【正文】 正常的，由于工業(yè)過程可能產(chǎn)生災(zāi)難性的后果，因此除了對人的傷害，對工廠的傷害和利潤的損失也是損失預(yù)防的主要方面。例如，它更強調(diào)在事故發(fā)生之前發(fā)現(xiàn)危險源并采取行動。s visible and hidden values are some issues that are now under intensive study. 3 損失預(yù)防是一個 在工業(yè)進(jìn)程中危險源控制的過程中經(jīng)常被提到的一個概念 。切爾諾貝利時間發(fā)生以后，這個名字也隨之被公眾所知道。組織概念的錯誤與有些組織比其他組織表現(xiàn)安全的事實是相一致的。 Groeneweg 已經(jīng)通過把典型的進(jìn)行錯誤分類改進(jìn)了里森的模型。外部的生活環(huán)境和人們的行為僅僅是意外事件發(fā)生的觸發(fā)因素。里森提出了一個綜合的事故原因模型，闡明了組織概念上的錯誤。一些在改變員工行為和態(tài)度成功的方法已經(jīng)被報道。 許多研究表明了 傳統(tǒng)的宣傳方式，例如活動，海報 和安全標(biāo)語， 很少能夠增加人們對于安全準(zhǔn)則的使用 。 由于對于造成事故發(fā)生根本因素的調(diào)查 被認(rèn)為是不必要的或 者是所花費的成本太高 ， 造成人們對于事故如何發(fā)生 的 關(guān)注較少 。第一種模型建立在 1919年 來源于軍工廠的統(tǒng)計檢查 。如今，這種模式已經(jīng)成為在工作中檢驗人的 錯誤的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之一。一個人出現(xiàn)的錯誤可能是有意的或者是無意的。他的結(jié)論是像不安全行為、不安全情況是一些錯誤的組織管理系統(tǒng)導(dǎo)致事故的征兆。在大多數(shù)情況下，一件事故的發(fā)生主要有兩個原因：人類的行為和物理或者社會環(huán)境。在 20 世紀(jì)開始的時候，人們開始相信差的物理條件是事故發(fā)生的根源。所有現(xiàn)代理論都是基于試圖解釋事件發(fā)生、發(fā)展過程和最終引起損失的事故致因理論。在制定預(yù)防性計劃時，了解為什么、怎樣做和其他意外事故的發(fā)展是十分重要的。1 Unit 1 Safety Management Systems 安全管理體系 Causation Models The most important aim of safety management is to maintain and promote workers39。 health and safety at work. Understanding why and how accidents and other unwanted events develop is important when preventive activities are planned. Accident theories aim to c larify the accident phenomena， and to explain the mechanisms that lead to accidents. All modem theories are based on accident causation models which try to explain the sequence of events that finally produce the loss. In ancient times, accidents were seen as an act of God and very little could be done to prevent them. In the beginning of the 20th century， it was believed that the poor physical conditions are the root causes of accidents. Safety practitioners concentrated on improving machine guarding, housekeeping and inspections. In most cases an accident is the result of two things ： The human act, and the condition of the physical or social environment. 安全管理系統(tǒng)最重要的目的是維護(hù)和促進(jìn)工人們在工作時的健康 和安全。事故致因理論旨在闡明事故現(xiàn)象，和解釋事故的機理。在古老的時期，事故被看做是上帝的行為并且?guī)缀鯖]有預(yù)防的方法去阻止他們。安全從業(yè)人員集中注意力在提高機器監(jiān)護(hù)、維護(hù)和清理上。 Petersen extended the causation theory from the individual acts and local conditions to the management system. He concluded that unsafe acts, unsafe conditions， and accidents are all symptoms of something wrong in the anizational management system. Furthermore, he stated that it is the top management who is responsible for building up such a system that can effectively control the hazards associated to the anization’s operation. The errors done by a single person can be intentional or unintentional. Rasmussen and Jensen hav e presented a threelevel skillruleknowledge model for describing the origins of the different types of human errors. Nowadays， this model is one of the standard methods in the examination of human errors at work. 彼得森根據(jù)管理體系中個人的行為結(jié)合 當(dāng)?shù)氐沫h(huán)境擴充了 事故致因理論。另外，他指出，高層管理人員負(fù)責(zé)建立一個能夠有效控制危險源有關(guān)組織。拉 斯姆森和杰森已經(jīng)提出了三個層次的技能規(guī)則知識模型來描述不同種類的人錯誤的起源。 Accidentproneness models suggest that some people are more likely to suffer anaccident than others. The first model was created in 1919， based on statistical examinations in a mumilions factory. This model dominated the safety thinking and research for almost 50 years, and it is still used in some anizations. As a result of this thinking, accident was blamed solely on employees rather than the work process or poor management practices. Since investigations to discover the underlying causal factors were felt unnecessary and/or too costly, 2 a little attention was paid to how accidents actually happened. Employees’ attitudes towards risks and risk taking have been studied, e. g. by SulzerAzaroff. According to her, employees often behave unsafely, even when they are fully aware of the risks involved. Many research results also show that the traditional promotion methods like campaigns, posters and safety slogans have seldom increased the use of safe work practices. When backed up by other activities such as training, these measures have been somewhat more effective. Experiences on some successful methods to change employee behavior and attitudes have been reported. One wellknown method is a smallgroup process used for improving housekeeping in industrial workplaces. A prehensive model of accident causation has been presented by Reason who introduced the concept of anizational error. He stated that corporate culture is the startingpoint of the accident sequence. Local conditions and human behavior are only contributing factors in the buildup of the undesired event. The latent anizational failures lead to accidents and incidents when perating system’s defenses and barriers. Gmoeneweg has developed Reason’s model by classifying the typical latent error types. His TRIPOD mode! calls the different errors as General Failure Types ( CFTs). The concept of anizational error is in conjunction with the fact that some anizations behave more safely than others. It is often said that these anizations have good safety culture. After the Chernobyl accident， this term became wellknown also to the public. 事故的傾向性模型表示有些人比其他人更容易引起事故。這種模式 占據(jù)了人 們 在安全思考和研究的時間 將近 50 年，并且仍然被一些組織使用，這種思維所造成的結(jié)果是，發(fā)生事故的責(zé)任僅僅 在于員工而不是工作過程和 較差 的管理實踐。祖爾策 —阿扎羅夫研究了員工 對于風(fēng)險和承擔(dān)風(fēng)險的態(tài)度 ， 研究表明，即使員工 意識到了 所涉及的風(fēng)險， 他們?nèi)匀?會有不安全的行為。當(dāng)通過訓(xùn)練去鞏固這些活動的時候，這些方法在某種程度上更加有效。一個為人所知道的方法就是一個小團體的改進(jìn)在提高工廠管理效率。他表明，企業(yè)文化就 是那個事件的出發(fā)點。 那些潛在的組織的失敗導(dǎo)致了事故和事件當(dāng)穿過系統(tǒng)的防御和越過障礙的時候。他的 TRIPO 的模型把不同的失誤稱作一般故障模型。人們常說，這些組織的表現(xiàn)出良好的安全文化。 Loss prevention is a concept that is often used in the context of hazard control in process industry. Lees has pointed out that loss prevention differs from traditional safety approach in several ways. For example, there is more emphasis on foreseeing hazards and taking actions before accidents occur. Also, there is more emphasis on a systematic rather than a trial and error approach. This is also natural, since accidents in process industry can have catastrophic consequences. Besides the injuries to people, I he damage to plant and loss of profit are major concerns in loss prevention. The future research on the ultimate ca