7 days, 7 blogs - Win hearts and minds to build consensus

Determine who needs to be involved and build a trust network

It is a fact of life that everything gets old and fails (and I include myself in that statement: I now need reading glasses, can’t run without a knee support, as I get older everything seems to be getting harder!). It is no different for our automation systems! The question is, what should we do about it?

I remember one customer who told me, “Steve, we have 3 choices: 1) we can do nothing 2) we can do something and 3) we can do everything. Doing nothing should never be an option, the laws of probability dictate ‘when’ not ‘if’. All that you are doing is delaying the inevitable (option 1). . Rarely do we have the luxury of unlimited budget, resources, access to the plant to do everything (option 3). So, doing something is better than doing nothing (option 2). We need to be proactive and be prepared just in case option 3 arises!!!!!”

On the basis that we need to do something, and we have decided what funding approach to follow (read Blog 1 – determine the funding approach) how do we approach the people aspects of any investment decision? As we journey towards the ‘digital promised land’ including parties with a vested interest early in the process and understanding their safety system upgrade needs not only helps build the business case, but also strengthens support for the project. 

A critical success factor in any migration / upgrade project is to include as many stakeholders as possible in developing the business case for the safety system upgrade. 

For instance, it is worth spending time with the different parts of the organization who come into contact with safety system and understand what challenges they have with respect to the safety systems. Spending time with the operations team (bypass management, operational risk assessments, alarm management), maintenance teams (proof testing, spares, repairs, maintenance), supply chain (commercial terms, support agreements), process safety groups (periodic safety reviews, safety system audits) and engineering groups (changes, updates, modifications, expansions etc.) and seeking their input will be more impactful and the project will me more successful if the upgrade helps to alleviate some of their specific challenges or pain points.

Talking with owners and users of safety system data is also important. With cyber security becoming an ever-increasing threat, the IT department is becoming a key stakeholder and must now be included (ignore at your peril!)

Agree on why we need to do something

The only good reason to upgrade is because it achieves one or more tangible business goals. The exact goals will vary from company to company. What’s important is that those goals be identified and quantified, and that they become the most significant criteria in selecting a replacement system.

Typically, there are 3 reasons to do something:

1.     We are forced to (in these cases, people will see it as a cost):

• Something breaks
• Audit violation
• New regulations e.g. safety standards updates e.g. IEC61511 Edition 2, cybersecurity standards e.g. IEC62443
• Corporate edict that says you have to comply!

2.     There is an Opportunity to change:

• Another event / timing of another project
• Part of plant / operating unit becomes available
• Opportunity to make changes

3.     It may be part of a Strategic decision

• Means of gaining competitive advantage
• Aligns with the Vision of the future
• Specific investments for long term gains

I always used to thing that “Logic and Data wins every time” how wrong I was!  My logical argument to upgrade was based on the business risk (cause) and the business risk (consequence).

However, after hitting my head against a brick wall several times, I came to realize that while logic is fine, when someone doesn’t believe something needs to be done, or just strongly disagrees, then no amount of logic facts or data will convince them otherwise (try convincing a toddler to do something when they don’t want too!). So this is where I needed to take a different approach.

Share the pain

Fundamentally it’s about cost benefit of change. I was told years ago by a customer that the justification to upgrade is as simple equation that boils down to this:

When the “PAIN_1 (production risk) of doing nothing multiplied by the remaining life of the plant (years)” is more than the PAIN_2 (cost) of the upgrade including production losses resulting from upgrade transition.

e.g. where upgrade makes sense

• Production loss of $2M per year are directly linked to obsolete equipment x 15 year plant life = $30M= PAIN_1
• Upgrading system costs $5M in hardware/services + $10M in lost production during transition $15M = PAIN_2

e.g. where upgrade doesn’t make sense

• Production loss of $2M per year are directly linked to obsolete equipment x 5 year plant life = $10M= PAIN_1
• Upgrading system costs $5M in hardware/services + $10M in lost production during transition $15M = PAIN_2

One trick is to correctly quantify the PAIN with the people who OWN the PAIN because opinions on the quantum will vary with the owner.

Build the trust

Discovery interviews are a good way to gather information that will enable you to deliver a winning business case.  Basically, you want to understand three aspects:

Current (where are you today):

• How is the job currently done?
• What gaps or problems currently exist?
• What systems are utilized to help automate or simplify the current method of working?

Desired (where do you want to be):

• What changes would the individual like to see in this particular area?

Impact (what is business impact):

• Change is hard, so there should always be a reward for change
• If you can get down to true metrics (e.g. time saved, errors eliminated, manual steps automated, efficiency etc.) then you can quantify the benefit

Another good way to win the hearts and minds is to individually (or as a team) identify the current restrictions / limitations that impact each of the individual’s day to day job with respect to their interaction with the safety system. A great way to do this is to focus on a specific given task e.g. apply a maintenance bypass before removing a device from service, and then use open “diagnostic questions”. For example, try using some of the following prompting questions “In your opinion, what makes this…..”

If possible, against each question, try and identify a unit of measure, and if possible, quantify it:

... the time it takes to...

... the likelihood of...

... the number of [x] to...

... the amount of...

... the frequency with which...

... the amount of waste due to...

... downtime due to...

... Yield loss due to...

... the percentage of...

... the cost of ...

As you go through this process you will gain the trust and insight from all the various stakeholders involved with safety systems in one way or another.

Tip: credit contributors in the business case to ensure that their inputs and efforts are recognized

Don’t forget to identify the management activities necessary to ensure functional safety objectives are met

An often-overlooked consideration of any aging system is the challenge of finding resources with the requisite skills, knowledge and competency to engineer, maintain, support and manage the safety system. If compliance to international standards such as IEC61511 is a prerequisite, then there is a requirement to ensure that “Persons, departments, organizations or other units which are responsible for carrying out and reviewing each of the SIS safety life-cycle phases shall be identified and be informed of the responsibilities assigned to them”. Also, “Persons, departments or organizations involved in SIS safety life-cycle activities shall be competent to carry out the activities for which they are accountable.”

For more information, please refer to IEC61511 Chapter 5 – Management of Functional Safety, clause 5.2.2 Organization and resources

Knowledge retention

The loss of this knowledge, albeit at site, from the system integrator or equipment manufacturer is not easily recaptured! Training system experts much beyond the expected life of the product may not be cost effective, yet alone feasible (e.g. try finding computers with serial ports!) This is an extremely important point to consider as part of the winning upgrade justification.

Finally, agree the goals

Another trick to build consensus and win the hearts and minds is to work together with each person to agree the goals for the upgrade. Having a shared outcome where individuals have contributed can wield excellent co-operation and results. For example, some of the goals could include:

1.     Reduction in Life Time Cost

2.     Return on Investment

3.     Internal rate of return

4.     Net present value

5.     Risk / Cost of a failure

6.     Cost of doing nothing vs. cost of upgrading

·       XXX mt/day * $/mt * XX days = $ M sales loss

·       XXX klb/day * $/klb * XX days = $ M margin contribution loss

·       Raw material consumption loss = XXX mt

·       Non-compliance contract to customers

·       Potential permanent customer loss

7.     ROI of tangibles / intangibles

8.     Reduction in insurance premiums

In the next blog we will take a closer look at when the best time is to upgrade