tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1537119231740022182.post3794560981113227304..comments2024-03-07T10:10:08.490+01:00Comments on OR at Work: On Her Majesty’s safety@ORatWorkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09446587181442453824noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1537119231740022182.post-6913220733436930652010-08-11T05:31:12.799+02:002010-08-11T05:31:12.799+02:00Genial dispatch and this enter helped me alot in m...Genial dispatch and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Thank you as your information.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1537119231740022182.post-17391479187043055212010-04-04T11:52:46.643+02:002010-04-04T11:52:46.643+02:00Thanks for your comment John. I agree with you tha...Thanks for your comment John. I agree with you that the effectiveness of a tool or model is highly depended on how it is used and by whom. However as Cox, Hubbard and others show a risk matrix is not a very well founded method of risk analysis, let alone a trustworthy guide to mitigate risks. Applying a risk matrix or any other qualitative scoring method can even add risk instead of reducing it, the primary reason for applying such a method. To my knowledge there is no publication that shows empirical evidence that risk matrices can improve decision making. It may be very useful in facilitating discussions on risk; I do think that quantitative and well founded risk analysis methods should be preferred in analysing risks and developing risk mitigation strategies. For each risk analysis method the “do no harm” principle must apply, also their use should lead to measurable risk reductions.@ORatWorkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09446587181442453824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1537119231740022182.post-9714098261629021772010-03-29T03:15:18.640+02:002010-03-29T03:15:18.640+02:00Much of the criticism in Tony Cox's paper is w...Much of the criticism in Tony Cox's paper is well founded - but the matrix like any tool can be abused by poor use.<br />First, risk is a concept - a construct which helps us get a handle on danger and opportunity. Risk does not equal, it is a function of.<br />Second, likelihood is too often seen as the likelihood of the hazard event - it must be likelihood of the consequence.<br />Third, consequence criteria (i.e. what you care about) need to be agreed.<br />Fourth, the thresholds between the levels of consequence also need to be transparently agreed.<br />The matrix is a great vehicle to facilitate such discussions - but like all vehicles, it needs to be well serviced and well driven.John Salterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13968286898791677775noreply@blogger.com