We run across this time and time again in aviation risk management programs: safety management teams confuse hazards and risks, and consequently also confuse risks and consequences.
To be frank, misunderstanding the difference between these three things can have far-reaching repercussions on your ability to practice risk management in your aviation safety management system (SMS).
These repercussions happen when safety management teams either:
Here are several problems we often see that commonly arise when hazards, risks, and consequences are misinterpreted:
The reason it’s so important to know the difference between hazards, risks, and consequences, and classify each item accurately as you practice risk management, is the following fact:
In other words, if you know the hazards, but don’t correctly know the risky situations that arise from them, then you will be misguided in what you ward against (i.e. misplaced risk controls). For risk management to be successful in safety management systems, safety management teams need to understand the clear distinctions between these three things.
Having clear distinctions will render risk management programs organized with clear boundaries for how to assess different aspects of safety events – in short, good safety management.
A hazard is a thing (or lack of it), such a physical object, environmental variable, or a state of being that causes or leads to problems. And it’s very important to note that all hazards are a static thing and NOT a specific situation that requires immediate reaction. Another way to distinguish a hazard is that it is something that has the potential to be dangerous depending on one’s interaction with it, but in and of itself is not dangerous.
Keeping this in mind will help distinguish the difference between hazards and risks in aviation SMS implementations.
Most examples are fairly straightforward. Here are a few to illustrate what a hazard is:
There are hundreds of potential hazards, but the one thing they all have in common is that they lead to problems, but in and of themselves are harmless.
A risk is
They are much different from hazards in that risks are inherent – well – risky. Without direct intervention, risks are dangerous and will lead to any number of consequences.
This is an important point because often people will confuse a risk and a consequence.
Remember that a risk is a point at which “safety is lost” and NOT “damage is done.”
Where most people get confused about risks and consequences when they associate the Type of Issue, such as “bird strike”, with the risk. A risk is something you can react to and mitigate, but a consequence cannot be reacted to – it already happened. Here are some examples of risks and how they differ from consequences:
Consequences are the repercussions of a situation and characterized by damages, be it
For example:
Remember, the important thing to note about these examples is that they clearly show different ways that damage is done. Consequences necessarily involve damages that can no longer be avoided. As said, this is different from risks, in which damage can be avoided.
Here’s a summary of each item:
Here are three great questions that can help you clearly decide whether something is a hazard or a risk, or a risk or a consequence:
One of the toughest tasks in aviation safety risk management is the initial setup of the hazard register. The reason this becomes such a burden is that safety managers attempt to manage this task without the support of operational department heads.
Operational department heads are subject matter experts. From the beginning, they should be involved in developing the hazard register and regularly reviewing the:
Safety managers may be successful in solely managing the hazard register during the first four to six years of the SMS implementation. However, as the SMS matures, and as SMS inspectors become more discriminating due to your "mature SMS implementation," audit findings regularly occur because the hazard register is not properly managed.
From the beginning of the SMS implementation, safety managers should be setting the expectation that the responsibility of managing the hazard register belongs to the operational department heads. Safety managers can provide training and guidance, but the department heads should be doing the work. Otherwise, your SMS implementation will never mature and deliver the expected financial benefits.
Department heads may be lukewarm to your demands that they participate in managing the hazard register. This may be due to:
If your company does not have a good hazard register, the following list will jump-start your list of hazards. If you are an SMS Pro user, don't worry about this list, as it is integrated into the SMS database's "Proactive Hazard Analysis Tool (PHAT)."
Managing a hazard register in a spreadsheet is not a best practice. A best practice is to have your list of hazards integrated into your risk management system that you use to classify reported safety issues and audit findings.
While you could manage hazards in a spreadsheet, this will be manageable if your company has fewer than 100 employees and is also a simple operation. Otherwise, we recommend that an SMS database be either built or acquired. There are a few good SMS databases on the market, but one thing you should look for is the hazard register integrated into:
Does your SMS need a low-cost, commercially available SMS database? Learn how SMS Pro can help your company achieve its SMS goals and objectives. Below are some short demo videos you may find useful.
Last updated in March 2023.