incorporating resilience into business continuity and emergency management for the petroleum and...

National University of Singapore

Master of Science

Safety, Health & Environmental Technology

SH5203

Emergency Planning

Assignment 1: Literature Review

Incorporating Resilience into Business Continuity and

Emergency Management for the Petroleum and Process

Industry

by

Yeo Pu Zhong Oliver (A0042338L)

SH5203 Emergency Planning

Assignment 1

1

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 2

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 3

DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 4

CURRENT TRENDS ................................................................................................................ 5

CURRENT RESEARCH EFFORTS ......................................................................................... 6

FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS ................................................................................................ 9

CONCLUDING REMARKS ..................................................................................................... 9

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 10

Word Count (excluding Executive Summary): 2546 words.


Assignment 1

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This essay attempts to summarise current research efforts on the topic of resilience as it

relates to Business Continuity Management (BCM), Emergency Management (EM) and

Disaster Recovery (DR) in the petroleum and process industries.

The main challenges facing risk managers today are the increasingly complex operations,

new technologies and limited resources dedicated to BCM, EM and DR. These processes are

gradually being integrated into a single process, given that they are highly inter-dependent.

The concept of resilience has recently been proposed as a unifying factor in these processes;

however, there is insufficient academic progress to support and encourage widespread

adoption of the concept.

Several new ideas proposed in recent years seem promising in advancing the field of

resilience. Practitioners of resilience engineering (RE) have developed qualitative, semi-

quantitative and fully-quantitative methods for measuring organisational or process

resilience.

The paradigm shift introduced by RE includes core principles such as anticipation, awareness

and flexibility; established risk management strategies based on hindsight can be

complemented with foresight-based strategies to improve organisational resilience.


Assignment 1

3

INTRODUCTION

The petroleum and process industry is an essential part of the modern industrial era. It

provides the world with fuel and hydrocarbon-based products, and produces the feedstock for

many synthetic chemicals necessary for sustaining our civilisation.

There are inherently high risks associated with the industry. Huge inventories of hazardous

material can be released into the environment in the event of a mishap, often resulting in

disastrous consequences. The daily operation of a facility (be it an offshore drilling rig, a

refinery, or a petrochemical plant) requires many components to function at a satisfactory

level. These components can be independent, interconnected or interdependent; the resulting

system is a highly complex one with many uncertain parameters.

In addition to that, the industry faces many challenges in these times of increasing cost

pressures and diminishing margins; new technologies are constantly being explored and

implemented so as to improve the efficiencies of the equipment and productivities of the

workforce. This is especially true due to advances in Information and Communication

Technology (ICT). New work processes are being developed in the workplace to take

advantage of the capabilities of new ICT tools.

Being the pioneer and leader in the application of process management systems (PMS) and

safety management systems (SMS), there is a need for the industry to review its approach to

these management tools through cross-disciplinary perspectives. Business continuity

management (BCM) has been an established management tool in the Information Technology

(IT) sector; however, the domain for BCM remains in the IT group for many organisations

(Gibb, et al., 2006).

Intimately linked to BCM is Emergency Management (EM) and Disaster Recovery Plan

(DRP), which deal with separate time horizons in the event of an unplanned mishap. Several

researchers have proposed an integrated BCM, EM and DR framework (Sin, et al., 2013;

Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015; Zhang, et al., 2013) in an effort to streamline these processes and

facilitate sharing of resources.

The concept of resilience has been proposed as an important characteristic of a high-risk,

complex, dynamic and unstable system (Azadeh, et al., 2014; Costella, et al., 2009; Dinh, et

al., 2012; Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015; Tveiten, et al., 2012; Sin, et al., 2013; Huber, et al.,

2009; Shirali, et al., 2012). Resilience has been studied for many years in non-chemical

disciplines, such as biology, psychology, organisational science, computer science, and

ecology. In industrial processes, the concept remained relatively undeveloped (Dinh, et al.,

2012).

This essay attempts to summarise current research efforts on the topic of resilience as it

relates to BCM, EM and DR in the petroleum and process industries. It comprises of five

chapters: Introduction, Definitions, Current Trends, Current Research Efforts, and Future

Research Areas.


Assignment 1

4

DEFINITIONS

Business Continuity

Business continuity of an organisation refers to its ability to continue delivery of products or

services at a predefined level in the aftermath of a disruptive event (ISO 22301:2012).

Business Continuity Management (BCM) or Business Continuity Planning (BCP) are used to

refer to a process which identifies potential threats/risks and their impacts to business and

provides a framework for organisational resilience (ISO 22301:2012).

The objective of a business continuity plan is to resume disrupted Critical Operations (COs)

of an organization to the predefined operating levels as quickly and efficiently as possible

(Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015).

Emergency Management

Emergency Management (EM), or Emergency Planning, refers to a set of measures

(technical, operational and organisational) that are planned to be implemented under the

management of the emergency organisation in case hazardous or accidental situations occur,

in order to protect human and environmental resources and assets (NORSOK Standard Z-

013).

The objectives of an emergency plan are to contain and control incidents, to safeguard

employees and anyone nearby who might be affected, and to minimise damage to property or

the environment (Ramsay, 1999).

Disaster Recovery

The objective of a Disaster Recovery (DR) Plan is to restore all disrupted operations to their

normal operating levels following any disruptive events (Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015).

Resilience

The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) provided a

broad definition of resilience as relevant to the topic of Disaster Risk Management (DRM):

The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist,

absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely

and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its

essential basic structures and functions (UNISAR, 20009).

In the context of BCM and EM for an organisation, resilience is a measure of its ability to

keep, or recover quickly to, a stable state, allowing it to continue operations during and after

a major mishap or in the presence of continuous significant stresses (Wreathall, 2006).

Resilience Engineering

Resilience Engineering (RE) refers to the field in engineering which focus on developing

inherent capacity within a system to cope with complex and unpredicted events (Shirali, et

al., 2011). It focuses on modelling and development of decision-support tools for the

practitioners (Robert, et al., 2013).


Assignment 1

5

CURRENT TRENDS

BCP and DRP

The consequences of poor BC and DR planning are loss of reputation, loss of market share,

customer service failure, business process failure, regulatory liability and increased

restoration time (Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015). This highlights the importance of having a robust

process for BC and DR planning, and points to incorporating the overall emergency

management process into a continuous improvement cycle using hazard and risk management

process (Tveiten, et al., 2012).

Sahebjamnia (2015) highlighted a concern that BCP and DRP are conducted separately and

for different time horizons within organisations. Indeed, efforts are put in to develop an

integrated framework for these management tools under a single umbrella which is risk

management (Sin, et al., 2013; Zhang, et al., 2013; Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015). The

researchers argue that BCP, DRP and EM are interlinked with each other; merging the

planners into a single group will synergise the process and improve resource allocation.

Integrated Operations (IO)

Tveiten (2012) described a series of changes that are happening on the Norwegian continental

shelf (NCS) offshore drilling industry. One of the significant developments as a result of

advances in ICT is the adoption of Integrated Operations (IO). IO broadly refers to new work

processes facilitated by digital infrastructure and information technology which allows multi-

discipline collaboration in the operation of a facility. These work processes heavily involve

the use of data transfer between onshore support centres and offshore installations such as

video conference, real-time well monitoring, 3-D visualization, etc. Personnel can be shifted

onshore to support multiple offshore installations, improving efficiency and productivity of

the operations.

Distributed Actors

A direct consequence of IO is that in the event of an emergency, there is an increased number

of actors who are spread out geographically and have to work together to handle the

emergency situation (Tveiten, et al., 2012). It is critical to control the flow of information and

ensure that each actor has access to real-time data seamlessly. Paradoxically, even as process

adopts new ICT tools, there is a lack of use of these tools in the EM process (Tveiten, et al.,

2012).

Challenges in Incorporating Resilience

It is difficult to incorporate resilience into the process industry due to the fact that the theory

of resilience is still only conceptual (Dinh, et al., 2012). There is a need to identify basic

principles and contributing factors of resilience.

A related issue is that there is no established method of assessing resilience quantitatively.

This makes it difficult for risk managers to justify adoption of resilience principles and

incorporate the concept into their existing management systems.

The introduction of new technology creates new causes of failure. The managers of

organisational risk have to recognise that relying on hindsight cannot adequate address these


Assignment 1

6

new sources of risk; anticipation and foresight must become the new paradigm shift in risk

management and emergency planning (Shirali, et al., 2012; Tveiten, et al., 2012). A cyclical

process of reviewing and revising the BCM, EM and DR plans to account for these

technological changes is not widely practised.

CURRENT RESEARCH EFFORTS

Concept of Resilience

The concept of resilience is developed separately in multiple disciplines (such as sociology,

ecology, economics, etc.); there is no definitive consensus on the application of resilience

(MacAskill, et al., 2014). The definition of resilience depends on the application and

quantification approaches of the researchers (Dinh, et al., 2012). Resilience can be used to

describe an outcome, a state, a systems property, a physical property, a process, etc. It can

mean to return to the same state or the ability to transit between multiple states. Yet, vague as

it is, this diversity should be embraced (MacAskill, et al., 2014). MacAskill & Guthrie

proposed a conceptual framework to develop cross-disciplinary understanding of resilience in

Disaster Risk Management (DRM).

Figure 1 Conceptual framework for helping safety practitioners think about resilience (MacAskill, et

al., 2014)

This framework is useful for the petroleum and process industries as well. The context and

application of resilience change when different systems are being considered. For example,

the resilience of a chemical process plant can encompass a wide scale, from the safety

management system (SMS), the operational controls and procedures and the overall plant

design, down to individual equipment and components. The time horizon being considered

can include pre-disaster (prevention), during the disruptive event (mitigation and emergency

response) and post-disaster (recovery). Societal consideration, in this case, can refer to the

human factors of an emergency handling situation (Gomes, et al., 2014), and perhaps even

the resilience (emergency preparedness) of the surrounding communities (MacAskill, et al.,

2014).

Principles of Resilience

Several researchers have devoted efforts to identify the principles of resilience. There is no

consensus among current practitioners; each academic adopt a set of terminologies to define

his or her model (Costella, et al., 2009). Azadeh et al. (2014) summarized a list of principles

and prioritised them using the fuzzy cognitive mapping technique. This is a semi-quantitative

Resilience

Context

Scale Chrono Societal

Application

Perspective Object


Assignment 1

7

method which helps practitioners assign priority and weight to RE factors. The result of the

study is presented in the figure below.

Figure 2 Principles of resilience engineering (RE) (Azadeh, et al., 2014)

Dinh et al. (2012) proposed a separate set of principles that are applicable to the process

industries. They cited contributing factors of resilience as Design, Detection Potential,

Emergency Response Plan, Human Factor and Safety Management.

Measuring Resilience

Costella et al. (2009) applied the process of auditing to assess the resilience of an

organisation. They make use of three approaches to auditing: structural, operational, and

performance. Structural auditing ensures that the documents in the HSE management system

(MS) are adequate and current. Operational auditing verifies that the procedures as

documented in the HSE MS are put into practice through interviews and observation of staff.

Performance auditing relies on the analysis of performance indicators to evaluate the progress

of the organisation. The advantage of this approach is that it can be easily aligned with

OHSAS 18001, given that resilience and safety management share many principles and

factors (Costella, et al., 2009).

Shirali et al. (2012) adopted a similar approach in their measurement of resilience. They

conducted surveys through direct observations and interviews, and concluded that the main

challenges of implementing RE into the process industry could be classified into nine

categories: lack of explicit experience about RE, intangibility of RE, choosing production

over safety, lack of reporting systems, religious beliefs, out-of-date procedures and

manuals, poor feedback loop, and economic constraints.

Another qualitative approach involves the use of a micro-incident analysis framework, which

was used to assess the resilience of a management system for a nuclear power plant (Gomes,

et al., 2014). This type of cognitive task analysis (CTA) technique helps to provide insights

into the cognitive aspect of an emergency handling situation and identify team coordination

and crisis management patterns (Gomes, et al., 2014).

A semi-quantitative approach, which is tightly linked to the auditing process, is the use of

performance indicators. Huber et al. (2009) proposed a framework to aid in the development

of indicators through a cyclical process. The steps involves: identifying resilience factors,

Most Influential

Least Influential

Prepareness

Awareness

Flexibility

Fault-tolerant

Learning culture

Reporting culture

Management commitment

Teawork

Redundancy


Assignment 1

8

proposing resilience indicators, assessing organizational resilience and finally assessing and

improving resilience indicators.

A quantitative method was proposed by Sahebjamnia et al. (2015). They defined resilience as

a function of loss of operating level after a disruptive event and the time it took for the

organisation to restore its operations to the normal level. This mathematical relation was then

used in a resource allocation model to optimize the resources required to cope with disruptive

events under an integrated framework of BC and DR. The advantages of the resource

allocation model is that it allows simultaneous development of BCP and DRP, allows

optimization of resource allocation and controls the losses of operating levels and restoration

times simultaneously. This study addressed the gap in devising decision support models for

an integrated BC and DR planning framework where other researches only focus on its

features (i.e. principles and factors).

Other quantitative methods include using experimental disturbances to assess resilience along

a known stress gradient (Slocum, et al., 2008) and using an exergy stress and strain curve to

track changes imparted onto a system (Mitchell, et al., 2006).

Distributed Actors Map

Traditionally, an emergency organisation chart is in the form of a hierarchical chart, with the

Incident Headquarters at the top and branching off into different actors in an emergency. In

the case of an offshore installation, the hierarchical approach breaks down as the number of

actors increase and becomes increasingly decentralised. A distributed actor map (figure

below) can provide a useful visualisation for all parties responding to an emergency situation

(Tveiten, et al., 2012). It can help to facilitate flow of information and create an awareness of

who should be involved and consulted in an emergency situation.

Figure 3 A distributed actor map from an emergency handling situation (Tveiten, et al., 2012)


Assignment 1

9

FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS

Conceptually, resilience and RE have reached a turning point. There appears to be consensus

among practitioners on the core principles of resilience and RE; however, there remains

varied use of terminologies. The cross-disciplinary conceptual framework proposed by

MacAskill & Guthrie (2014) has the potential to serve as the basis for future research on the

topic.

The field of RE requires more research in quantitative assessment of resilience; most of

previous academic pursuits targeted the qualitative and conceptual results. A numerical

method for assessing resilience can provide managers with a more useful tool and also instil

confidence in RE.

Future mathematical models of resilience should consider simultaneous or consecutive

multiple disruptive incidents, and also make use of uncertainty programming techniques due

to the inherent uncertainty in the models parameters (Sahebjamnia, et al., 2015).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Resilience is a relatively new concept in the petroleum and process industry. Numerous

studies have shown that it is an important characteristic of a high-risk, complex and uncertain

system. The concept of resilience is intertwined with the objectives of business continuity,

emergency management and disaster recovery; however, it is not being explicitly recognised

as such. The paradigm shift introduced by resilience engineering includes core principles

such as anticipation, awareness and flexibility; established risk management strategies based

on hindsight can be complemented with foresight-based strategies to improve organisational

resilience. Researchers have made headways in identifying principles and contributing factors

of organisational resilience; current efforts are focused on establishing semi-quantitative and

quantitative methods for assessing it.


Assignment 1

10

REFERENCES

Azadeh A. [et al.] Assessment of resilience engineering factors in high-risk environments by fuzzy

cogitive maps: A petrochemical plant [Journal] // Safety Science. - 2014. - pp. 99-107.

Costella M.F., Saurin T.A. and de Macedo Guimares L.B. A method for assessing health and safety

management systems from the resilience engineering perspective [Journal] // Safety Science. -

2009. - 47. - pp. 1056-1067.

Dinh L.T.T. [et al.] Resilience engineering of industrial process: Principles and contribution factors

[Journal] // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. - 2012. - pp. 233-241.

Gibb Forbes and Buchanan Steven A framework for business continuity management [Journal] //

International Journal of Information Management. - 2006. - pp. 128-141.

Gomes Jose Orlando [et al.] Analysis of the resilience of team performance during a nuclear

emergency response exercise [Journal] // Applied Ergonomics. - 2014. - pp. 780-788.

Huber Gilbert Jacob, Gomes Jose Orlando and de Cavalho Paulo Victor Rodrigues A program to

support the construction and evaluation of resilience indicators [Journal] // Work. - 2012. - pp. 2810-

2816.

Huber Stefanie [et al.] Learning from organizational incidents: Resilience Engineering for High-Risk

Process Environments [Journal] // Process Safety Progress. - 2009. - pp. 90-95.

ISO 22301:2012 Societal security - Business continuity management systems - Requirements.

MacAskill K. and Guthrie P. Multiple interpretations of resilience in dissaster risk management

[Journal] // Procedia Economics and Finance. - 2014. - pp. 667-674.

Mitchell Susan M. and Mannan M.S. Designing Resilient Engineered Systems [Article] // Chemical

Engineering Progress. - 2006. - 102. - pp. 39-45.

NORSOK Standard Z-013 Risk and emergency preparedness analysis [Journal]. - 2001.

Ramsay Cameron G. Protecting your business: from emergency planning to crisis management

[Journal] // Journal of Hazardous Materials. - 1999. - pp. 131-149.

Robert B. and Hmond Y. Organizational resilience: A multidisciplinary sociotechnical challenge

[Book Section] // Resilience and Urban Risk Management / book auth. Serre, Barroca and Laganier. -

London : Taylor & Francis Group, 2013.

Sahebjamnia N., Torabi S.A. and Mansouri S.A. Integrated business continuity and disaster recovery

planning: Towards organizational resilience [Journal] // European Journal of Operational Research. -

2015. - pp. 261-273.

Shirali G.H.A. [et al.] Assessing Resilience Engineering Based on Safety Culture and Managerial

Factors [Journal] // Process Safety Progress. - 2011. - pp. 17-18.

Shirali G.H.A. [et al.] Challenges in building resilience engineering (RE) and adaptive capactiy: A field

study in a chemical plant [Journal] // Process Safety and Environmental Protection. - 2012. - pp. 83-

90.


Assignment 1

11

Sin Ivan and Ng Keith The evolving building blocks of enterprise resilience: Ensnaring the interplays

to take the helm [Journal] // Journal of Applied Business and Management Studies. - 2013. - pp. 1-

12.

Slocum Mattew G. and Mendelssohn Irving A. Use of experimental disturbances to assess resilience

along a known stress gradient [Journal] // Ecological Indicators. - 2008. - pp. 181-190.

Tveiten Camilla Knudsen [et al.] Building resilience into emergency management [Journal] // Safety

Science. - 2012. - 50. - pp. 1960-1966.

UNISAR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction [Book]. - Geneva : United Nations, 20009.

Wreathall J. Properties of resilient organizations: an initial view. [Book Section] // Resilience

Engineering: Concepts and Precepts / book auth. Hollnagel E. and Woods D.' Leveson,N.. - London :

Ashgate, 2006.

Zhang X. and McMurray A. Embedding business continuity and disaster recovery within risk

management [Journal] // World Journal of Social Science. - 2013. - pp. 61-70.