Proposal of a Method to Support the Design and Evaluation of Rules that Take into Account the Mechanism of Functional Performance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52731/lbds.003.155Abstract
In this study, we propose a method to support rule design and evaluation that takes into account the mechanism of functional performance in order to prevent organizational ac-cidents and scandals by defining the state in which a rule performs its function as "the rule is appropriate for purpose," "the established rule is followed," and "the rule is not becoming a dead letter. The proposed methodology consists of three steps. In Step 1, the user analyzes the regulatory regime of the subject rule. In Step 2, the user assesses the risk of the rule not being appropriate, not being followed, or becoming a dead letter. In Step 3, the user considers measures to address the risks. To evaluate the proposed method, we conducted user eval-uations using questionnaires on the proposed method and the results of the proposed method, experiments to compare the proposed method with existing methods, and third-party evaluations of the results by the regulated parties to confirm the effectiveness and appro-priateness of the proposed method. Finally, we explain conclusion and future research topics.
References
R. Baldwin, “Why rules don’t work,” Mod. L. Rev., vol. 53, p. 321, 1990.
A. O’Dea and R. Flin, “Site managers and safety leadership in the offshore oil and gas industry,” Safety Science, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 39–57, Feb. 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00049-7.
Taniguchi, Y., "Exploring the process of rule violating behavior," Economic Studies, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 25-33, 2018.
Taniguchi, Y., "The process of rule becoming a dead letter: an examination based on the triangle theory of injustice," Economic Studies, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 5-13, 2017.
J. Weichbrodt, “Safety rules as instruments for organizational control, coordination and knowledge: Implications for rules management,” Safety Science, vol. 80, pp. 221–232, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.031.
Naoto Yoshino and Yasushi Saito, "Rule Management in High-Risk Organizations: Reconsidering Research Agendas in Safety Management Studies," Organization Science, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 19-30, 2018.
A. Hale and D. Borys, “Working to rule or working safely? Part 2: The management of safety rules and procedures,” Safety science, vol. 55, pp. 222–231, 2013.
A. Takahashi, G. Shimada, and Y. Sato, "Proposal on the concept and evaluation procedure of human errors in chemicals risk assessment for preventing fire and explosion," National Industrial of Occupational Safety and Health, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 169 -176, 2021.
E. H. Bax, B. J. Steijn, and M. C. De Witte, “Risk management at the shopfloor: The perception of formal rules in high-risk work situations,” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 177–188, 1998, doi: 10.1111/1468-5973.00087.
R. Amalberti, C. Vincent, Y. Auroy, and G. de Saint Maurice, “Violations and migrations in health care: a framework for understanding and management: Figure 1,” Qual Saf Health Care, vol. 15, no. suppl 1, pp. i66–i71, Dec. 2006, doi: 10.1136/qshc.2005.015982.
C. Scott, “Analysing regulatory space: fragmented resources and institutional de-sign,” Public law, pp. 283–305, 2001.
Miho Takagi, Hirokazu Fukui, and Yuko Matsui, "Factors that contribute to making the rules a dead letter in the workplace," Journal of the Institute of Nuclear Safety System, vol. 18, pp. 2–13, 2011.
M. Schulz, “A model of obsolescence of organizational rules,” Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 241–266, 1998.
S. J. Alper and B.-T. Karsh, “A systematic review of safety violations in industry,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 739–754, Jul. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.03.013.
R. Baldwin and J. Black, “Really responsive regulation,” The modern law review, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 59–94, 2008.
