Human Error Identification by using SHERPA: Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach Technique
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Human error can occur with every people. Understanding the mechanism of human error is important to find potential solutions to prevent them. The objective of this article was to describe how to perform SHERPA technique for identifying human error.
The SHERPA technique was firstly developed for identifying human error in nuclear industry. Nowadays, this technique has been accepted to be used widely in general industries. The main benefits of this technique are reliable and easy to learn and apply. However, some limitations of the technique are that the result does not provides quantitative probability of the human error. In addition, it might spend long time for some large and complex industries. There are eight steps of the SHERPA technique. The results can explain five types of human errors including 1) Action Errors 2) Checking Errors 3) Retrieval Errors 4) Communication Errors; and 5) Selection Errors. The results can also describe consequences, recovery, probability, criticality, and remedial strategy.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Journal of Safety and Health is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, unless otherwise stated.
References
Annett J. (2004). Hierarchical task analysis (HTA). In Handbook of human factors and ergonomics methods. (pp. 355-363). CRC Press.
Dadgar P., Tehrani G., M., & Borgheipour H. (2017). Identification and Assessment of Human Error in CNG Stations with SHERPA Technique. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 12(2), 253-265.
Embrey D. E. (1986). SHERPA: A systematic human error reduction and prediction approach. In Proceedings of the international topical meeting on advances in human factors in nuclear power systems. American Nuclear Society.
Ghiyasi S., Heidari M., Hoda A., & Azimi, L. (2018). Human error risk assessment of clinical care in emergency department with SHERPA approach and nurses safety climate analysis. Iran Occupational Health, 15(3), 129-140.
Hughes C. M., Baber C., Bienkiewicz M., Worthington A., Hazell A., & Hermsdorfer J. (2015). The application of SHERPA (Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach) in the development of compensatory cognitive rehabilitation strategies for stroke patients with left and right brain damage. Ergonomics, 58(1), 75-95.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (1999). Reducing error and influencing behavior. Health and Safety Executive (HSE). https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg48.pdf
Isaac A., Shorrock S. T., & Kirwan B. (2002). Human error in European air traffic management: the HERA project. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 75(2), 257-272.
Marshall A., Stanton N., Young M., Salmon P., Harris D., Demagalski J.,...Dekker S. (1970). Development of the human error template–a new methodology for assessing design induced errors on aircraft flight decks. ERRORPRED Final Report E.
Stanton N. A., Salmon P. M., Rafferty L. A., Walker G. H., Baber C., & Jenkins D. P. (2017). Human factors methods: a practical guide for engineering and design. CRC Press.
Tharekes L. (2020). THE ROLE OF CREW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TO AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT PREVENTION. Sripatum Chonburi Journal, 16(4), 142-151.
Vasasiri V., & Ploypanichcharoen K. (2017). Reduction of Nonconformity from Human Error in Assembly Process of Spindle Motor for Hard Disk Drive. Thai Industrial Engineering Network Journal, 3(1), 34-44.
Williams J. (1986). HEART-A Proposed Method for Assessing and Reducing Human Error in Ninth Advances in Reliability T echnology Symposium. AEA, Technology.
Winkle T. (2016). Safety benefits of automated vehicles: Extended findings from accident research for development, validation and testing. In Autonomous driving (pp. 335-364). Heidelberg.
