Risk perception tools

A risk perception tool has been used to develop an understanding of operational risk for a number of years. The US military has adopted the concept to address risk in its daily operations and activities. The model recommends that personal as well as operational risk as identified by leadership be part of the overall training in risk concepts (Operational Risk Management (ORM) Fundamentals, 2010 Operational Risk Management, Marine, 2002). 

Outcome 1. Suppose that risk perception is the main driver of a consumer s reaction to a food safety scare. This would suggest that communicating research information effectively is a powerful tool in changing behavior. That is, providing and communicating the true probabilities of being exposed to the risk (when possible) will be a useful way to respond to consumers concerns. 

Montooth (1984) stated in Public Epidemiology. The Tylenol killings claimed seven lives. .. a one-time event, over a 1-week period. The public was outraged. The pharmaceutical industry has. .. re-tooled at [a cost of almost] 225 million. Annually, 50,000 people die on our highways. About half of those deaths are preventable by inexpensive means, which are already at hand, bnt complacency prevails. Risk perceptions. .. are reactions, are not rational. ... 

To implement an effective risk assessment method, a combination of employees and leadership is the best approach to address risk perception. In turn, this enhances the education of employees in the identifying, recognizing, evaluating, and control of associated risk. Use of a standardized personal risk assessment tool builds a bridge between the differences and variations in individual risk perception. 

The use of a risk assessment tool may require a shift in the perceptions held by the leadership team on what its role is in risk management. It requires allowing employees to raise issues without fear of reprisal and with an understanding that disagreement is okay. 

Using a personal risk assessment tool reduces the gap between various perceptions of risk. 

To further increase the potential for successful introduction of the risk perception concept and tool, review... 

Recall also the lesson from Sandman (1991) and Slovic (1991) that group statistics have minimal impact on risk perception (Chapter 5). If your objective is to increase risk awareness and motivate safe behavior, the most influential evaluation tool you can use is actually anecdotal. The most moving feedback usually comes from the personal report of an injured employee. However, as illustrated in Figure 20.13, the victim might want to cover up at-risk behavior leading to an injury. The culture needs to support reporting personal injuries, as well as discussing ways to prevent future incidents. 

HAZARD RECOGNITION TOOLS, BUILDING THE FOUNDATION FOR RISK PERCEPTION... 

A fire protection strategy serves as a bridge between the company s perceptions of fire-related risks and the details of howto manage specific risks. The fire protection strategy should be considered as the tool that defines when certain protection levels are required for a facility. The fire protection strategy should attempt to define general performance requirements or controls for specific situations. Below are examples of the types of statements that could be used in the fire protection strategy. 

If we accept that the perception of risk is linked to a number of extraneous factors then how do these elements affect society s view of HIT In the main it is probably fair to assume that the public gives little regard to the safety characteristics of technology in healthcare. There is an implicit assumption that the tools we use to support care are fit for purpose, well maintained, in good working order and are operated by trained individuals. These are indeed reasonable expectations so when defects in those systems or the way they are operated introduces hazards this can be difficult to justify to the patient on whom the risk is ultimately imposed. 

Strategies to move health care toward high reliability include communication, risk acknowledgment, an emphasis on active learning, teamwork, and crew resource management. Tools include risk and process auditing, process control, reward systems, and perception of risk. 

Definitions of the levels of probability and severity used in risk assessment matrices vary greatly. This reflects the differences in the perceptions of risk that people have. Since a risk assessment matrix is a management decision tool, management personnel at the appropriate level must agree on the definitions of the terms to be used. In so doing, management establishes the levels of risk that require reduction and those that are acceptable. 

The outcome of the previous risk assessment is a qualitative match, based on perceptions, which needs to be confirmed and quantified during a subsequent process development stage. A mechanistic description of the process, as introduced in Sect. 8.1.5, can be used as a powerful tool to establish the design space with minimum need for experimentation at final scale. However, this type of description is not always readily available, and the use of a statistical approach constitutes a pragmatic alternative. The limitation of the statistical approach is its reliance on scale-dependent experimentation and the difficulty in extrapolating relationships to other scales or equipment. Selection of the most adequate approach (mechanistic or statistical) depends, therefore, on the (1) existence/reliability of the mechanistic understanding, (2) availability of material for experimentation, and (3) flexibility required on the design space. In this section, a statistical approach will be illustrated in order to quantify relationships between process parameters and product attributes the three involved steps are described in Fig. 8.22. 

Reducing or eliminating the perception that associated risk are acceptable by clearly identifying the potential severity of loss-producing events (Job Safety Analysis A Fundamental Tool for Safety, n.d.). 

---