Is Reliability Equal To Safety?

My point is that if Reliability was treated EXACTLY like safety - where there is a clear policy, clear management support, clear performance metrics, clear regulation (do not get me started on enforcement here), a clear decision tree, and of course a clear path to litigation when a violation occurs - perhaps the evolution could take place faster than the 30 years we have had modern reliability techniques and methods.

What I am saying is that CEOs and Company Boards did not achieve safety out of the goodness of their hearts or from some sense of conscience. they did so out of fear of litigation. To be frank - the CEO and Company Boards are by charter - driven to maximize profit - and I am sure that early on they viewed safety compliance as a cost and a hindrance to that charter. After enough law suits the risk simply became too big to bear and like magic - safety became a standard operating context. CEOs understand TOO MUCH RISK. It became cheaper to have safety than to have violations.

If you ever had something to thank a lawyer about - that is it! (No lawyer jokes in reply please!)

I have visited and learned from hundreds of people who had made various reliability improvement journeys - and the one thing that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the have in common - is management as a barrier. It is either a barrier to achieving the performance that is possible or they are a barrier for sustaining the performance long term. The funny thing to me is that the assets we are all trying to make perform better and produce more - BELONG to the shareholders that the CEO and Board represent! They are not our assets - in fact from a shallow view - the less reliable the equipment - the more job security we have!

Shareholders currently have NO WAY to determine the devaluation of company assets based on operating and maintenance performance. They are blind as bats. It seems counterintuitive with so much investment money at stake.

Things that defeat reliability improvements are not mechanical or electrical. They are usually internal and include barriers and obstacles, competing forces, non value added work, lack of focus, lack of skills, lack of knowledge, general chaos and lack of communication. These can all be overcome - but need ongoing leadership at all levels - including the Corporate suite to succeed and sustain.

So that is why I asked added the legal to my original question.

As to the moral and ethical - the Do The Right Thing - element. I have heard it said that you can count on the CEO to do the right thing - once they have exhausted all other choices!

I am hoping that as a community - we can get them to that point sooner rather than later.

I do not expect much participation in this discussion because it is dangerous to people who are actively employed to speak up. That is fine because people speak to me off the record all the time.

I do not speak for the entire community because we are no monolithic in view or need - but I do speak for many.

Terrence O'Hanlon, CMRP
Publisher
Reliabilityweb.com
Uptime® Magazine
http://www.reliabilityweb.com
http://www.uptimemagazine.com

Networking Links
Join the Association for Maintenance Professionals
http://www.maintenance.org