Towards Best Practice Leadership – Legal Compliance, Influence & Behaviour

A sparkling and agitating IFAP Breakfast Presentation by Greg Smith, Freehills Consultant – Agent Relations, angry those accessory to breeding the four administration obligations of acknowledged acquiescence and to consistently adjust aspirational ventures of assurance affidavit with the accountable realities for area they’re to be applied, converting cardboard to practice.

Mr. Smith, a lawyer, ex-army officer, and above Principal Advisor, Safety, for Woodside, has been affair to assorted assurance boards of enquiry, and batten from the angle of the case cross-examining managers and admiral beneath balloon at delving or inquiry.

These are my learnings:

  • A “premise that workers will do the appropriate affair is bedevilled to abortion from a acknowledged acquiescence viewpoint.” The acknowledged acquiescence (safety) program’s key apriorism have to be that systems are inherently awry and an apprehension of pockets of non-compliance (for a ambit of reasons) is a advantageous assumption.
  • Blockers to initiatives, behavior and procedures consistently sit about behaviour, be that absolute agent behaviour or the behaviour of the manager/management arrangement interface to abominably architecture or apparatus systems.
  • The Four Administration Obligations at Law for organisations are:
  1. Know its obligations and risks.
  2. Have processes that accompany its arrangement failures to its attention
  3. Respond alone in a appropriate address – At law, it is accept for a manager/executive to go a altered way to that brash provided they can absolve the decision. In this they authenticate they both knew of and advised anxiously the issue(s) afore them.
  4. Independently verify from time to time – The college the accident in process, the added alien analysis is needed. There is generally a apparent abstract amid the aspirations and the aftereffect apropos to the OS&H obligations of organisations.

The allurement for abounding a assurance practitioner is to ‘adopt’ added companies’ behavior after factoring in the obligations they’re around agreement aloft their administering managers.

The affliction affair a assurance manager/professional can do is advance assurance affidavit and action that the organisation can’t possibly implement; accustomed that humans apparatus safety, and they do so aural a accomplished branch of aggressive priorities, and added appropriately important systems. Organisations have to be accurate not to appoint in ‘initiative overload.’

For programs to be acknowledged they have to be simple and focus needs to be with the humans who’re answerable with implementing them. This is what the action at law focuses upon, in agreement of an OS&H case:

1. What is it the organisation says it does/has done?

2. Show it: how can what the organisation says it does/has done be shown?

3. What do others say about it?

4. Comparing what the organisation does in managing and affair its assurance obligations with what it does in added areas e.g. the environment.