Tag: human factors

Ryan Donald – My Journey into Human Factors

Posted on by Neil Clark

September 2023

Ryan Donald is a Chartered Safety Professional (CMIOSH) and Human Factors Consultant (Chartership pending) with extensive experience in the management of safety in the subsea industry and experience in applying Human Factors methods in the offshore Oil & Gas industry. He has a master’s degree in Behaviour Change with a specialist pathway in Ergonomics and Human Factors.

How did you get into the Human Factors sector?

I used to be a Health and Safety Advisor in the diving industry and the organisation was keen on implementing behaviour-based safety approaches, focusing on intervention and safety conversations to increase occurrences of safe behaviours. Although this is important, I felt there was something missing from the approach. My first thought was “if we think behaviours cause incidents, then doesn’t it make sense to address the things influencing undesired behaviours”? Around about this time, a client was venturing into Human Factors and requested it be considered within our risk assessments. This was the spark that led me to pursuing a career in Human Factors, so I began studying. I soon realised it was a massively diverse discipline, one which considers the wider influences on behaviour and looks past “human error” to understand the true causes of incidents. Most importantly, Human Factors proactively evaluates influences on performance. I was, and still am, hooked so working at IHF gives me the chance to refine my skills further …

You mentioned the impact of the working environment on people. Can the working environment be that impactful?

Yes.  In my opinion, the external working environment is one of the major influences on our behaviour. Take a competent person, add in a little work pressure and/or a poorly designed system, then you may have an increased the risk of error. When we think of a workplace we really enjoy being in, we may have high levels of intrinsic motivation. If we are challenged, developed and are left to our devices in terms of autonomy, then we may have stronger motivation. Take me for example, if I am micro-managed (with  low autonomy), this effects my performance, especially my confidence and decision-making ability. This is an influence of my work environment and shows how the behaviour of others is an external influence on my own behaviour and subsequent performance.

What is your expertise and why do you like this part of your job?

I feel like I have a good understanding of what can influence us as people. I have a good understanding of cognitive process such as attention, decision making and memory in order to understand the influence of poor task / work environment design. I don’t think this is massively different from many Human Factors practitioners, but I pride myself in what I can bring to the role of a Human Factors Consultant. I really do feel in my element when doing human error analysis, really understanding a task and how it can influence the workforce psychologically as well as physically.

 

What do you like about working at IHF?

I really like the people, it sounds cliché, but they are a great bunch of people. Also, my role at IHF is very diverse. From safety critical task analysis, to applying research methods to explore experiences of the workforce to inform improvement initiatives. IHF have a wide client base across many industries so there is always something new to learn helping me enhance my skill set and knowledge.

What do you think is your biggest achievement in your work life?

I don’t really have one. I like to have rolling goals to keep me motivated. I tend to achieve a goal, pat myself on the back and move on to the next one. At risk of yet another cliché, I just want to be good at what I do and continue to develop.

What aspects of this field are the most difficult to deal with?

Challenges come from peoples understanding of the Human Factors discipline, which can be quite a significant barrier. For starters, the term Human Factors does make it seem to be about people, perhaps fuelling the misconception that Human Factors and human error or behaviour are one and the same. There is a lot to get your head around, so confusion or lack of understanding can easily be forgiven. There is a lot of complexity in Human Factors as many aspects feed into this term: cognitive ergonomics, physical ergonomics and organisational ergonomics to name three broad topics. There is a book by R.S. Bridger about human factors in investigation where he says, right from the outset, “Human Factors is not about people, it’s about the things that affect people”. I think that is a great summary of the discipline.

You are a lead investigator: which are the main aspects of an investigation that are less obvious in an undesired event?

When an incident occurs, it is very easy to identify the immediate cause, it is usually a behaviour. The obvious things are physical interactions, or the agent of harm, these are often the focus – i.e., changing signage, changing design etc… These are important, however, what we don’t do so well is explore the decision-making process, consider what that person thought to be true at the time and we don’t consider the influences of the social environment and behaviour of others and how this influences motivation or attitudes. This does take a shift in mindset, understanding the context from the perspective of those involved.

 

I won’t pretend that I always thought this way, it took some effort to understand it and change my own attitude. It is something I feel is vital to understand though. I mean if our number one asset is people, maybe we should understand what makes them tick. Just as we know the failure modes of a technical system and what to do if it were to deviate from the plan, we should know the same of people and reduce the risk of human failure. That can be done through effective investigations which consider humans and their limitations.

How do you manage to keep a healthy work balance?

I feel like a walking cliché here, but my family. I truly value family time. It is easy to get sucked into work, doing a few extra hours here and there is fine, but it’s important to have a work/life balance.

What are your recommendations to someone starting a career in Human Factors ?

Firstly, I would try and get a good understanding of human behaviour as well as the technical aspects associated with the industry you are working in. This would be true for those coming from a psychology background or an engineering one.

The Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors (CIEHF) have their competence pathway. It sets you off on a journey which spans the Human Factors discipline and by listening to their Webinars and other events you will enhance your knowledge and skill set. I would encourage to join and attend as much as you can. They offer access to Ergonomics and Applied Ergonomics journals, allowing you an insight into recent research and advancements in the discipline. Also, their mentor program is fantastic. They set you up with a Chartered Ergonomics organisation who supports your Human factors journey. Speaking from experience, having a mentot is fantastic and has some great advice and he has supported me for nearly two years. His support has been invaluable.

 

 

Interview and pictures by Paola Usala

Unveiling the Human Side of Career Success: A Glimpse into the World of Human Factors

Posted on by Colin Thomson

In a world driven by technology and innovation, the intersection of human behaviour and advanced systems has become a crucial area of focus. If you’ve ever wondered about the career path that leads to the field of Human Factors, read on. In this blog post, we dive into an insightful conversation with a Principal Human Factors professional, Paul Sirett.

 The Journey Begins

For Paul, it all started with a role in the military. Paul spent four formative years in the Parachute Regiment, interacting with complex systems and equipment, from radios to advanced weaponry systems. These experiences unveiled the realisation that the interaction and design of these systems were far from optimal and that there must be a career path to support the development of complex organisations and the associated systems.

“I started to look around when I knew I was going to be leaving the military,” our Paul reminisced. “I thought there must be something I can get into that focuses on making systems equipment, and organisational processes better.

The Evolution of Human Factors

As Paul departed from the military, the concept of Human Factors was emerging as a growing field. With a background in Organisational Psychology, he embarked on a path that ultimately merged numerous disciplines such as Ergonomics, Human Factors, Organisational Psychology, and Business Processes. What began as an exploration into system interactions expanded into a deep-seated commitment to understanding the human element in every facet of working life.

Bridging the Gap: Human Factors in Financial Services

Over time, Human Factors transitioned from a fragmented notion to a cohesive discipline recognised for its potential to enhance not only safety but also efficiency and the bottom line. It’s no longer limited to military contexts; Human Factors now extends its reach into sectors as diverse as financial services and banking and is now recognised in all high-hazard sectors such as nuclear, rail, Oil and Gas etc.

As our discussion unfolded, Paul shifted toward the challenges of introducing Human Factors to industries unfamiliar with its potential. Financial services, a sector synonymous with profit and risk, may seem worlds apart from Human Factors. Yet, a strategic approach that aligns with their goals can bridge this gap. By reframing the conversation and focusing on aspects like inclusivity and cognitive strategies to improve decision-making, Human Factors experts can provide tangible benefits, such as increased efficiency and cost savings.

“It’s about finding the language that resonates with each sector,” Paul emphasised. “Whether it’s inclusive design for buildings or optimising cognitive processes for financial decisions, Human Factors offer tailored solutions that cater to diverse needs.”

Embracing Challenges and Change

In the pursuit of a meaningful career, embracing challenges and adapting to change is crucial. Paul’s experiences working for both large engineering firms and smaller, specialised consultancies revealed the power of a supportive community. He felt:

“IHF offered a nurturing environment for like-minded individuals to collaborate effectively.  Also at Integrated Human Factors, I can work remotely and I enjoy working at client sites occasionally.”

Navigating Uncharted Territories

With an eagerness to explore uncharted territories, Paul’s journey led to the intriguing realm of nuclear energy. While Nuclear energy may seem far removed from everyday life, its application of Human Factors principles sheds light on the broader impact of this discipline. Human factors are crucial in the nuclear sector to ensure safety, prevent errors, and optimise operations.

“What attracts me to IHF is the diversity of its portfolio,” Paul shared. “While I appreciate the opportunities in Nuclear, I’m also excited about the prospect of applying Human Factors principles to other sectors as well.”

The Power of Perspective

Stepping away from career-oriented dialogue, our conversation delved into the personal passions that fuel Paul’s life outside of work. From a household bustling with two young huskies to the restoration of an old Victorian house, he keeps himself busy.  His passion is Judo, being a 2nd Dan Black Belt, however, that is on hold at the moment given his other commitments.

The Future: Where Human Factors Thrive

As our conversation ended, we explored the potential future of Human Factors for those looking to break into this career path. IHF is building an academy dedicated to growing Human Factors skills and mentorship. In a rapidly evolving world, continuous education and collaboration are paramount.

In industries like nuclear power or energy production, the Human Factors application ensures operational safety, preventing catastrophic failures stemming from human error.  But whether it is financial services or cyber security if human beings are involved Human Factors play an equally important role. Human Factors are important in non-hazardous sectors because they improve productivity, employee well-being, and user satisfaction by tailoring systems and processes to human capabilities and needs, ultimately fostering efficiency and innovation.  All organisations have people at the forefront of their business, and they are the ‘glue’ that keeps the business running in times of unique or difficult circumstances.  Human Factors is the discipline that has the tools and techniques to reinforce and enhance people and the organisation so that the business is efficient, safe, and profitable.

IHF spreads its wings

Posted on by Colin Thomson

Human Factors consultancy IHF has established a partnership with an innovative duo from the aviation and medical sectors.

Airline captain James Taylor and his consultant oncologist father Roger will work as associates of Edinburgh-based IHF to enhance its capabilities in human factors, and will set up an office in Brighton.

IHF’s team of 24 consultants and trainers around the world set out to understand and resolve what are commonly regarded as “human errors” in any system or process.

Apart from big oil and gas, trade unions are also signed up as they make risk and safety a top priority for their members in these industries.

Neil Clark, CEO, who runs IHF said: “I am really excited about partnering with James and Roger. Its testament to how far IHF have come in the last 12 years that we are bringing on board such high calibre professionals.

“Human Factors is a growing discipline in both the healthcare and aviation sectors, so it makes sense to bolster our teams’ capabilities in these areas. As an RAF pilot myself I have seen how best practice in aviation is being adopted by other sectors and the influence of human factors continues to grow exponentially in medicine”.

James Taylor has 16 years experience as an airline pilot with seven of those as a captain. He has also undertaken the training of pilots in the flight simulator.

He said: “Every time I fly a passenger airliner or train a pilot, I am reminded of how important the safety culture in the industry is, with the key focus being on implementing procedures that have human factors at their heart.

“Everyone in the industry acknowledges the importance of the strong safety culture which over the decades has developed robust processes for identifying and correcting issues which may carry even a very slight risk.

“Human factors may pose a risk in themselves or exacerbate the risk from mechanical or electronic factors. I strongly believe that airline style safety can and should be applied to all settings especially in healthcare”.

Roger has been a consultant oncologist for 35 years, planning and supervising radiotherapy and chemotherapy for patients with cancer and contributed to the “Towards Safer Radiotherapy” document.

He has been vice-president of the Royal College of Radiologists and Clinical Director for Swansea Health Board Cancer Services.

He said: “Radiotherapy is already one of the safest processes in hospital medicine, however we need to maintain our guard. Radiotherapy planning and a delivery are multistep processes requiring input from several different staff groups.

“Therefore, it is essential to mitigate the risk from any human factor which might pose a risk to safety. In healthcare circles we often talk about applying the airline industry safety culture but there is much more that could be done to implement this across organisations”.

Why human factors are vital considerations in incident investigations?

Posted on by Colin Thomson

The HSE figures for Workplace fatal injuries in Great Britain 2021/22 counted a total of 123 fatalities at workplace, over 441,000 reports of non-fatal injuries at work, and 102,000 of those being absent from their workplace for more than 7 days with a substantial cost for the companies impacted. Even though there has been a slight decrease in the accident rate, we see serious accidents happening routinely, and it is crucial for companies to respond to accidents and incidents effectively, with an in-depth investigation that enables understanding and learning. In fact, each incident should be considered as a learning opportunity to discover the true underlying causes of the adverse event and learn from them, rather than attribute blame.

What is an incident and accident investigation?

An incident (and accident) investigation, as HSE states[1], is a powerful ‘retrospective tool’ to increase control over hazards in a working environment, and to report, track and implement change in response to the incident. The investigation consists of an official, structured and in-depth examination about the adverse event beginning with gathering of information on equipment, procedures and the event in question. This process, after the collation and analysis of information, involves a number of stakeholders, not just the people present at the time of the event. The main objective is not only to establish what happened during the adverse event, but also what allowed it to happen.

[1] EI, Guidance on Investigating and Analysing Human and Organisational Factors Aspect of Accident and Incidents

Why human factors are vital considerations in incident investigations. 

Investigation concluding that human error was the sole cause of an incident are not acceptable. There are many underlying causes that can create a working environment where humans errors are unavoidable and that are direct consequences of active failures or latent conditions such as inadequate training, poor equipment design, noisy and undesirable working conditions, inadequate work planning or poor safety culture just to name a few. These causes have a considerable impact on workers and could lead to a human failure.

An introduction to Cognitive Origins Analysis an SUPPA model. 

All human performance and interactions with systems come down to our human biology and so, every human failure traces back to the cognitive origins including mental processes of perception, memory, judgment, and reasoning. To understand human behaviour, we analyse these cognitive origins by using SUPPA model: Scan – Understand – Predict – Plan – Act, a dynamic process that completes the investigation of contextual, external, and essentially internally causes of failure.

Be prepared.

It is required by law that businesses carry out incident investigations and review risk assessments after incidents happen, and to fulfil that and act promptly, it is important to be prepared for such events.

A specific skillset and expert knowledge underline an effective investigation. Organisations should have selected competent investigators are ready to act. Whenever in doubt, seek professional advice from a chartered consulting company that will secure a high-standard investigation process for your organisation. IHF specialises in incident investigation and provides a software as a service equipping client to build their own in-house competency.

We are running a webinar entitled “Human Factors Guide to Incident Investigation” where you can learn more about the best practices in incident investigations and practical guidance on applying human factors in investigations.

Building your own Intelligent Customer Capability

Posted on by Colin Thomson

Building your own Intelligent Customer Capability

The concept of Intelligent Customer (IC) in relation to high-hazard safety was developed by the UK Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and has gained acceptance around the world.

The UK Health and Safety Executive defines IC as:

“The capability of the organisation to have a clear understanding and knowledge of the product or service being supplied”.

Both safety critical organisations in hazardous sectors as well as large complex organisations will use contractors to help them with various activities. But there is a joint responsibility, so it’s important that organisation understand, oversee, and accept any technical work undertaken by contractors.

Organisations must be able to lead the presentation of the safety arguments to the regulator. This could include having a human factors strategy in place, explaining the process for developing and using safety critical procedures or describing the fatigue management arrangements that are in place.

Questions organisations should ask themselves before engaging with a human factors consultancy?

  • Will this engagement help us to build up our own in-house skills through shared learning? It’s important for organisations to consider if they could perform the work themselves if a contractor was no longer around. So, what training and consultancy is required at the start of an engagement to enable an organisation to build its in-house human factors capabilities themselves.
  • How competent is the consultancy? Is the consultancy a chartered member of the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors? The HSE mentions that careful consideration should be given to the potential consequences of outsourcing of safety-related work. Companies must take steps to ensure that contractors are competent to carry out health and safety-related work. Companies should seek to retain intelligent customer capability to ensure that they can appropriately manage and oversee the work.
  • How can you develop whole-system functionality checks. It’s important to look at all the different safety-critical elements to get a holistic picture. This is especially important where work is contracted out to a range of specialists.
  • Are they experienced in your sector? Consultancies that have a track record in sectors such as nuclear, aviation, maritime, oil and gas, pharmaceutical, manufacturing or even financial services will be best placed to meet your sectors needs having built up experience of the specific challenges your type organisation faces.

Organisations who adhere to this guidance and then demonstrate to regulators such as the HSE that they are delivering the ‘intelligent customer’ capability in practice.

IHF software solutions, combined with training and consultancy, enable organisations to manage their facility’s human factors needs in an efficient, consistent, and confident manner. With a streamlined process, standard reports and an intelligent approach to stakeholder engagement, your organisation will continually follow best practice, allowing it to establish and scale up its human factors function quickly, meeting the requirements of the regulator.

To build an in-house capability IHF can help organisations train operators and team leaders.  For example, our CIEHF accredited Safety Critical Task Analysis (SCTA) also aims to turn any organisation into ‘intelligent customers’ by raising the in-house capabilities of their human factors focal point to understand, monitor and in some cases deliver components of an SCTA. This means that, for the activities which require an external consultant, the internal staff will know exactly what needs to be delivered on the overall path and can supervise the delivery from the external consultant.

Contact us to discuss how we can help your organisation build ‘intelligent customer’ capability.

Work as Imagined vs Work as Done

Posted on by Colin Thomson

Work as Imagined vs Work as Done

When we look at approaches to safety and Human Factors, it’s very important to understand the difference between the two terms. For example, one of the leading causes of medical errors is the difference between the way work is imagined and the way it is actually done. It’s very rare that someone sets out to do harm, often they are unaware that they are making a lethal error. The most common example is when management in an organisation thinks a procedure is being completed in a particular way but in reality, the workforce has a different way of completing the procedure. The procedure does not get updated or checked, errors can creep in, or key skills developed to complete work as done can be lost with the skills gap and retirement.  In the gap between work as imagined and work as done lies danger.

Work-as-imagined (WAI)

Work-as-imagined (WAI) refers to the various assumptions, explicit or implicit, that people have about how their or others’ work should be done.

Work-as-done (WAD)

Work-as-done (WAD) refers to how something is actually done, either in a specific case or routinely.

Mind the Gap 

There is often a considerable difference between what people are assumed or expected to do and what they actually do. In hazardous industries, standard operating procedures (SOPs) may have built up or been adapted over time. Procedures can be complex and lengthy. These processes may have failed to adapt or innovate over time.

Workers may not follow standard operating procedures when:

  • The procedure fails to align with what they were taught in training
  • Workers may think that their method of performing the task is better than the method used in the procedure. This can happen when a worker has decades of experience working in an industry and in their mind has found the “best” way of doing things.
  • The procedure makes the task more complex and difficult to complete
  • The procedure is unclear, leading to misinterpretation of the steps required to complete the task
  • Workers work from memory rather than referring to the procedure. This can be a particular issue if the task is particularly repetitive.
  • Leaders do not clearly articulate that they expect the procedures to be followed and fail to check if the procedure is being followed correctly.
  • Staffing levels are sub-optimal leading to staff cutting corners.

The Solution

Examining WAI and WAD is an important part of conducting Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) as part of an SCTA. Where there is a gap between WAI vs WAD, leaders need to dig deeper to understand, and then take appropriate actions to resolve the gap.  Observing how a procedure is carried out in the field can give a better understanding of the risk of the task and help reduce the likelihood of failure. If this observation is carried out with different people and in different environments, this may fill in some of the gaps in how the work is done. To get the clearest picture interviewing workers can be used in tandem with observations.

IHF helps for a range of high risk industries including aviation, chemical processing, COMAH sites, financial services, health, nuclear, oil & gas and pharmaceutical conduct SCTA’s. Our training courses (approved by the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors) and software solutions help organisations build their own in-house capabilities, with our consultants on hand to guide our clients on best practices. Having this SCTA knowledge in the workforce also exerts a positive influence on the quality of risk assessment and incident investigations and also the quality of improvement suggestions. IHF can help organisations streamline their SCTA processes, standardise the processes across the organisation and bring all their information into one easily accessible portal.

To learn more Contact Us.

 

Human Error v Human Factors

Posted on by Colin Thomson

Human Error v Human Factors

Often the terms human error and human factors are used in an interchangeable way – but they are quite different things.

Human error refers to an unintentional action or decision which can then have a knock-on consequence such as an accident or workplace incident. Or put more simply it involves all those instances where a planned activity fails to achieve its intended outcome.

Human Factors on the other hand delves much deeper. It accounts for why the mistake was made. So human factors look at the reasons why the errors occur. So, when we address the human factors in relation to health and safety, the aim is to optimise the human performance and reduce the human failures.

The danger is if you focus your workforce safety around human error, then you miss the why. By looking at it from a human error alone you will miss something that has built up over time.

Safety is not about who failed it’s about what failed

The easiest excuse after a safety incident is to blame someone or finger point. Instead, organisations which pride themselves on safety should dig deeper, explore their strategies, systems, and the environment. A worker’s behaviour or action often contributes to an incident but it’s often not the main cause. It should be viewed as a warning or symptom that there are problems in the organisational system and the environment. So human factors can find the issues that may be hidden below the surface.

A bad system will beat a good person every time

As Edwards Deming (one of the Founding Fathers of Total Quality Management) said: “A bad system will beat a good person every time.” An employee in the most part does not set out to cause an incident and will have good intentions when going about their duties. If you have a no blame culture, then workers will tell you their challenges and report incidents such as near misses. Attributing safety challenges to a lack of situational awareness does little to improve the situation. Organisations need to allow people to perform at their best by ensuring they are not afraid to express their concerns.

If we look at an iceberg what we see does not give us the full picture with as much as 90% can be contained below the surface, out of site.  So an incident could be a sign of a much larger problem. Businesses must therefore consider safety incidents as early warnings of something bigger that could happen in the future.

 

Why do management of change projects fail?

Posted on by Colin Thomson

There is a huge pressure in change initiatives to be completed quickly often without considering the human element in enough detail.

Organisations often don’t consider the human contribution early enough and in enough detail. There can be a huge difference between a project that is overly technically focussed, with little regard for the people who need to enact the technical processes or maintain the processes of the project and projects that have embraced the human element from the beginning and maintain this focus throughout the project.

We recommend that organisations take small and frequent human considerations into account right the way through a change initiative.

The difference between something that’s technically accurate and something that’s fit for purpose

If we look at designing a kettle, we could develop a kettle that functionally works proficiently by boiling water and doing the job it was intended to do. But as we are likely to use this product daily, if a kettle was designed with a handle that loosened off over time, this would increase the risk of burns or scalds.

This same logic could be applied to a management of change project that hasn’t gone to plan as they have almost exclusively focussed on what they are trying to do technically without embracing how people will interact with the project. In the kettle example, there have been large customer safety recalls by Whirlpool where the costs or reimbursing customers were substantial.

Other factors to consider could be how people access the information in a project, understanding what the feedback of the system is giving you.
By integrating human factors into a project, an organisation can make the shift from something that is technically accurate to something that is fit for purpose.

The common sense argument

We often hear in the workplace, even hazardous workplaces that safety is just common sense.

What is common sense to one person is often not common sense to another person as human beings are all different. Common sense is therefore notoriously uncommon.

Common sense is a learned behaviour and changes over time. A young child might conceivably put its hand on steaming water as it hasn’t learned that this action can cause it pain through burns.

If we take a workplace change project the goal therefore shouldn’t be to develop common sense but to seek competence of the new way of doing things. So the focus needs to be on building employee competence.

We can ask ourselves questions like:

  • How within a management of change process can people fail?
  • Where do we know they have failed in the past?
  • How do they fail?
  • What can we do about it proactively

How can you include human factors in a change management initiative?

We need to actively consider the human contribution from the start to the finish. We need to understand more deeply what the people’s interactions are with colleagues, how they interact with the business digitally and the overall environment of the business. Building a visual model can help organisations understand what technical components exist within the business and how they interact with the human elements. Often, it’s within the interaction where human error creeps in.

When we start to see repetition of failures through human error, we would look to improve upon this sub optimal output. We can then look to improve some key business indicators and monitor key KPI’s set by the organisation over time. Once we see one department in the business improve the same fundamentals can often be applied to improve other parts of a business to build cumulative value.

By performing business-critical task analysis we can identify and prioritise where the human contribution lies and what the risk is associated with that. If a project fails, we could perform a human factors investigation to find out how the human contribution contributed to the “why” of what failed.

IHF Expands in Australia

Posted on by Colin Thomson

Integrated Human Factors, one of the UK’s leading specialist Human Factors consultancies is expanding its offering in the Australia and the wider Asia Pacific region and establishing an office in Perth, Western Australia.

IHF, a tech-driven human factors consultancy was founded a decade ago in the UK by Neil Clark and is a registered member of the UK Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors (CIEHF). The IHF client base includes many large enterprises in the aviation, defence, financial services, healthcare, oil and gas, transportation, and utilities industries.

Leading the expansion in Australia will be David Clarke, Director, and Managing Partner of IHF Asia Pacific. David has worked across Airlines, Human Capital and Human Factors in both Australia and the UK over the last 25 years in both front-line and management positions

David said;

Expanding in Australia and Asia Pacific is the natural next step for the IHF Group. With so many hazardous and process focussed industries based in Australia, not to mention the explosion in transport-related infrastructure projects across the Asia Pacific region it made sense to expand our operations here.

“The global shortage of competent and experienced Human Factors specialists has made it almost impossible for businesses to adequately address their organisational Human Factors – and not to mention regulatory – obligations. Therefore, businesses are having to adapt by developing their in-house capability to manage their human factors requirements. To do this, they need a robust suite of easy-to-use software tools to manage their human-risk management backed up by top-level expertise. That’s where we can help”

Neil Clark, CEO, IHF said:

I have known David for many years, and his expertise and can-do attitude makes him the perfect person to lead the growth of IHF in Australia and the Asia Pacific Region. As we expand David can tap into the wider IHF Team who have cross-industry human factors expertise in aviation, psychology, engineering, ergonomics, and safety. This is what makes IHF’s capabilities extensive, creative, flexible, and global.