From the inception of the oilfield, risk has been a part of the business. Most everyone agrees that the first oil well in the world was drilled by Colonel Edwin Drake in Pennsylvania in 1859, a whopping 21 meters in depth, which equals 68’ 10”. However, that is not the case—at least that well was not the first. That well is the first known oil well drilled in the United States, but the first oil well drilled anywhere was drilled overseas a few years earlier in an area that today is known as Southern Poland. The oil wells there were not drilled but instead were shafts dug by hand and oil was brought up by buckets. There are other documented claims of oil extraction prior to 1859 by other countries as well. The point is that since the inception of the industry, there were numerous risks. These risks have brought their share of hazards as well. So, the industry is not unfamiliar with risk.
Risk is defined as noun denoting a situation involving exposure to danger. As a verb, the word means to expose (someone or something valued) to danger, harm, or loss.
The concept of risk has numerous connotations of loss, whether it be loss of limb, health, or life. Risk can be financial as well. We as an industry are no stranger to risk. In fact, the industry has become adept at ways to mitigate risk or hazards.
Some of the most celebrated people and notable companies in our industry were risk takers. This key factor pretty much explains where we get the reputation that we have. Unfortunately, the stark reality is that for every successful risk taker, there are a great many others who did not fare nearly as well. During the past 150 years of our business, there have been leaps and bounds of progress in identifying risk, mitigating risk, or eliminating risk. There are processes that enable us to do that. Conversely, not everyone subscribes to those processes because there is a finite cost. When it comes to weighing a finite cost versus an uncalculated risk with no cost—well, this way of sizing up situations is prevalent in our industry. Some people feel that when they are comparing choices in these terms that they are thinking outside the box. When that becomes the perception, the choice usually becomes an uncalculated risk because, with the uncalculated risk, there is generally no historical evidence to weigh against it.
What is the solution to this? Does taking a risk pay off? Is it worth it? Most of us subscribe to the process of nothing ventured, nothing gained. That is not a completely flawed process. We have won wars, won Super bowls (but not the Cowboys lately), and overcome many obstacles. How much risk do we take? Does the end justify the means?
Critical thinking skills include, but are not limited to: reflection, analysis, acquisition of information, creativity, structuring arguments, decision making, commitment, debate. Just as with safety programs, there are many formulas for critical thinking out there. Critical thinking has a place in risk management. Some safety programs that have leaned heavily on critical thinking have been successful. Other safety programs bode success on paper but in practice are unsuccessful on damage control. The downfall of critical thinking is 1. There is a lack of valid information. And 2. There is not enough debate.
So, in order to have legitimate risk reduction, a focus group is recommended. Accurate information is required. It may require people with opposing views. Under normal circumstances, the decision maker often is surrounded with likeminded people, and this is not necessarily healthy. Of course, you would like to have everyone on board ultimately, but it is iron against iron that makes things strong. The key to risk reduction is accurate information. An example of a poorly run risk reduction plan can be the Covid-19 situation. Bad or incomplete information runs rampant. “Best guess” is not a plan, nor is staying with a bad plan. The best plan is derived from complete and accurate information with specific timelines and expectations. Too many cooks are in the kitchen with different visions for the soup.
Most companies tend to seek the perfect plan to eliminate risk. Make the plan flexible enough to adjust. Our industry is dynamic and always changing. Like General George S. Patton said: “A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week.” Although this sounds contradictory to my previous point, the gist is that if you take months to execute the perfect plan, you lose reaction time. So, what I am trying to say is, once the group is formed, do not make the response time too long. Scenarios change, thus making the rollout dead before you get the plan in place. It is a delicate balancing act but one that can be managed.
The larger the company, the more the process becomes bogged down. This creates a slow response time. In summation, recognize the risk, respond to the risk, evaluate the risk. Quantify the risk. Execute a plan, revisit the effectiveness, and seek improvements until a satisfactory result is accomplished. The scenarios may change, but a plan in place that can address it quickly puts you way ahead of the curve.
Avoid handling it like the government has regarding Covid-19 re: risk assessment. The information gathering process is too sloppy and convoluted. There is too much misinformation. Everyone claims to be an expert and there is no teamwork.
There is risk everywhere. How to handle risk is a question with as many potential answers as there are opinions. Design a risk reduction plan in general, and it will apply to most things you encounter. Good luck and may the force be with you. Have a great month and stay positive. We have endured hard things before.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dusty Roach is a safety professional based in Midland. He is also a public speaker on subjects of leadership and safety, and he maintains a personal website at dustyroach.com.