Risk Management in Account to Engineering- MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theRisk Management in Account to Engineering. Answer: Introduction Risk management is the assessment, pointing out of areas of fault that is carried out by an organization to be able to know if their business can be able to continue running smoothly, without experiencing interference. It facilitates the monitoring of risks and thereby making sure; they are controlled thus cutting down the percentage of loss to the organization. This can also be an upside to an organization as the assessment can very well be the turning point of capitalizing in on boosts to the organization thereby when risk management is taken into play it brings an aura of opportunities that can be realized Hester (2008). The main agenda of the form of management is to ensure that occurring risks or risks that are seen to want to deflect the companys goals are to be dealt with in terms of deflecting the negative impact that may befall an organization Das (2007). Organizations have the option of having the risk assessors in the organization and this actually helps a lot as the organ ization does not have to outsource its workers thus reducing costs and increases the chances of performing better as their work is solely checked whether all angles of the company are safe and whether to put in place rules and regulations in regards to working areas so us to curb the redundancy of errors. Principles of Risk Management There are the principles in regards to risk which constitute of, creating value this is seen as the resources used to limit a seen risk should be less than that which is being limited if it would actually be let free and the company to find the problem its costs should be less. This is due to companies would be happy to see risk method prevention being cheaper Hester (2008). Being tailorable, here it means that the risk being undertaken is controllable and can be well extinguished by having the risk assessors take care of the problem this is so as when there is a conflict between the organization and the risk assessors the probability of damage being encountered is high Reniers (2016). Considering human factors is another critical point as they should take a seat back and assess the whole risk properly with no need for haste as it may cost some employees their jobs, thus proper management and have the human aspect in consideration they ought to ensure its fallbacks do not cripple the human relationship aspect. There is the aspect of having periodically assessed format where the organization is keen to check on its working and having the interest to know how things are faring, whether there are any risks cropping up, and if so what are the steps being put in place to curb them. Another factor is openly addressing uncertainties and assumptions this should be a vocal point of this all as when problems are encountered its good to state what is to be expected and if not, so what would the disadvantages be and how can they be faced and dealt with without having too many losses following each other Das (2007). Large and Widespread in the Longford Gas Explosion 1998 The Longford gas explosion was a horrific disaster that occurred in the year 1998 on the date of September 25 when an explosion took place at an industrial gas station known as the Esso natural gas plant at the Longford premises in the Australian state of Victoria Gipps land area. Due to this catastrophe, some lives were lost as the total of dead was 2 and 8sustained injuries ranging from very serious to some luckily having escaped the tragedy with little bits of cuts. The catastrophe also caused the state's gas supply to be restricted for approximately two weeks thus crumbling the on day goings on businesses for that period Cause of Failure The cause of failure is attributed to the fact that it was in a very bad state so much that the then Wales premier the late Sir Neville described it as a waste and ramshackle, this shows how badly off the lean oil pump was and how its defunct state contributed to the accident that occurred. Also, another profound inquiry into the incident showed that the first major cause of the incident was the very bad way the pumps had been fastened in which it caused the pipes to expand at an alarming rate which causes the left front wheel of gas tank to come causing it to jerk off, in this is seen as the main cause due to the lackluster maintenance that wasnt being carried out on the gas plant itself that caused a high turnover and poor procedures on the companies inspections and close checkups Reniers (2016). Another factor to the explosion was the unavailability of workplace safety and the no employee training. With this in hand and the lackluster building of the gas structure which had been built poorly in terms of its height was one meter lower than the baseline and also the virtue of adding too many metals that could not be able to facilitate the rapid change of temperatures in the system thus succumbing to the high pressures thus leading to the explosion. The tumbling of the construction due to the explosion further increased the deaths as it crushed through the rooms where they were stored and ripped through walls easily thus burning others intensely. The failure of carrying out an audit for hazards also proved to share a hand in this as the company did not bother with such details its sole aim was to make profits thus did not bother having their system equipments checked for proper functionalities. Why it Qualifies as an Engineering Failure. It qualifies as an engineering failure as seen by the matters that led to its failure. This is so as if the contractors who were building the gas tank did not neglect the tanks then maybe the gas pipes would not have succumbed to the force of too much heat running through it. In addition, if Esso the company had trained it workers by use of the engineering acts at the place they would have been able to cope with the tragedy as they would have been able to try and curb the fire that engulfed the premises. The other prevailing factor is that of the pipes not being assessed appropriately this is done by the tank gas engineers who ought to be seeing whether the alignment of the pipes and their meters are working correctly, this is vital so as to avoid such disasters from happening in this situation its the gas tanks pipes poor maintenance that brought about the pipes losing its way and blowing up thereby causing the harsh collision with the enclosed building thus bringing it down partial ly. Here the engineers were the ones to help avoid this but due to poor mannerisms and keeping on modifying the bolts and nuts not looking at their capabilities led to this disaster Haring (2015). If I was in the engineers seat in all these failures that were experienced, I would have done things differently by making sure the companies cylinders and pipeline were checked and rechecked within a span of months so as to ensure safety is in the storage area this would lead to proper checkups and analysis thus ensuring good workings and comfortable checkups without having doubts. On the next point of the explosion I would ensure the proper guidelines are followed as the company had faults which were encountered due to an engineers thirst to finish up his project this would not be the case for me as I would ensure the construction of the gas state policies are adhered to and that nothing is added to the construction. The barriers that would have helped this accident from occurring is having safety bodies and construction manuals and guides in terms of having construction assessments to see whether the engineers are following the protocols in constructions. The lessons learned from this failure is that things are to be followed to the letter and that misjudging of things can lead to dire consequences. Thereby its positive to follow governing rules so as to have a good working environment. After the Australian government, put up this failure laws and enactments, which sort to ensure that the public safety is a priority, it did so by having construction rules and policies which are followed to the letter thus curbing the inaccurately constructed or engineered projects Haring (2015). The inherent risk was the loss of life, which is very large in this particular review as seen as from the causes of the accident that led up to the fateful tragedy. The risk assessment on the matter was very high as both causes signified a high amount of ignorance and complacency this brought forward the notion of poor governance. Though with the following of mandates and rules the loss of 2 lives and the injured being 8 is a big catastrophe this shows that the cost of repairs and maintenance is not more than that of the departed and injured lives. By so engineers ought to have better mannerisms to ensure the safety of personnel Renier (2016). References Das, (2007).Risk management: swaps financial derivatives library. Singapore, J. Wiley. Hester Harrison, (2008).Risk assessment and risk management. Cambridge, Royal Society of Chemistry. Beaver Parker, (2015).Risk management: problems solutions. New York, McGraw-Hill. Berends, (2011).Risk Management for Design and Construction. Hoboken, John Wiley Sons. Meyer Reniers, (2016).Engineering risk management. Niwa, (2009).Knowledge-based risk management in engineering: a case study in human-computer cooperative systems. New York, Wiley. Hayes, (2007).Risk management in engineering construction: implications for project managers: a report of research supported by the SERC specially promoted program me in construction management and prepared by the Project Management Group, UMIST. Ha?Ring, (2015).Risk analysis and management: engineering resilience.