Oil and gas companies are under increasing pressure from external parties to deliver on stated HSE commitments and performance objectives. Many of them are also being compelled to obtain HSE-related certifications (e.g., ISO 140011, OHSAS 180012, RCMS3, EMAS4). These developments and others have fueled a sharp growth in the area of independent (third-party) certification and verification activities at petroleum industry facilities. The movement towards obtaining external certifications and conducting verification activities is providing HSE managers in the industry with either 'nightmare' scenarios (more paperwork, dealing with auditors that don't understand the business, etc.) or with tremendous opportunities to improve performance and further integrate HSE into the business. Whilst this paper will not focus on the 'benefits' of obtaining external certification and/or conducting verification activities per se, most of these will become self-evident through the course of the discussion. Moreover, the paper will focus on comparing two very different approaches that are emerging in the oil and gas industry to address these developments in HSE third-party certifications. This paper will argue that one approach, the 'traditional' (quality management system) approach to HSE certification events, is fundamentally flawed because it drives organizations to focus on maintaining a body of documentation and bureaucracy, which is not consistent with the way that oil and gas companies work. This paper will then discuss an alternative approach to third-party certification thatis emerging at oil and gas industry facilities: one that focuses on evaluating and driving HSE performance. Additionally, this paper will provide a brief case study related to the HSE performance of sites that have external certifications and conduct verification activities. It will illustrate the results obtained by oil & gas operations that have adopted the alternative approach over the traditional approach.
展开▼
