Enhancing Risk Assessment Consistency: A Conversation with Indira Saifuddin ahead of Hazard 35

Image

Indira

Saifuddin

Risk and Safety Consultant

Bureau Veritas

1. Your presentation focuses on enhancing the consistency of risk assessments. What challenge were you looking to address?

In many DSEAR surveys and risk assessments, we’ve observed that while consequence ratings are fairly consistent - since they’re often based on quantifiable outcomes - likelihood scoring can vary significantly between assessors. This subjectivity can weaken the overall reliability of the assessment and make comparisons across facilities or projects more difficult.

2. How does your methodology integrate Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) into traditional risk assessment?
We use FTA to systematically break down potential incident scenarios into smaller, constituent events and contributing factors. This allows us to evaluate likelihood in a structured, data-driven way rather than relying solely on intuitive judgment. By applying FTA, we can trace the logic of how each potential failure could occur and quantify it more consistently.

3. What advantages have you seen from adopting this approach?
The biggest benefit is consistency. When assessors follow the same structured process, we reduce subjectivity and increase repeatability. It also improves transparency - stakeholders can see exactly how likelihood values were derived. Ultimately, this supports more evidence-based decision-making and strengthens overall process safety governance.

4. How does this approach improve DSEAR assessments specifically?
DSEAR assessments often involve complex interactions of substances, processes, and ignition sources. Integrating FTA into the likelihood estimation makes the assessment far more robust. It provides traceability, clarity, and confidence that the risk ratings reflect actual process conditions rather than personal judgment.

5. What impact could this have for risk managers and safety professionals in hazardous industries?
It bridges the gap between qualitative and quantitative analysis. By combining the accessibility of risk matrices with the analytical depth of FTA, we can make assessments more reliable and defendable. This helps risk managers focus on what matters most - making informed, evidence-based decisions that protect people, assets, and operations.