Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Developing Trust While Communicating Risks

by Sanjeev Saraf Leave a Comment

Developing Trust While Communicating Risks

Developing Trust While Communicating Risks

Communicating risks to public from chemical or nuclear facilities is a major challenge. We notice this over and over again with EPA community-right-to-know, nuclear power plants and lately with the LNG facilities.

I want to focus on a critical aspect of this risk communication – winning the trust of the community.

There are two major cognitive social psychology principles one must understand while planning a risk communication program:

1. If an individual has strong initial impressions of a hazard, then subsequent evidence will be influenced by these beliefs. New evidence will appear reliable if it is consistent with initial impressions. And similarly, new evidence will be dismissed if it is contrary to initial impression.

For example, if you are talking about risks from LNG terminals and the neighbors are concerned about explosion hazards or terror threats, you cannot simply dismiss them. I have noticed in some of these meetings citizens raising question about hazards and some PR firm answers LNG is a clean energy source. Within a minute this evidence will be dismissed!You have to acknowledging the hazards/risks consistent with initial impressions and then present your strategy for minimizing risks.

Remember people receive information from media, talking to other people, news, blogs, radio and all these come into account in risk perception. Without complete knowledge of the system, such as LNG terminal, decisions of a person are based on beliefs concerning likelihood of uncertain events. And we know these likelihoods are minimal – now all you have to do is show what steps are being taken in order to reduce the likelihood.

2. If an individual lacks strong prior opinions about a hazard, their risk perception will be influence by HOW the information is presented.

As an example, if a patient is offered a treatment option with 70% chance of survival (as opposed to 30% chance of death) he is more than likely to accept the treatment. Framing the statistics in terms of living rather than dying changes risks perceived by the patient.

So what does all this mean in context of developing a risk communication or crisis communication plan:

  1. Realize you will have two distinct categories of people – people who have developed prior opinions and people who have no prior idea
  2. Plan your presentation for both these categories.
  3. For audience without a prior belief system educate them with past statistics.
  4. Audience who have a prior opinion you have to acknowledge the hazards and focus on risk mitigation measures

You can keep the above guidelines and now you have to decide

  • What information to communicate
  • How best to put across the information
  • Who should communicate

Filed Under: Articles, on Risk & Safety, Operational Risk Process Safety

About Sanjeev Saraf

Reduce risks, Increase Uptime, Reduce costs

I did my first litigation support work in 2000.

Since then I have been obsessed with preventing future failures. Some of these failures can have catastrophic consequences.

Having tried various techniques, learning / unlearning “latest” paradigms, it is clear we have a long way to go!

But instead of thoughtful work, what I mostly see are platitudes and oversimplifications. No keen practical insights!

I want to change that.

« Survivability
The Bathtub Curve »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Photo of Sanjeev SarafArticles by Sanjeev Saraf
in the Operational Risk, Process Safety article series

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Posts

  • Gremlins today
  • The Power of Vision in Leadership and Organizational Success
  • 3 Types of MTBF Stories
  • ALT: An in Depth Description
  • Project Email Economics

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy