1998 .

[2]  J. Reason Human error: models and management , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  L. Argote Organizational Learning Curves: An Overview , 2013 .

[4]  Pia Oedewald,et al.  System modeling with the DISC framework: evidence from safety-critical domains. , 2012, Work.

[5]  Shmuel Ellis,et al.  Learning from successful and failed experience: the moderating role of kind of after-event review. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  Pia Oedewald,et al.  Final report of MoReMO 2011-2012: Modelling Resilience for Maintenance and Outage , 2013 .

[7]  B. Hesketh,et al.  Adaptable behaviours for successful work and career adjustment , 2003 .

[8]  Teemu Reiman,et al.  Understanding maintenance work in safety-critical organisations – managing the performance variability , 2011 .

[9]  Björn Wahlström,et al.  Organisational learning – Reflections from the nuclear industry , 2011 .

[10]  Arjen van Witteloostuijn,et al.  A contextual theory of organizational learning from failures and successes: A study of acquisition completion in the global newspaper industry, 1981-2008 , 2012 .

[11]  Gustavo Stubrich The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization , 1993 .

[12]  E. Pulakos,et al.  Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[13]  P. Oedewald,et al.  Evaluating safety-critical organizations – emphasis on the nuclear industry Research , 2009 .

[14]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  Positive psychology. An introduction. , 2000, The American psychologist.

[15]  Shmuel Ellis,et al.  Learning from Errors: The Role of After-Event Reviews , 2012 .

[16]  K. Vohs,et al.  Case Western Reserve University , 1990 .

[17]  S. Dekker,et al.  The complexity of failure: Implications of complexity theory for safety investigations , 2011 .

[18]  Nancy G. Leveson Safety as a system property , 1995, CACM.

[19]  Roderick E. White,et al.  An Organizational Learning Framework : From Intuition to Institution Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[20]  K. Davis Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success , 2014 .

[21]  Dov Dvir,et al.  In search of project classification: a non-universal approach to project success factors , 1998 .

[22]  Kaupo Viitanen,et al.  The expected and experienced benefits of Human performance tools in nuclear power plant maintenance activities: Intermediate report of HUMAX project , 2014 .

[23]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  A Tale of Two Safeties , 2012 .

[24]  René Amalberti,et al.  The paradoxes of almost totally safe transportation systems , 2001 .

[25]  Antonio Garzon-Vico Learning From Failure and Learning from Success in the Pharmaceutical and Biotech Industry , 2012 .

[26]  David Baccarini,et al.  The Logical Framework Method for Defining Project Success , 1999 .

[27]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Resilience Engineering in Practice: A Guidebook , 2012 .

[28]  Karl E. Weick,et al.  Managing the unexpected: resilient performance in an age of uncertainty, second edition , 2007 .

[29]  R. Cook,et al.  “Going solid”: a model of system dynamics and consequences for patient safety , 2005, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[30]  Daniel H. Kim The Link between individual and organizational learning , 1997 .

[31]  Eila Järvenpää,et al.  Hiljaisen tiedon säilyttäminen ja jakaminen ydinvoimalaitoksessa , 2007 .

[32]  K. J. Vicente,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work , 1999 .

[33]  Dan Zakay,et al.  Outcome value and early warning indications as determinants of willingness to learn from experience. , 2004, Experimental psychology.