#273080 - 11/28/14 08:19 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 04/08/02
Posts: 1821
|
What kind of risk assessments? and what kind of risks?
There are often risk assessments made by local emergency managers, generally they can be found publicly.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273081 - 11/28/14 05:07 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Addict
Registered: 01/09/09
Posts: 631
Loc: Calgary, AB
|
Not sure if this is exactly what you are looking for, but to determine the level of risk you multiply the chance of occurrence by the consequence of the risk. For example, when planning Scouting events, I use the following: Chance of Occurrence: - 0: Improbably (will not occur)
- 1: Remote (unlikely to occur)
- 2: Occasional (possible to occur)
- 3: Probable (might occur)
- 4: Frequent (very likely to occur)
Consequence: - 0: No harm
- 1: Slight injury (delay in resuming activity)
- 2: Injury requiring first aid (out for day)
- 3: Serious Injury requiring EMS
- 4: Life-threatening Injury
Risk Level (Chance of Occurrence x Consequence): - 0-2: Minimal
- 3-5: Low
- 6-8: Moderate
- 9-16: High
So to perform a risk assessment for an outing, I fill out a matrix listing the activities and their potential hazards and then assign the appropriate chance of occurrence, consequence and risk level as well as listing any actions we can take to minimize the risk. The higher the level of risk, the more you need to look at ways to prepare for and mitigate that risk. For example, while a wild animal attack may have a grave consequence (4) it has a low probability (1) which makes it a low risk. Also, in my case, if I have one or more activities with a moderate level of risk it indicates I need to do an additional layer of paperwork and parental notification. If I have one or more activities that have a high level of risk I need to re-evaluate. That said, I've used similar approaches to work projects too, to evaluate the risks involved that could jeopardize delivery or cost and the basic principle is the same; multiply the chance of occurrence by the consequence. If you are talking wider-scale disasters, I'd use the same approach. It's too easy to focus on the consequence alone, but taking the probability into account you get a better picture of what you should really be looking at.
_________________________
Victory awaits him who has everything in order — luck, people call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary precautions in time; this is called bad luck. Roald Amundsen
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273084 - 11/29/14 01:41 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Member
Registered: 05/15/07
Posts: 198
Loc: Scotland
|
I would like to add a caveat to the matrix style of assessment.
The methodology fails with high consequence hazards in low likelihood occurrence areas
If a risk is seen as life threatening it should always be graded as high (16 in the example above) if it can happen, whatever the chance of occurrence.
I cannot countenance risk assessing something that can kill without putting into place any and all accommodations that will reduce that risk level.
Life threatening scenarios require very expert assessment by competent people.
(Here starts the discussion of 'competent' on this forum)
In the UK one definition often used is:
"To be competent an organisation or individual must have:
Sufficient knowledge of the tasks to be undertaken and the risks involved.
The experience and ability to carry out their duties in relation to the project, to recognise their limitations and take appropriate action to prevent harm to those carrying out construction work, or those affected by the work".
Edited by Ian (11/29/14 01:48 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273085 - 11/29/14 02:02 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Ian]
|
Geezer
Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
|
Since we are dealing with people it's necessary to remember that we often create our own luck or viewed differently, we skew the odds. Something highly dangerous may have an extremely low probability of happening under "normal" circumstances, and then a human gets involved and moves the probability to 100%. The term adrenaline junkie comes to mind.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273086 - 11/29/14 03:03 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Ian]
|
Sheriff
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/03/09
Posts: 3837
Loc: USA
|
Life threatening scenarios require very expert assessment by competent people. Non-experts are constantly called upon to assess life-threatening situations. Some are very common and foreseeable (should I have a fourth spiked eggnog before I drive home?), some less common (will I get robbed in broad daylight in the mall parking lot?) some are very uncommon (will an airplane crash into my house?). There are, of course, varying levels of expertise that people may have while assessing these situations. It certainly would be nice to have an expert make these assessments, but most of the time that's not feasible. It behooves us to get better at threat assessment. Bruce Schneier's book Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly about Security in an Uncertain World was written for my industry but is the best treatment of how bad humans are at threat assessment that I've yet read.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273087 - 11/29/14 04:42 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Veteran
Registered: 10/14/08
Posts: 1517
|
The matrix is a useful tool, but it is just a beginning. Where it fails is how it is put to use and interpreted. The rare but catastrophic event must be prepared for, in planning, training and equipment. Just because it ranks low in probability does not mean you can dismiss it. A good method for including it in planning is to use the "PACE" acronym for planning: Primary, Alternate, Contingency, Emergency.
Primary: Your primary plan for how you will accomplish your goal, safely.
Alternate: An adjustment to your plan that still allows you to accomplish your primary goals, just in a deferent way.
Contingency: Something goes wrong and requires you to change your goal. Maybe an injury, a shortage of necessary equipment or supplies, or a natural weather event that makes the original goal impossible.
Emergency: Your are in survival mode and trying to get out alive.
Your equipment and supplies must cover all four. Your survival kit is usually for the "Emergency" situation. You must address these four areas while doing your planning, but after doing your risk assessment.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273090 - 11/29/14 11:46 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Veteran
Registered: 02/27/08
Posts: 1579
|
Thanks, everyone! But does anyone know the link I'm talking about? I remember it's nicely written up, and I want to share it with someone. As I recall, Nighthiker wrote up a document and put it up somewhere. He then posted a link to it on our forum. But I can't find it! I thought it's somewhere on this site, but it doesn't seem to be there -- http://www.alpharubicon.com/prepinfo/prepinfo.htm
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273092 - 11/30/14 02:47 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Sheriff
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/03/09
Posts: 3837
Loc: USA
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273093 - 11/30/14 03:34 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Addict
Registered: 05/04/02
Posts: 493
Loc: Just wandering around.
|
A few lifetimes ago I did risk analysis in a medical environment. The link below provides a reasonably easy to understand process that can be adapted to other situations.
The spreadsheet provides a comprehensive view of both the risks and mitigation's for a given threat matrix. It gives a fairly broad image of the issues in the medical world, but also suggests threats and mitigation's common to most threats.
I believe it is posted in the public domain as I found it with a google search.
I have used this system in communications (Grid Down Comms) planning as well as several other areas. It is a bit complex but therein is it's strength. Spend a morning with it and you will understand both the process and your particular threat situation.
edit: I had a long url here but it did not work. Probably because of the formatting.
instead google
Kaiser Hazard Vulnerability Analysis
Nomad.
Edited by Nomad (11/30/14 03:36 AM)
Edit Reason: replaced failed link
_________________________
...........From Nomad.........Been "on the road" since '97
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273094 - 11/30/14 03:49 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Nomad]
|
Geezer
Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273096 - 11/30/14 04:04 AM
Re: Estimating risk / Regional Hazard Mitigation
[Re: Bingley]
|
Enthusiast
Registered: 09/10/08
Posts: 382
|
Sounds familiar  Risk Assessment Table
ready.gov/business
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Impacts with Existing Mitigation (L, M, H) (11)
Asset or Operation Hazard Senario Oportunities for Probability Overall
at Risk (Location, Timing, Prevention (L, M, H)
(6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Hazard Rating
People Property Operations Environment Entity
Magitude) or Mitigation
Risk Assessment Table
INSTRUCTIONS
Column 1: Compile a list of assets (people, facilities, machinery, equipment, raw materials, finished goods, information technology, etc.)
in the left column.
Column 2: For each asset, list hazards (review the “Risk Assessment” page from Ready Business) that could cause an impact. Since
multiple hazards could impact each asset, you will probably need more than one row for each asset. You can group assets together as
necessary to reduce the total number of rows, but use a separate row to assess those assets that are highly valued or critical.
Column 3: For each hazard consider both high probability/low impact scenarios and low probability/high impact scenarios.
Column 4: As you assess potential impacts, identify any vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the asset that would make it susceptible to loss.
These vulnerabilities are opportunities for hazard prevention or risk mitigation. Record opportunities for prevention and mitigation in
column 4.
Column 5: Estimate the probability that the scenarios will occur on a scale of “L” for low, “M” for medium and “H” for high.
Columns 6-10: Analyze the potential impact of the hazard scenario in columns 6 - 10. Rate impacts “L” for low, “M” for medium and “H”
for high.
Column 8: Information from the business impact analysis should be used to rate the impact on “Operations.”
Column 10: The “entity” column is used to estimate potential financial, regulatory, contractual, and brand/image/reputation impacts.
Column 11: The “Overall Hazard Rating” is a two-letter combination of the rating for “probability of occurrence” (column 5) and the
highest rating in columns 6 – 10 (impacts on people, property, operations, environment, and entity).
Carefully review scenarios with potential impacts rated as “moderate” or “high.” Consider whether action can be taken to prevent the
scenario or to reduce the potential impacts.
ready.gov/business
Find out if your home or business is at risk to fires, floods, or earthquakes. Then quickly create a plan to reduce your risks. http://www.usgs.gov/natural_hazards/http://www.weather.gov/briefing/http://www.fema.gov/plan-prepare-mitigatehttp://www.ready.gov/make-a-planhttp://www.ready.gov/plan-for-your-riskshttp://www.ready.gov/considerations for age, disability, pets http://www.ready.gov/be-informedhttp://www.ready.gov/alertshttp://www.ready.gov/community-and-other-planshttp://emergency.cdc.gov/hazards-specific.asphttp://svi.cdc.gov/ ATSDR - The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) - how vulnerable to disaster is your neighbourhood ?? resilience of communities when confronted by external stresses on human health, stresses such as natural or human-caused disasters, or disease outbreaks.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273099 - 11/30/14 03:07 PM
Re: Estimating risk / Regional Hazard Mitigation
[Re: Bingley]
|
Geezer
Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5357
Loc: SOCAL
|
Thank the folks at the Dogpile.  My part was fairly simple. Search engines are really amazing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273100 - 11/30/14 03:41 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Ian]
|
Veteran
Registered: 08/16/02
Posts: 1205
Loc: Germany
|
I would like to add a caveat to the matrix style of assessment.
The methodology fails with high consequence hazards in low likelihood occurrence areas
If a risk is seen as life threatening it should always be graded as high (16 in the example above) if it can happen, whatever the chance of occurrence.
I cannot countenance risk assessing something that can kill without putting into place any and all accommodations that will reduce that risk level. The method also works in this case. This risk assessment method helps you to assign limited resources to address risks in the most efficient way or assess the impact of changes. The method requires boundary conditions and some experience. If you have high consequence hazards, you take measures to lower the odds of occurrence to an acceptable level. The method also gets a little warped when defining the consequence levels. A loss rate that may be considered excellent in a military assault may not be suitable to make the parents of a boy scout group happy.
_________________________
If it isn´t broken, it doesn´t have enough features yet.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273101 - 11/30/14 05:48 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: M_a_x]
|
Geezer in Chief
Geezer
Registered: 08/26/06
Posts: 7705
Loc: southern Cal
|
Rational risk assessment is very interesting, but can anyone cite a real life instance where it made a difference?
_________________________
Geezer in Chief
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273104 - 11/30/14 08:00 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Veteran
Registered: 10/14/08
Posts: 1517
|
Where do I begin!
I use it constantly, but it is to ensure that I am aware of all the possible risks, and that I make the proper preparations. How many times it may have prevented a catastrophic incident it is impossible to tell, because I was prepared and avoided or mitigated it.
It also has helped in many instance in determining what the plan will actually be, such as which route to take (or avoid), whether the objective of the trip is even achievable or worth the potential risk. It aids in making good decisions.
I guarantee that almost all of you do it without even thinking about it every day, especially someone who spends as much time in the out doors as you, Hikermor. You have done it so much, and have so much experience at the activities you participate in, that you do it automatically. It becomes good judgment, or wisdom, or intuition. But people have to start somewhere, and going through the process is good training for the less experienced. The process is required, and must be elaborated on and thoroughly briefed, in certain career fields.
In some work, risk assessments are more about exploring the risks in order to mitigate them when you must do the most dangerous types of jobs. In search and rescue, the military, law enforcement, fire fighting, and some others you explore the risks that you know you will face and include them in your plan. It is the job of some to go directly into the risks. A good risk assessment means that everyone is aware and prepared for the worst case.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273105 - 11/30/14 08:18 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: hikermor]
|
Veteran
Registered: 02/27/08
Posts: 1579
|
Rational risk assessment is very interesting, but can anyone cite a real life instance where it made a difference? Some people start AND END their prep with tons of guns and ammo. There are always these marauding gangs of cannibals, right? That's why you need to carry three different types of guns and 500 rounds of ammo when you bug out on foot. So I'd like to think persuading to do otherwise is a difference that rational risk assessment can make. Maybe someone can tell us how to do irrational risk assessment?
Edited by Bingley (11/30/14 08:19 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273106 - 11/30/14 08:31 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Geezer in Chief
Geezer
Registered: 08/26/06
Posts: 7705
Loc: southern Cal
|
I think you've nailed it. For most situations, firearms are not particularly critical. In my experience, they are not very effective signalling devices. But they do give one a false sense of security.
_________________________
Geezer in Chief
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273107 - 12/01/14 12:05 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: hikermor]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 11/09/06
Posts: 870
Loc: wellington, fl
|
Or, you can choose to assume death, and work backward to assess your risk from leading causes: NIH leading causes of death unintended incident death and suicide are much more common than homicide, suggesting that getting the guns out of the house might be the statistically wiser course.
_________________________
Dance like you have never been hurt, work like no one is watching,love like you don't need the money.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273108 - 12/01/14 02:03 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: hikermor]
|
Sheriff
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/03/09
Posts: 3837
Loc: USA
|
Rational risk assessment is very interesting, but can anyone cite a real life instance where it made a difference? I am a network security engineer, formerly a consultant and currently a sales engineer. For various reasons I can't be very specific, but there are occasions where my consulting clients used a rational risk assessment to avoid risks that could have been extremely injurious to their business and in at least one case probably saved lives. As a sales engineer I have helped customers in similar ways. In the case of my wife, she was taking the emergency kit I built for her out of her car to save room for a Girl Scout camping trip she was leading. I prevailed upon her to keep it in the car...and she used the flashlight, first aid kit, matches, and multitool (that she told me about). It made a big difference for the Girl Scouts.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273111 - 12/01/14 04:44 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Ian]
|
Veteran
Registered: 08/31/11
Posts: 1233
Loc: Alaska
|
I would like to add a caveat to the matrix style of assessment.
The methodology fails with high consequence hazards in low likelihood occurrence areas
If a risk is seen as life threatening it should always be graded as high (16 in the example above) if it can happen, whatever the chance of occurrence.
I cannot countenance risk assessing something that can kill without putting into place any and all accommodations that will reduce that risk level.
There is an extremely small, but still finite risk that you could be hit in the head and killed by a small meteorite. Years ago a woman in Alabama was injured by a meteorite after it came through the roof of her house. (See Sylacauga Meteorite.) Since you believe in taking "any and all accomodations" to reduce risk, I assume you have installed a steel plate in your roof, and wear a balistic helmet at all times when you are out of doors?
Edited by AKSAR (12/01/14 04:47 AM)
_________________________
"Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more."
-Dorothy, in The Wizard of Oz
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273112 - 12/01/14 09:06 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Member
Registered: 05/15/07
Posts: 198
Loc: Scotland
|
So, AKSAR you fell into the trap. Congratulations.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273113 - 12/01/14 02:41 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: hikermor]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 04/08/02
Posts: 1821
|
Rational risk assessment is very interesting, but can anyone cite a real life instance where it made a difference? Very wide questions, which can be applied in a lot of things. Examples: Firefighter hears a person trapped in a house fire. Decision is made to breach a wall using a chainsaw. Do you take the time to strap on your chainsaw chaps. If you do you are safer, but the time delay means that person might be dead when you reach him. Result: Person was saved, but the firefighter slipped and the chainsaw damaged his leg permenantly. But anothter example could be drive or not to drive in bad wheather or anything else. Risk assesments is a very inaccurate tool and there can be many pro's and con's to do or not to do something.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273115 - 12/01/14 04:17 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Tjin]
|
Veteran
Registered: 08/31/11
Posts: 1233
Loc: Alaska
|
Assessing risk is really only part of the question. One also needs to consider the other side of the equation. We can choose to accept the risk if the potential reward is large enough. On the other hand, if we take steps to mitigate the risk, we may forgo the reward. Tjin's firefighter example illustrates this.
We can never eliminate all risk, but we can be thoughtful about how much risk we accept, and in what circumstances. SAR teams will often accept a somewhat higher risk if there is a chance of saving a life. If it is known in advance to be a body recovery mission, the level of acceptable risk is much lower.
USCG helicopter crews use a formal "GAR" (Geen, Amber, Red) risk assessment before launching a mission. A color (with associated number) is assigned each of several factors (weather, crew fatigue, etc). If the resulting score is within limits, they will launch. If the score is higher, they require approval from higher in the chain of command before launching. This doesn't eliminate risk, but it forces them to clearly think through and justify the risks before a mission. It reduces the tendency for highly motivated crews to take impulsive (but I'll advised) actions.
_________________________
"Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more."
-Dorothy, in The Wizard of Oz
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273116 - 12/01/14 04:29 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Veteran
Registered: 09/17/07
Posts: 1219
Loc: here
|
To add a couple of unnecessary cents to the discussion: We run a checklist just about every time we have to make anything other than an ordinary decision (should I get a drink of water or orange juice?). About the only purpose I would see for a chart, decision matrix, or whatever would be to study it so that you have something available in your mind that you can use or will subconsciously use when the moment arises.
_________________________
"Its not a matter of being ready as it is being prepared" -- B. E. J. Taylor
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273117 - 12/01/14 05:17 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: hikermor]
|
Veteran
Registered: 08/16/02
Posts: 1205
Loc: Germany
|
We use the formalized method for project management. It works very well there as it helps to keep an eye on relevant risks and periodical assessment helps to detect negative development while there still is time to react. It helps to justify expenses and goals are achieved more easily.
Consequences and probabilities may shift over time. A formalized method and documentation helps to keep track of that. My preparation got better and cheaper by using risk assessment.
_________________________
If it isn´t broken, it doesn´t have enough features yet.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273121 - 12/02/14 08:28 PM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: hikermor]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 05/29/10
Posts: 863
Loc: Southern California
|
Rational risk assessment is very interesting, but can anyone cite a real life instance where it made a difference? Look up the history of FMECA (Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis). Everything that has been cited here is an example of it. Like most preventative practices, it's not so much a history of successes, but of failures that either didn't happen or had minimal effect on the system. As an example; My own disaster planning FMECA: Probability of occurence:Wildfire (moderate) Flood (low) Earthquake (moderate) Crime (low) Aviation accidents (low) Ground vehice accidents (low) Loss of utilities (moderate) Severity of occurence:Wildfire (high) Flood (low) Earthquake (moderate: based on shake damage maps, building construction, and local geology) Crime (moderate. Mostly vehicle theft/burglaries) Aviation accidents (low) Ground vehicle accidents (low) Loss of utilties (moderate) Hazard (risk)index is a combination of Probability of Occurence and Severity of Occurence and determines where I allocate my resources (time, money, space, etc.). Wildfire (high) Flood (low) Earthquake (moderate high) Crime (moderate) Aviation accidents (low) Ground vehice accidents (low) Loss of utilities (moderate high) As you can see above, Wildfire is my primary concern, followed by earthquake and loss of utilities, and crime bringing up the back. If I lived out in the Cochella Valley or the Bay Area (Earthquakes), Oakland (Crime), or Mission Valley (Flooding) this would obviously change.
_________________________
Hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#273126 - 12/03/14 09:13 AM
Re: Estimating risk
[Re: Bingley]
|
Member
Registered: 05/15/07
Posts: 198
Loc: Scotland
|
I live in the Thames Valley area of the UK. Here is the Local Resilience Forum (LRF) risk register. The layout, glossary and some of the detail may be of use to you. TVLRF Risk RegisterMy input was in the area of loss of fuel supply (H36 & H31) Every area of the UK has similar.
Edited by Ian (12/03/14 09:15 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
543
Guests and
42
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
