Safety Survey Reports

1. Safety Survey Reports B-Safe Management Solutions, Inc. Franklin, IN, 46131, USA 317 - 736 - 8980 www.behavioral-safety.com

2. Agenda • Survey Background • Survey results – Well Engineering • Survey results – Process Safety • The Way Forward

3. Understanding Safety Culture Safety Culture loosely used to describe ‘the corporate atmosphere or ‘culture’ whereby safety is understood to be, and is accepted as, the number one priority’ (Lord Cullen (1990), after the Piper Alpha Disaster) Translates into: The way we approach and improve safety around here Safety Culture Elements are: Cooper, M.D. (2000). “Towards a Model of Safety Culture”. Safety Science, Vol 32 (6), 111-136.

4. Safety Culture Survey: 5 Step Approach Conduct behavioral Observations / Interviews • Step 1: Onsite Validation Activities Collate Results Work with PDO to identify issues • Step 2: Safety Culture Survey Development Customize approach to suit Conduct Online Safety Survey • Step 4: Distribute Survey to Personnel • Step 4: Write Safety Survey Report Analyze Data • Step 5: Present Safety Survey Report Present report

5. Safety Culture Assessment Survey Project • Survey questions based on 20 years academic work • Survey consistently measures safety culture and is accurate • Demographics • Employer, Primary Worksite, Employment Category & Injury Experience • Staff views on safety practices • 4 Point Scale – Highly Disagree to Highly Agree

6. Safety Culture Survey Process • Safety Culture Survey Reviewed, Revised and Approved by PDO • Distribution Methods to Process • Online link to Translated/ English Survey via Email • ‘Hard Copy’ Arabic version distributed to sites • Safety Culture Survey was active for 8 Weeks • Monitored Completion of Surveys and Sent Reminders • On-site Validation Process Included: • Safety Culture Survey Validation Interviews with PDO personnel • Onsite Observation of conditions and behaviours

7. Safety Survey Report • Comprehensive Written Reports for Well Engineering & Process Safety • Survey Scores • Each survey question’s mean average score converted into a percentage • Percentage scores placed in a ‘Banding’ range based on surveys from past 20 years • Beginning =0-30%, Developing = 31-60, Performing 61-80%, High Performing =81-90%, and Excelling = 91-100%. • Benchmarked against 5 other industry sectors • (Chemicals, Manufacturing, Mining, Oil & Gas, Utilities) • Statistical Analyses • Multiple Regression of all survey topics to Identify PDO’s ‘Safety Culture Predictors’ separately for Well Engineering & Process Safety

8. Safety Survey Results Well Engineering

9. Well Engineering Results - Sample Size & Response Rate • 1,953 responses received from Well Engineering respondents

10. Well Engineering Results - Sample Size & Response Rate

11. Well Engineering Results - Average Safety Survey Score PDO Well Engineering Total Score = 78.85%

12. Results – Average Safety Culture Scores

13. Well Engineering Results – Average Topic Scores

14. PDO– On-Site Validation • Validation interviews, discussion, observations Common Themes Identified • Some very good safety systems in place • Some very good / comprehensive safety information posted on notice boards • Many supervisors / managers have a good reputation regarding safety with their workforce • Some of the best scaffolding standards in the GCC

15. Well Engineering Results – On-Site Validation • Areas of Opportunity • Management / Supervision • Managers say safety is important, but associates say productivity is put before safety to meet production targets. • Requests for Coastal-based management and HSE to visit field much more often • Safety Communications • Many do not understand the HSE information provided from Muscat. • Plans requested to explain how to use information to its fullest extent • Numerous requests for assistance to turn information into practical application onsite • Inconsistent transfer of information at site level • Too much focus on minor incidents, not ‘kick’s, etc., that could lead to catastrophic events. • Safety Training • Lack of awareness of people’s safety training needs. • Materials and training are too simplistic • Continuously repeated Pre-job safety briefs are seen as boring rituals • Limited time for safety training, with requests for much more than currently provided • Requests for HSE video library onsite in English & Arabic

16. Well Engineering Results – On-Site Validation • Safety Procedures • Too many safety regulations being created • Confusing safety procedures slow the job down too much. Seems to lead to many people working over allocated hours. Causing people to ignore them and focus on productivity. • Noticeable that most people behaving safely, most of the time • Recognising Safety Performance • Feeling in field based rigs / hoists that good/excellent safety performance is not being recognised by corporate • Night Moves • Night moves generally thought to be unsafe. Leading to people to work many more hours than they should • Welfare • Requests for annual health checks to test for ‘cocktail’ of chemical/fume exposures • Noise at rig sites impacting on peoples sleep patterns. Impacting concentration levels during shifts • Many stated they experienced diarrhea and/or food poisoning due to poor food quality

17. Additional Components Measured Risk Rating Aligns with ratings of the ‘Process Element, On-the-Job Risk, and Focuses on the Actual risks faced

18. Well Engineering Results – Personal Injury Risk Ratings

19. Additional Components Measured Involvement Aligns with ‘Action Element’, Associates’ On-the-Job Approach to Safety, indicates the specific activities people have been involved and when

20. Well Engineering Results – Involvement in Safety

21. Additional Components Measured Welfare Arrangements Aligns with ‘Person Element’, the Commitment to Safety, and identifies the welfare arrangements that affects people’s commitment

22. Phase 3: Results – Welfare Arrangements

23. Correlation Between Survey Scores and Incident Statistics Hoist Based Rigs Field Based Rigs

24. Multiple Regression A way to identify those survey topics that predict PDO’s future safety performance to provide focus Management & Associates Commitment to Safety Person Elements Safety Communications The few Topics identified that will provide most significant impact if improved Overall Safety Culture Improvement Emergency Preparation Process Elements SOP’s Safety Training Action Elements On-the-Job Risk On-the-Job Approach to Safety Housekeeping The larger the correlation the larger the influence…

25. Well Engineering Results – Multiple Regression: The Way Forward • Opportunities for Change • Management’s Commitment to Safety - Evaluate beliefs and means to demonstrate safety leadership throughout the organization

26. Phase 4: The Way Forward • There are 5 major Safety Culture areas where progress can be made to propel PDO Well Engineering into the world-class safety culture range. • Enhance the safety leadership skills of all managerial levels. • Fully involve Associates in safety via sound and proven strategies, such as conducting risk assessments, and developing a comprehensive and adaptive Behavioral Safety process. • Review the quality of the content, delivery and scope of PDO’s Safety Training courses and their effectiveness; • Review the quality, type and number of safety communications to ensure the safety message is received as intended in the field • Set a corporate target of 95% of all corrective actions being completed within 30 days of being reported and track it.

27. PDO Safety Survey Results Process Safety

28. Process Safety Results - Sample Size & Response Rate • 479 responses received by Process Safety respondents

29. Process Safety Results - Average Safety Survey Score PDO Process Safety Total Score = 80.9%

30. Results – Average Safety Culture Scores

31. Breakdown of Results What We Measured to Establish the Level of Safety Culture

32. Process Safety Results – Average Topic Scores

33. Additional Components Measured Risk Rating Aligns with ratings of the ‘Process Element, On-the-Job Risk, and Focuses on the Actual risks faced

34. Process Safety Results – Personal Injury Risk Ratings

35. Additional Components Measured Process Risk Ratings Aligns with ratings of the ‘Process Element, On-the-Job Risk, and Focuses on the Actual risks faced

36. Phase 3: Results – Process Hazard Risk Ratings

37. Potential Process Safety Indicators

38. Additional Components Measured Involvement Aligns with ‘Action Element’, Associates’ On-the-Job Approach to Safety, indicates the specific activities people have been involved and when

39. Phase 3: Results – Process Safety - Involvement in Safety

40. Additional Components Measured Welfare Arrangements Aligns with ‘Person Element’, the Commitment to Safety, and identifies the welfare arrangements that affects people’s commitment

41. Process Safety Results – Welfare Arrangements

42. Process Safety Results – Multiple Regression: The Way Forward • Opportunities for Change • Sr. Mgmt. Commitment to Safety - Evaluate beliefs and means to demonstrate • ‘On-the-Job’ Approach to Safety - Need to reduce the number of ‘At-Risk’ behaviors • Emergency Preparedness - Evaluate plans and awareness of workforce • Housekeeping - Need to review effectiveness and time spent

43. Phase 4: The Way Forward • There are 6 major Safety Culture areas where progress can be made to propel PDO Process Safety into the world-class safety culture range. • Enhance the safety leadership skills of all managerial levels. • Review the current risk assessments with the job holders, and identify gaps to help put any appropriate risk controls in place. • Address the inherent Asset Damaging Process Safety risks and consider, If not already done, examining incident databases by those Process Safety risks that fall under Asset Integrity, Operator Competency and Safety Management activities to identify which type of process safety risk is most prevalent in PDO; • Fully involve Associates in safety via sound and proven strategies, such as conducting risk assessments, and developing a comprehensive and adaptive Behavioral Safety process. • Review the effectiveness of the Emergency Preparedness . • Review ways of improving and maintaining housekeeping • Set a corporate target of 95% of all corrective actions being completed within 30 days of being reported and track it.

44. Questions / Comments?