15 July 2019
Frequently sounding bridge warnings, especially false ones, can create
‘alarm fatigue’ and hinder watch keepers in carrying out their vital role, a
new survey supported by shipping body InterManager has revealed.
The findings
have been released this week by P&I Club, Shipowners Club, which conducted
the survey in conjunction with the Department of Psychology at Royal Holloway,
University of London, ISWAN and Inter-Manager, in order to investigate whether
alarms on the bridge may affect the attention and focus of bridge watch keepers.
The survey
was largely responded to by Masters and senior officers, which demonstrates
that the concerns are apparent to experienced and well-qualified seafarers.
Respondents came from a wide variety of vessel types.
Inter-Manager
is now calling for manufacturers to work with ship operators to address
seafarers concerns and develop better ways of communicating bridge warnings.
Respondents
highlighted there is a problem with too many similar sounding alarms and
revealed a need for alarms to be easily identifiable so that urgent warnings
can be recognized over simple notification bells.
Key findings
include:
·
89% of participants thought false alarms were a problem.
·
66% said the alarms were not easily detectable.
·
57% of respondents disagreed that alarms are graded by sound.
·
50% of participants reported some frustration with the format of
the alarms themselves. Of particular concern was the fact that sounds are frequently
the same tone for all alarms with no distinguishing factors between alarm
systems.
·
77% of crew do not want to be disturbed from their watch keeping
duties.
·
24% of participants reported that they never or seldom engaged the
Bridge Navigational Watch Alarm System due to their concerns at frequent false
alarms.
The main
issue raised was frequent alarm fatigue, followed by the fact that alarms are
hard to identify, and then concerns over the design of alarm system or the
bridge itself. The results present a reoccurring theme regarding the grading of
alarms to assist the watch keeper.
Another
factor that emerged from the answers was the crew’s readiness to silence alarms
without investigation due to ‘alarm fatigue’ caused by repeated alarm soundings
for no apparent reason. Some 85% of participants reported they were aware of
the alarms, the systems they represent and their location. However, 45% of the
respondents agreed that frequent alarms are often silenced, and when this was
analysed by the level of role, 44% of Masters, 41% of Chief Officers, 48% of
Second Officers and 60% of Third Officers agreed, showing that this practice
was prevalent among all ranks.
The report
concludes: "It is evident from the feedback of these seafarers that the
current regulations and arrangements relating to bridge alarm monitoring and
systems can be improved upon. Doing so will improve the working environment of
seafarers and assist with the reduction of related claims.”
Captain Kuba
Szymanski, InterManager Secretary General, said: “At present, as an industry we
are creating an environment for failure and then we are surprised when our
seafarers fail! We can and must break this vicious circle. Look at the findings
– 50% of our seafarers are frustrated by frequent alarms! 77% want alarms to be
useful alarms and not a nuisance. They are extremely busy people, because we
ask them to be ‘jacks of many trades’. Therefore, in my opinion, quite rightly
they expect alarms to be useful and effective.”
Welcoming
the report, he said: “This is brilliant – I cannot praise Shipowners’ enough
for undertaking this ground-breaking research and drawing excellent
conclusions. In particular I am pleased that they checked with the end users –
that is very proactive and, I would say, pioneering. Honestly, this is one of
very, very few surveys which actually asks seafarers themselves.”
Szymanski
said action is now needed to address seafarers concerns and called on
manufacturers to work with ship operators and crew representatives to identify
which alarms are particular problems and to produce more effective methods of
alert. “Seafarers are tired of being blamed for everything,” he said. “It is
important that we take a human-centric approach to this and find solutions that
benefit our crews in the workplace rather than hinder them when carrying out
vital tasks.”
Ship owners’
Club said: “As vessels and the equipment on board become increasingly smarter,
seafarers are required to learn additional skills for the ongoing operation and
maintenance of these pieces of technology and equipment. However, where more
equipment is fitted it naturally increases the possibility of a higher number
of alarms. From a Club perspective, we believe that when fitting additional and
new technology on board it should always be done with the intention to enhance
the seafarer’s ability to safely and efficiently navigate and operate the
vessel.
“It is
evident from the feedback of these seafarers that the current regulations and
arrangements relating to bridge alarm monitoring and systems can be improved
upon, which will allow for crew to fully utilise the benefits of the technology
being made available to them. Doing so will improve the working environment of
seafarers and may assist with the reduction of related claims experienced by Members
and the wider maritime industry. The Club is sharing this information to help
facilitate further discussion of the topic in the industry with the hope of
finding a method to provide a solution which improves bridge alarm management
on board.”
The survey was conducted during 2017 and 2018
by a questionnaire, which was circulated widely throughout many maritime
sectors, via Intermanager, ISWAN and UK Chamber of Shipping. After careful
collation, the findings are now being made available to Club Members, the
survey participants and the wider industry.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου