Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The ISM Code, in force since 2002, has been described as a paper tiger,
toothless and super bureaucratic. Others suggest that it has contributed to a
reduction in casualties at sea.
Word Count
2102
Submitted by
Dominik Muller-Tolk
National Maritime College of Ireland
April 2015
Contents
Introduction.......................................................................................2
The ISM Code.....................................................................................2
Safety Management Systems............................................................3
Checklists...........................................................................................4
Standard Operating Procedures.........................................................5
Company Attitude to ISM...................................................................6
Conclusion.........................................................................................6
References.........................................................................................8
Appendix............................................................................................9
~1~
Introduction
The ISM code was adopted into SOLAS in 1998 in response to the
sinking of the Herald of Free Enterprise. It was intended to bring
about a fundamental change in seafarers attitudes towards safety
and pollution prevention. By 2002 almost all internationally trading
ships were required to be compliant. 13 years on and there are
widely ranging views on the code and how it has changed the
industry. Some have described the code as a paper tiger, toothless
and super bureaucratic, others suggest that it has contributed to a
reduction in casualties at sea. I think that, in a sense, both are true.
The principle of ISM has the potential to revolutionize safety at sea,
however the resulting Safety Management Systems (SMS),
implemented by companies, are often totally missing the point and
giving rise to the aforementioned paper tiger. It is sad to think that a
system with as much potential as ISM has been violated to such a
degree that, in my opinion, it is only a matter of time before we
witness the total constructive loss of a vessel, as a direct result of
the on board Safety Management System. This report aims to
consider what I feel are some of the main issues with the manner in
which ISM is currently implemented.
~2~
~3~
~4~
Checklists
I am not suggesting, by any means, that checklists are a bad thing.
They are used extensively in the airline industry, and increasingly in
the medical profession, to great effect. A study published in the New
England Journal of Medicine showed that the use of a simple
checklist (appendix 1) during surgery could reduce mortality rates
by up to 50%. (Haynes, 2009) There are several important things to
note about this checklist; which in my experience, are often not the
case in shipboard checklists.
Every point on the checklist is critical and appropriate to the
operation and must be carried out every time.
Points are laid out in a logical sequence in the order in which
they will be carried out in the theater.
It is short and to the point, serving to draw a competent
surgeons attention to critical points s/he may have missed. It
is not an idiots guide to surgery.
Such a checklist is inviting to use as it is clearly intended to assist
the person using it. In fact it could be referred to as an aid de
memoirs rather than a checklist in the traditional sense. Critically,
there is nothing to be lost in using such a checklist. It cannot be
used as a stick to beat you with later on, and still allows for the use
of professional judgment.
In contrast, many of the checklists I have encountered at sea are far
more, an idiots guide than an aid de memoirs. They contain an
endless list of points to be covered encompassing every possible
eventuality; the completion of each point is indicated by a tick.
Many companies operate a policy where every point must be
ticked when completing the checklist. Even when this is not the
case every point must at least be read to ensure that nothing
important is left un-ticked. This does not sound unreasonable until
one is doing the reading and ticking for the Nth time, at which
point it feels totally pointless and stupid. Most people do not enjoy
tasks they consider pointless and stupid and are apt at finding ways
around them. What results is a tick the box attitude, which may lead
to a very tidy paper trail that looks great to auditors and inspectors,
but it has completely failed in its practical objectives on board ship.
Another problem with the inappropriate use of checklists is the
potential for hindering/removing a persons professional judgment.
~5~
~6~
~7~
Conclusion
I feel that ISM was a much-needed system with commendable
targets. I do not feel that the manner, in which companies have
chosen to implement ISM, in producing their SMS, has been very
conducive to achieving those targets. The manner in which SOPs
and checklists are used, to mitigate risk, itself risks reducing rather
than increasing standards of seamanship and therein causing a
whole new range of potential accidents. In this regard I feel that the
shipping industry is guilty of trying to re-invent the wheel. Many of
the problems we face today have already been faced and overcome
by the aeronautical and medical professions and by the fire service
and we should take the opportunity to learn from their mistakes.
Otherwise I suspect it is only a matter of time before we, like the
airline industry, find an increasing number of accidents caused by
our own Safety Management Systems.
~8~
References
~9~
Appendix
~ 10 ~