Pictorial Job Aids: The Next Step In Operator Qualification

There is a saying that one picture is worth a thousand words. After more than 32 years in the natural gas industry, I agree with that saying but with a caveat: it must be the correct picture and it must be presented with a concise and meaningful caption. Then, it will be worth many thousands of words.

This article describes the next step in the evolution of the operator qualification process: the development and use of operator qualification (OQ) “job aids” in the form of good pictures and diagrams with meaningful captions.

The pictorial job aids are much more effective and efficient to develop and use than the many thousands of words of explanation of how an operator qualification sub-task human error occurred. This next step of evolution is clearly needed now that we are more familiar with the fairly new OQ process. We can see weaknesses in quality assurance and we are dealing with the growing challenges associated with worker attrition and changing technologies.

For many decades prior to the 1990s, almost all related organizations assumed that the basic skill levels of new employees and the historical training and developmental processes were adequate and that knowledge and performance gaps would be readily identified and rectified. Industry experience has taught us otherwise.

From 1987-2003, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) worked on developing a standard concerning the qualification of key personnel in the industry. In 1992, Congress recognized that workers needed to be capable and trained to recognize and deal with abnormal operating conditions. In 1994, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the industry decided that there needed to be a critical evaluation of each worker’s capabilities as it related to specifically identified tasks (OQ sub-tasks). In 1996, the DOT chose to have the industry and the DOT work to develop a final rule. Even though there were still differences of opinion, the final ruling was issued in 2003, which focused on reducing the likelihood of human error in the performance of OQ tasks.

Currently, there are cited generic tasks to be evaluated with recommended evaluation frequencies within the Code and guidelines. The basic litmus test of an OQ program should be whether you feel confident sending out a worker, who is Operator Qualified (OQed), to perform that particular sub-task. Unless you have critically reviewed the degree of evaluation: (1) the scope and completeness of questions; (2) the degree of physical aptitude that is required, where applicable, to pass; and (3) the frequency and the associated complexity and criticalness of the associated task, one cannot be confident sending out an OQed worker to perform that particular task.

If all of the above areas are found to be satisfactory, there is still a facet that is missing from the program. If the subject task is elaborate and it is not frequently performed, the literal OQ process does not adequately deal with this situation. A task that is elaborate and not frequently performed may have been satisfactorily performed by the employee during the evaluation process, but, the employee may not have retained the familiarity with the task requirements to identify abnormal operating conditions or to satisfactorily complete the assigned task.