A risk-based approach to Skills Recognition in rail

Why assess the risk of Skills Recognition

Risk-based analysis methods offer unique opportunities in the area of Skills Recognition for rail organisations as employees are already used to managing risk as everyday activities. In adopting a risk-based approach to Skills Recognition, rail can ensure that identified external threats and internal weaknesses are overcome in a planned and systematic way.

Risk-based impact evaluation tool

Using the risk assessment table, a risk-based impact evaluation can enable rail leaders to be more selective about the types of Skills Recognition used in their organisations.  Of principle concern is the need to balance the risks against the likely cost, benefits or feasibility of SR in a rail setting. The risk-based impact model enables risk to be evaluated in five categories:

Using information developed in the SWOT environmental scan and risk assessment table, complete the risk-based evaluation activity in four stages:

  1. Make an evaluation against each of the seven risks by looking at the level of risk, where (3) is rated for high, (2) for medium and (1) for lower.
  2. Next, evaluate each of the seven risks by looking at the level of known or estimated cost/benefit; where (3) is rated as a negative cost/benefit, (2) is a questionable cost/benefit and (3) as a positive cost benefit.
  3. The rating for Stage 1 is multiplied with Stage 2 to provide a risk assessment number. For example, in the area of safety a given SR process could be evaluated as lower risk (1), but the cost/benefit could be negative (3). This would produce a risk number of 3.
  4. Finally, compare the risk number with the following table to determine how the risk should be treated.

 

Risk

Number

Assessments

Criteria

2

Maximise the opportunity

Strengths and Opportunities clearly outweigh the weakness and threats, therefore require no treatment

3

Engage on SR activity

Litigation strategies are put in place to avoid the weaknesses and/or threats

4

Proceed with care

Mitigation strategies are put in place to manage the weaknesses and/or threats

6

Proceed with caution

Mitigation strategies are put in place to eliminate the weaknesses and threats

9

Do not continue

Weaknesses and threats clearly outweigh the strengths and opportunities


Risk evaluation chart

Higher risk

PROCEED WITH

CARE

(4)

PROCEED WITH   CAUTION

(6)

DO NOT CONTINUE

(9)

Medium risk

ENGAGE IN

SR ACTIVITY

(3)

PROCEED WITH

CARE

(4)

PROCEED WITH

CAUTION

(6)

Lower risk

MAXIMISE SR OPPORTUNITY

(2)

ENGAGE IN

SR ACTIVITY

(3)

PROCEED WITH

 CARE

(4)

 

Positive cost/benefit

Medium cost/benefit

Negative cost/benefit

 

Highly feasible

Feasible

Lower Feasibility

 

Example of risk evaluation

       Area of risk

Risk

Cost/benefit/feasibility

Total

1) Safety

1

2

3

2) Legal/Compliance

2

2

4 (proceed with care)

3) Operational risk

3

3

6

4) Reputation

1

1

2 (Maximise SR opportunity)

5) Financial viability

1

1

2

6) Market support

1

1

2

7) Business survival

1

1

2

Average =

1.43

1.57

3 (Engage in SR, but)

 

In this example, the greatest risk is evaluated in the operational area as six (6) points and the risk evaluation chart suggests a 'proceed with caution'. Next, the risk assessment indicates an impact on legal/compliance of four (4) points, suggesting that this item could proceed with care.