Competent People? - IADC · Competent People? How Sure are You? J. Ford Brett, P.E. CEO PetroSkills Jun 2014

®

Competent People? How Sure are You?

J. Ford Brett, P.E. CEO PetroSkills

Jun 2014

© 2013 PetroSkills, LLC. All rights reserved. 2

Influence of Individual Capacity

Pate-Cornell, Risk Analysis Vol 13, No 1993

Rarely (never?) is there one root

cause of a problem (or performance)

Individual action or lack of action

almost always (always?) caused the

problem.

From that perspective, it is attractive

to take the attitude that “if we just

had people with the right

competency then everything would

be okay.”

Not true, training is necessary

(Crticial) but not sufficient

Piper Alpha Influence Diagram as an example.


More or Less Technology?


More or Less People?



Head Count

Limiting

Factor



What about

Head

Contents?


Bottom Line

The Value of Information Approach is a

quantitative, reliable, and auditable way answer

the question: How do I know if my people are

competent?

Used in Petroleum Business since early 90’s to

design Exploration Projects

Used in Medicine to value diagnostic tests

Recently used in Medical to value ‘certification’

tests

The approach can guide a robust competency

development and assurance program


Value of Seismic – “Risk Police”


Application to Assurance in Petroleum Business


Value of Assurance: Stuck Pipe Example


Simple Sensitivity Analysis

Assessment

worth the cost

Not

worth

cost

How much does a ‘Mistake’ Cost vs the Assessment Cost?

How

accurate is

the Test? (assumed to be symmetric

for this example)

Ho

w c

om

pete

nt

are

th

e

test

takers

no

w?


Which Approach is Best? How could we

know for sure?

Knowledge Skill Behavior Variable

Cost

Fixed

Cost

Self Assessment Low Low Low Low Low

Supervisor

Assessment Med/Low Med High Med Low

Trained Coach Med/High Med Med Med Med

Review Board Med/High Med Med

Formal Exam High Low Low Low Med

Controlled

Simulation High High Med Med High

Observed

Controlled Work

Experience

Med High High Med High

Depends on Effectiveness and Cost


Competency Assurance Approaches

Approach Pros Cons

Self

Assessment

• Very Fast & Cheap

• Non Threatening

• Builds Self Responsibility

• No Confusion w/ Promotion

• Competencies NOT reliably assured

Supervisor

• Relatively Easy to Execute

• Accounts for Knowledge & Work

performance

• Relatively Non Threatening

• Added Burden on Supervisor

• Some supervisors not able to assess all

reports

• Variable Assurance across groups

Trained Coach

• Accounts for Knowledge & Work

performance

• Less biased than supervisor validation

• Consistent assurance across groups

• More costly than supervisor

• Requires trained coaches and formal

process for success

Review Board

• Consistent, Accurate Assurance

• Little Bias

• Possible to implement for experienced

personnel

• Expensive

• Requires significant Participant time to

assemble evidence

Formal Exam

• Good Assurance of Knowledge with

properly written exam

• Consistent Assurance

• Can create “pride” & professionalism

• Cheap to Conduct

• Only Assures Knowledge component

• Can be Threatening

• Difficult w/ experienced personnel

Simulation • Effectively assesses skills

• Consistent Assurance

• Can create “pride” & professionalism

• Likely expensive

• Must be designed properly to assess

required skills

Observed Work

Experience

• Assures Skill when properly done

• Improves Coaching & On-the-Job training

programs

• Links the job with development

• Not completely consistent

• Requires Coach/Supervisor time


Process: Development and Assure

Competence

Request Capability Assessment

Coaching, feedback and evaluation

Observe

Competency

Achievement

Employee & Supervisor

Review and Plan how

to close the competence

gap

Schedule

Discuss/ Observe

Additional Learning

Knowledge Assessment Self-Study, or

Training Course

Knowledge Knowledge

Achievement

Mentorship to Perform on-job

training and seasoning

1

2

3

4 5

6


Current Practices

What are the current

practices for A)

training and B)

certification of the

offshore drilling

workforce and C) are

they adequate to

assure a necessary

level of safety in the

industry? Resources Include: Formal and

Informal Courses, OJT, and Team

Exercises


Simplified types of ‘Certifiable’ training

Unique Equipment /

Company /

Operation

Specific

Not

Unique Common

Foundation for

Engineering /

Operations

Cognitive Knowledge

Affective Observable

“Well Control School”

Real time Kick

Control

BOP System

Configuration Executing this Well’s

contingency plan

Use of

Proprietary

Cement Additives

Some Drilling Examples

Exception

Reporting

Process

Situation

Awareness

Diagnosing Mud

Problems

Casing Design Theory

Wellbore Hydraulics

Executing this well’s

cement Job

Written “standard tests”

can work here

Regulatory

Requirements

Pore Pressure /

Fracture Pressure

Theory

Crew Resource

Management

Well Design (Casing/Cementing/Mud

Program etc)

Shut in Procedure

Operating

Generic Well

Control

Equipment


Process: Development and Assure Competence


Bottom Line

The Value of Information Approach is a

quantitative, reliable, and auditable way answer

the question: How do I know if my people are

competent?

Used in Petroleum Business since early 90’s to

design Exploration Projects

Used in Medicine to value diagnostic tests

Recently used in Medical to value ‘certification’

tests

The approach can guide a robust competency

development and assurance program


Documents

Competent People? - IADC · Competent People? How Sure are You? J. Ford Brett, P.E. CEO PetroSkills Jun 2014