In a recent article in the Maritime Explorer, "Transocean Ltd. CEO Steven Newman said the company’s
crew on the Deepwater Horizon “should have done more” to prevent the
rig’s 2010 explosion in the Gulf of Mexico". http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/Transocean-Should-Have-Done-More-Before-Blowout-CEO-Testifies-2013-03-20/
This is indeed a
pleasant change and in a way a pioneering effort for which Transocean's CEO
needs to be congratulated. The maritime industry, in general, avoids taking blame.
There are reasons for that wherein for example P&I clubs do not really pay
unless someone is blamed. A bad system will defeat a
good person every time” – W. Edwards Deming. This reminds me of a quote
from the Cain Mutiny, which in essence says, “Navy is a master plan devised by
the genius for execution by idiots”. This master plan is the system,
which should be so created that there is no need to blame the individual.
Every time the system fails, the management reviews and acts to work on
the procedures that comprise the system. Improve the system enabling
better protection of the individual. It is ironic that individuals who are
assigned the designing and then implementing of the system often consider it a
burden – little realizing that the system approach takes management away from
asking, “Who” to asking, “How and Why”. This results in further
development of the system rather than blaming the individual who was simply
working within the system.
In this
article, however,the CEO talks of both good people and a good system. I agree
with the good people bit. In any case if analysis reveals that the employees
lacked competence or were negligent it would again point to the system, meaning
the weak HR (Human Resources) procedures which hired incompetent personnel. So
it is always the system which lets down the organization. So my objection and
suggestion to Transocean (for that matter any maritime organization) is not to say
that their system too was “wonderful” but to re-look at the system and analyze
how the system let down the personnel they selected. I have a quote which I use
when I work with organizations as I develop their systems as a consultant and
that is “the only bad NC (Non Conformity) is the one you do not know about”.
The system therefore should be created with the environment matched to
encourage NCs to be reported. After all corrective action and correction are NC
driven. And as the NCs collected contribute to the data base increase, they
will provide the information which can be analyzed and trends obtained to
predict potential NCs. The company becomes a mature organization when it can
predict potential NCs before they occur. Potential
NCs are data driven. Therefore Transocean needs to work towards that end.
So, yes the CEO has indeed taken a very positive step by accepting the
deficiencies and will no doubt now look ahead to going back to the Plan stage
of the P-D-C-A cycle (Plan Do Check and ACT) and review the system.
