Tuesday, 29 May 2007

Meeting with National Britannia / Safecontractor

So I went up to Caerphilly to meet with representatives of National Britannia (including their divisional managing director, James Ostler) to discuss the curfuffle I have created over our SafeContractor renewal.

I was actually quite impressed: National Britannia have put a lot of thought into what I have said, and took my concerns very seriously. Broadly speaking, this was the outcome of the meeting:

1. NatBrit agree that overloading people with information is counter-productive

2. Our risk assessments are very good, and do a good job of communicating information to our handymen

3. They would prefer to see more paperwork documenting the work we have done to produce those risk assessments (i.e. why we have chosen those risks not others; our process for identifying new risks, etc.)

This is also what the HSE hinted at: that the paperwork we issue to handymen is excellent, but we should have more 'back-office' paperwork to back it up.

NatBrit are going to re-audit our application and issue a revised list of additional things they'd like to see. I doubt if producing this extra paperwork will make our business any more safe, but it probably won't make it less safe (assuming, that is, that they don't ask us to issue more bumf to our handymen, just have it filed away for occasional review in the office) Once I know what new paperwork they would like to see, I will decide whether it is commercially worth the extra time and effort needed to produce it.

One question I did pose, which to their credit they did consider very carefully (and, I suspect, discussed further after I left) was this: "would you ever reject a risk assessment because it was too long-winded?". If one really does believe that over-loading people with excessive information is counter-productive, then it follows that you must reject some risk assessments for being too long. A 2,500 word document about, say, using a Stanley knife is unlikely to be an effective document and should be rejected. NatBrit didn't think they had yet rejected anything for ticking too many boxes, but maybe they will start doing that now?


林磊 said...

2016-3-2 leilei
michael kors outlet
michael kors handbags
christian louboutin outlet
air max 90
sac longchamp
cheap ugg boots
nike store
louis vuitton handbags
air jordan 8
coach factory outlet online
coach factory outlet online
adidas running shoes
ugg outlet
nike sb dunks
louis vuitton pas cher
kate spade outlet
louis vuitton handbags
michael kors handbags
ray ban sunglasses
cheap ray ban sunglasses
christian louboutin
coach outlet store online
gucci borse
fitflops sale clearance
louboutin shoes
michael kors handbags
true religion sale
ugg boots
michael kors handbags
michael kors outlet online
rolex replica watches
timberland uk
moncler jackets
longchamp outlet
instyler max
michael kors handbags
coach factory outlet
jordan retro 4
mcm handbags
adidas gazelle

Gege Dai said...

fitflops clearance
michael kors outlet online
coach outlet store
michael kors outlet
mont blanc outlet
michael kors factory outlet
adidas uk
fitflops sale
cheap soccer jerseys
cheap oakley sunglasses
cheap mlb jerseys
michael kors outlet
ray ban sunglasses
ray ban sunglasses
ugg outlet
ray-ban sunglasses
christian louboutin outlet
ugg outlet online
new balance shoes
ray ban sunglasses
toms shoes
ugg uk outlet
canada goose outlet store
tiffany jewellery
hermes outlet
beats by dre
true religion outlet
michael kors outlet
rolex watches
christian louboutin shoes
juicy couture outlet
michael kors handbags
true religion outlet
chrome hearts eyewear
longchamp outlet
longchamp handbags

Julie T. Kirwan said...