Reducing Human Error Frequently Asked Questions
An action or failure to act resulting in an unwanted outcome.
In other words, when something goes wrong that you didn't mean
to happen.
Errors happen for many reasons, but the most common kinds happen
because of natural vulnerabilities of our senses, memory and
other mental processes over which we have limited control.
No, but the risk that it will happen can be greatly reduced.
Yes, in the sense that conditions that make it more likely
can be identified.
If people have not been trained and assessed appropriately
to assure their competence then clearly there is an avoidable
risk that they will make an error. However, even highly competent
individuals can, and do, make plenty of errors.
There are some systematic differences between people who are
more likely to make some specific types of errors and those
who less likely to. However, they are not more “error
prone” when their full range of activities is considered.
Some kinds of errors are less likely to occur where people
are conscientious and concentrate on what they are doing. However,
the majority of errors happen in spite people trying to avoid
them and for reasons that are beyond their immediate control.
Not directly in most cases. However, it does tend to expose
weaknesses in processes that otherwise might avoid error, or
amplify effects of adverse influences.
Yes, some kinds of routine or repetitious tasks can be done
more reliably by machines. However, even automated processes
have to be designed, instructed, prepared and maintained by
people and these activities are vulnerable to human error.
Whilst they are acquiring new skills clever people tend to
repeat fewer mistakes. However, once those skills are established
they pass to a more automatic form of control where the application
of conscious intelligence seems to provide little, if any, protection
against unintended actions or lapses of attention.
Although some errors may be detected by checking work, those
checks are themselves vulnerable to the same kinds of adverse
influences that caused the original errors. Indeed where capable
processes result in few errors, to find the probability of detection
tends to be especially low.
Systematic identification and removal or reduction of “risk
influencing factors” reduces the chance that natural human
vulnerability to error will take effect. This can be achieved
proactively and without waiting for opportunities to learn by
trial and error.
Application of the DMAIC principle can and does remove some
contributory causes of error but not all, for a least two reasons.
Firstly, Six Sigma prioritises and analyses processes that have
been troublesome in past and therefore does not address causal
factors in those with no or low incidence of historic failure.
However, many of these factors are shared by many processes
so that their combined adverse effects have a high probability
of resulting in error somewhere, perhaps without precedent.
Secondly, the probabilistic nature of many cognitive processes
implicated in human error is not addressed in the usual application
of Six Sigma.
For more information on Reducing Human Error offerings,
click below.
Overview | Training
| Consulting | Licensing
| Products | eLearning
| Government Services | FAQ
|
Download
the New