The Baker Panel Report - ABSA

would be positive from a process safety culture perspective, and responding “disagree” or “tend to disagree” would be negative froma process safety culture perspective. Survey Item 4: “In general, workers don’t bother to report minor process-related incidents, accidents, or near misses.” This item isworded negatively, both from a grammatical and a process safety culture standpoint. As a result, responding “agree” or “tend toagree” would be negative from a process safety culture perspective, and responding “disagree” or “tend to disagree” would bepositive from a process safety culture perspective. Survey Item 20a: “Workers at this refinery feel pressure to work considerable overtime from: Co-workers.” Although this item isworded positively from a grammatical standpoint, it is worded negatively from a process safety culture standpoint. Responding“agree” or “tend to agree” would therefore be negative from a process safety culture perspective, and responding “disagree” or“tend to disagree” would be positive from a process safety culture perspective.For clarity, when discussing survey results in this report, the Panel typically indicates whether a particular response is positive or negative froma process safety culture perspective.> Considerations and limitations relating to survey dataBecause survey data differ in some respects from other information that the Panel gathered, the Panel highlights certain considerations andlimitations relating to survey data generally and to the survey data included in this report specifically. These considerations and limitations aresummarized below.Nature of survey data. Survey data generally reflect impressions, beliefs, and opinions of the group being surveyed. Responses to the surveyconducted on the Panel’s behalf reflect impressions, beliefs, and opinions of approximately 72 percent of the workforce at BP’s U.S. refineriesabout the process safety cultures existing at those refineries. Survey responses, however, do not necessarily reflect facts regarding the subjectmatter of the survey items, in part because of the possibility that not all respondents had first-hand knowledge regarding that subject matter.As discussed in more detail below, the Panel focused mainly on survey data from refinery personnel whose job functions likely involved somedegree of familiarity with process hazards and process safety practices. The Panel believes that this focus increased the likelihood thatrespondents would be familiar with the subject matter of survey items related to process safety. Nonetheless, the Panel does not construesurvey responses as facts, but as data providing insights into perceptions of refinery personnel concerning process safety culture in theirrefineries.Absence of external benchmark data or baseline. As discussed above, the Panel developed the survey instrument used to assess processsafety perspectives of BP’s U.S. refinery workforce. Prior to such development, a substantially similar survey instrument did not exist. As aresult, two limitations relating to analysis of the survey data should be noted. First, no normative standards or external benchmark data existsagainst which the BP U.S. refinery workforce survey results can be measured. In other words, survey data do not exist from any group that hadtaken the same survey, and thus the Panel cannot use the survey data it obtained to conclude whether BP’s U.S. refineries are perceived to havea more or less positive safety culture than other refineries. While the Panel acknowledges this limitation, the Panel believes that the surveydata nonetheless provide valuable insights into and opportunities for BP to improve the process safety cultures at its five U.S. refineries. Forexample, with the survey data from BP’s U.S. refining workforce, the Panel can compare survey results between one refinery and another orbetween one job function and another. The Panel believes that these types of comparisons provide valuable information for possible processsafety culture improvement.Second, the survey was not conducted previously among BP’s refining workforce. As a result, the Panel does not have baseline survey dataagainst which it can compare current data to conclude whether process safety cultures are improving, worsening, or stabilizing at BP’sU.S. refineries. The Panel acknowledges this limitation but nevertheless believes that the “snapshot picture” that the survey data revealprovides valuable insights into the process safety cultures at BP’s U.S. refineries as of May 2006, when the survey was conducted.The Panel’s Review C 9