Organisaation kokonaissuorituskyvyn arviointi Aila Järveläinen, 13.3.2018 aila.jarvelainen@trafi.fi Responsible traffic. Courage and co-operation.
Hallintojärjestelmä CMS + SMS CMS SMS 29.3.2018 Finnish Transport Safety Agency 2
Organisaation kokonaissuorituskyky eli Kuinka hyvin organisaatio pystyy valvomaan toimintansa jatkuvaa vaatimustenmukaisuutta ja hallitsemaan toimintaansa kohdistuvat riskit Kuinka hyvin organisaation vaatimustenmukaisuuden valvonta (CMS) ja turvallisuudenhallintajärjestelmät (SMS) toimivat Organisaation suorituskyvyn kivijalkana on, että sen dokumentaatio (toiminnankuvaus, käsikirjat, menetelmät) täyttävät vaatimukset ja soveltuvat sen toimintaan. Suorituskyvyn näkyvänä osana on se, että organisaatio toimii tämän dokumentaation mukaisesti ja on asettanut toiminnalleen tavoitteita. Kokonaissuorituskyky = tieto vaatimustenmukaisuudesta Y/N ja arvio siitä kuinka hyvin organisaation hallintojärjestelmä toimii Finnish Transport Safety Agency
KOSSU <> Riskiperusteinen toiminta & Organisaation profiili Yhtiö B Yhtiö C Tieto hallintojärjestelmän osien A suorituskyvystä (auditoinnit, poikkeuslupahakemukset, käsikirjamuutokset, raportit jne Yhtiö A Organisaatio profiili
How to assess organisation s overall performance? Assessment of customer s processes and their end results and outcomes Risk management process Internal oversight process Reporting process Continuous improvement process Performance Personnel training process Subcontracting process Emergency response process Collection Of data and information Analysis of data Decision making about actions Actions and follow-up etc. Method applies to all processes + Imporant to assess also the end results and outcomes of each process Safety Management System, Compliance, Organisational Culture, DATA 29.3.2018 Finnish Transport Safety Agency 5
End result: organisation profile Safety Management System Overall SMS s level of maturity (=practical ability to support operational safety including management of hazards that come from organisation s own operations and aviation safety programme) Suitability of processes to the operations The quality of end results of processes Compliance with organisation s documented procedures Internal oversight Management of Operational Environment (subcontracting, operations under special conditions, contingency) Management of high risk operations END RESULT Services provided by Authority are tailored to each customer s performance and risk levels: oversight, certification, safety meetings, guidance Finnish Transport Safety Agency 6
Nykyinen SMS tool Phase 2 Assesment tailored according organization s SMS-procedures described in SM Evidence & results based on safety data Finnish Transport Safety Agency
Tavoitteena tukea prosessin toimivuuden tarkastelua SAFETY RISK MANAGEMENT OR*.GEN.200(a)(3) Safety Risk Management is daily routine embedded in activities and decision making process. Reporting system to capture errors, hazards and near misses. Feedback to reporter / rest of the organization. Reactive, proactive, predictive. Safety investigations and other sources. Ongoing process. All key personnel are involved. Hazard log. Contracted organizations role. Structured process. Assessment of risk associated with identified hazards. Likelihood and severity. Criteria for the evaluation. Justification Asessor Risk control strategies. Corrective actions resulting from the risk assessment. Mitigation (and new assessment). Allocation of responsibilities. Timelines Visibility inside management. Mitigations done. Corrective actions done. Mitigations are working. Mitigations are effective. Role of the quality / compliance monitoring. 29.3.2018 Finnish Transport Safety Agency 8
PSOE definitions for individual features Present => marker can be 0 or 1, based on compliance to requirements There is evidence that the feature is clearly visible and is documented within the organization s SMS Documentation. Suitable => marker can be 0, 1 or 2, based on inspector judgement The feature is suitable based on the size, nature, complexity of the organization and the inherent risk in the activity Operating => marker can be 0, 1 or 2, based on inspector judgement There is evidence that the feature is in use and an output is being produced Effective => marker can be 0, 1 or 2, based on inspector judgement There is evidence that the feature is effectively achieving the desired outcome and has a positive safety impact 29.3.2018 Finnish Transport Safety Agency 9
Connection to organization profile for example hazard identification 1.1 EFFECTIVENESS is achieved when aviation safety hazards are being identified and reported throughout the organization. Hazards are captured in a hazard register and assessed in a systematic and timely manner. Effectiveness Not Achieved Effectiveness Achieved Signs of Excellence Excellence CAA/TRAFI REMARKS 29.3.2018 Finnish Transport Safety Agency 12
KIITOS Finnish Transport Safety Agency Kumpulantie 9, 00520 Helsinki PO Box 320, FI-00101 Helsinki, Finland Telephone +358 29 534 5000 www.trafi.fi Responsible traffic. Courage and co-operation.