A method to identify investigative blind spots (MIBS): Addressing blunt-end factors of ultra-safe organizations’ investigation-work-as-done

•The paper presents a method to identify and address investigative blind spots (MIBS).•Blind spots are issues that are systematically not addressed in investigative work.•They emerge due to work pressures when using methods, or due to gaps in methods.•They can emerge in ultra-safe organizations with...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSafety science Vol. 154; p. 105825
Main Authors Lundberg, Jonas, Woltjer, Rogier, Josefsson, Billy
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Elsevier Ltd 01.10.2022
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0925-7535
1879-1042
1879-1042
DOI10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825

Cover

Abstract •The paper presents a method to identify and address investigative blind spots (MIBS).•Blind spots are issues that are systematically not addressed in investigative work.•They emerge due to work pressures when using methods, or due to gaps in methods.•They can emerge in ultra-safe organizations with modern investigation methods.•The paper discusses and compares three cases of using the method at an air navigation provider. Ultra-safe organizations, such as Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), have extensive safety management organizations and generally excellent safety records with very few serious incidents and accidents. This development has been supported by increasingly advanced and effective methods. However, recent research has uncovered how the application of even advanced incident investigation methods is subject to the same pressures of the reality of everyday work, similar to other safety-critical work tasks. They may therefore also have “incidents”, where all issues are not examined with desired thoroughness, and all recommendations are not formulated or implemented with desired effectiveness. This development may be driven by different factors. For instance, the economic pressure on ANSPs is arguably high in Europe’s competitive aviation market. This speaks for an efficient and pragmatic method for investigating organizational factors affecting incident investigation work. The foundation for such a method existed in prior research, in the form of lists of risk factors for investigative work. In this paper, we present the Method for identifying Investigative Blind Spots (MIBS). We also describe, compare, and assess its development and application, at a Swedish ANSP. Incident investigators were involved in a series of semi-structured workshops to identify possible “blind spots” in their own investigation practices (investigation-work-as-done), i.e. organizational factors that impede or otherwise affect the various phases of the investigative process (investigation-work-as-imagined). This resulted in a method description with an associated set of discussion cards that ultra-safe organizations can use to address blunt-end factors of their investigation-work-as-done.
AbstractList Ultra-safe organizations, such as Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), have extensive safety management organizations and generally excellent safety records with very few serious incidents and accidents. This development has been supported by increasingly advanced and effective methods. However, recent research has uncovered how the application of even advanced incident investigation methods is subject to the same pressures of the reality of everyday work, similar to other safety-critical work tasks. They may therefore also have "incidents", where all issues are not examined with desired thoroughness, and all recommendations are not formulated or implemented with desired effectiveness. This development may be driven by different factors. For instance, the economic pressure on ANSPs is arguably high in Europes competitive aviation market. This speaks for an efficient and pragmatic method for investigating organizational factors affecting incident investigation work. The foundation for such a method existed in prior research, in the form of lists of risk factors for investigative work. In this paper, we present the Method for identifying Investigative Blind Spots (MIBS). We also describe, compare, and assess its development and application, at a Swedish ANSP. Incident investigators were involved in a series of semi-structured workshops to identify possible "blind spots" in their own investigation practices (investigation-work-as-done), i.e. organizational factors that impede or otherwise affect the various phases of the investigative process (investigation-work-as-imagined). This resulted in a method description with an associated set of discussion cards that ultra-safe organizations can use to address blunt-end factors of their investigation-work-as-done.
•The paper presents a method to identify and address investigative blind spots (MIBS).•Blind spots are issues that are systematically not addressed in investigative work.•They emerge due to work pressures when using methods, or due to gaps in methods.•They can emerge in ultra-safe organizations with modern investigation methods.•The paper discusses and compares three cases of using the method at an air navigation provider. Ultra-safe organizations, such as Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), have extensive safety management organizations and generally excellent safety records with very few serious incidents and accidents. This development has been supported by increasingly advanced and effective methods. However, recent research has uncovered how the application of even advanced incident investigation methods is subject to the same pressures of the reality of everyday work, similar to other safety-critical work tasks. They may therefore also have “incidents”, where all issues are not examined with desired thoroughness, and all recommendations are not formulated or implemented with desired effectiveness. This development may be driven by different factors. For instance, the economic pressure on ANSPs is arguably high in Europe’s competitive aviation market. This speaks for an efficient and pragmatic method for investigating organizational factors affecting incident investigation work. The foundation for such a method existed in prior research, in the form of lists of risk factors for investigative work. In this paper, we present the Method for identifying Investigative Blind Spots (MIBS). We also describe, compare, and assess its development and application, at a Swedish ANSP. Incident investigators were involved in a series of semi-structured workshops to identify possible “blind spots” in their own investigation practices (investigation-work-as-done), i.e. organizational factors that impede or otherwise affect the various phases of the investigative process (investigation-work-as-imagined). This resulted in a method description with an associated set of discussion cards that ultra-safe organizations can use to address blunt-end factors of their investigation-work-as-done.
ArticleNumber 105825
Author Josefsson, Billy
Woltjer, Rogier
Lundberg, Jonas
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Jonas
  surname: Lundberg
  fullname: Lundberg, Jonas
  email: jonas.lundberg@liu.se
  organization: Department of Science and Technology, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Rogier
  surname: Woltjer
  fullname: Woltjer, Rogier
  email: rogier.woltjer@foi.se
  organization: Defence Technology Division, Swedish Defence Research Agency, Stockholm, Sweden
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Billy
  surname: Josefsson
  fullname: Josefsson, Billy
  email: billy.josefsson@lfv.se
  organization: Research & Innovation Department, LFV Air Navigation Services of Sweden, Norrköping, Sweden
BackLink https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-187275$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index
BookMark eNp9kU1uUzEUhS3USqSBDTDyEAZObb_4xQ8xCYVCpVYM-Jla_g03vNqR7aQqIzbAArq9rgSHgIQYdGTJPt_xveecoKOYokfoGaMzRll_up6VYmHGKeftQkguHqEJk4uBMDrnR2hCBy7IQnTiMTopZU0pZV3PJujnEl_7-jU5XBMG52OFcIsh7nypsNIVdh6bEaLDZZNqwc-vLl5_fPESL53LvhSIq_a8jZX4Jgna1pQLTgFvx5o1KTp4nPJKR_jevFIs9z_u_nVPkdyk_I3oQlzb6Ak6Dnos_umfc4o-n7_9dPaeXH54d3G2vCS2k7wSxobOCU77haaDtlJS0WlreymcngdthKE8mEFQOTdWGD901rHeLaQw1s6D6aaIHHzLjd9sjdpkuNb5ViUN6g18Wao2sxphq1qEvKU2RfKgtzmVkn1QFurv8duWMCpG1b4GtVb7GtS-BnWooaH8P_TvZw9Crw6QbyHswGfVFD5a7yB7W5VL8BD-Cy8rp_g
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ssci_2023_106315
crossref_primary_10_1080_00140139_2024_2390127
Cites_doi 10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00045-X
10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.009
10.1016/j.aap.2010.07.003
10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.018
10.1016/j.ssci.2009.07.004
10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.010
10.1016/j.ssci.2009.01.004
10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.041
10.1016/j.ress.2006.08.010
10.1016/j.aap.2011.08.014
10.1016/j.ssci.2010.04.001
10.1017/CBO9781139062367
10.1016/j.aap.2014.07.027
10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104827
10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005326
10.1016/j.apergo.2015.07.017
10.1016/j.ssci.2011.01.008
10.1016/j.ssci.2018.07.001
10.1016/j.ssci.2017.09.018
10.1016/j.ssci.2019.04.016
10.1016/j.aap.2013.01.010
10.1016/j.ssci.2015.08.010
10.1080/09617353.2018.1556505
10.1037/h0042769
10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.271
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2022 The Authors
Copyright_xml – notice: 2022 The Authors
DBID 6I.
AAFTH
AAYXX
CITATION
ABXSW
ADTPV
AOWAS
D8T
DG8
ZZAVC
DOI 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825
DatabaseName ScienceDirect Open Access Titles
Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access
CrossRef
SWEPUB Linköpings universitet full text
SwePub
SwePub Articles
SWEPUB Freely available online
SWEPUB Linköpings universitet
SwePub Articles full text
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
DatabaseTitleList

DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Economics
Public Health
EISSN 1879-1042
ExternalDocumentID oai_DiVA_org_liu_187275
10_1016_j_ssci_2022_105825
S0925753522001643
GroupedDBID ---
--K
--M
.~1
0R~
123
13V
1B1
1RT
1~.
1~5
29P
4.4
457
4G.
53G
5VS
6I.
7-5
71M
8P~
9JM
9JN
9JO
AABNK
AACTN
AAEDT
AAEDW
AAFJI
AAFTH
AAIAV
AAIKJ
AAKOC
AALRI
AAOAW
AAQFI
AAQXK
AAXUO
ABBQC
ABFNM
ABIVO
ABJNI
ABKBG
ABLVK
ABMAC
ABMMH
ABMVD
ABMZM
ABNUV
ABXDB
ABYKQ
ACDAQ
ACGFS
ACHRH
ACIWK
ACJTP
ACNNM
ACNTT
ACPRK
ACRLP
ADBBV
ADEWK
ADEZE
ADMUD
ADTZH
AEBSH
AECPX
AEKER
AENEX
AFKWA
AFRAH
AFTJW
AFXBA
AFXIZ
AGHFR
AGJBL
AGUBO
AGUMN
AGYEJ
AHHHB
AHJVU
AHPOS
AIEXJ
AIKHN
AISVY
AITUG
AJBFU
AJOXV
AJRQY
AKURH
AKYCK
ALEQD
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AMFUW
AMRAJ
ANZVX
AOMHK
ASPBG
AVARZ
AVWKF
AXJTR
AZFZN
BJAXD
BKOJK
BLXMC
BNPGV
BNSAS
CS3
DU5
EBS
EFJIC
EFLBG
EJD
ENUVR
EO8
EO9
EP2
EP3
F3I
F5P
FDB
FEDTE
FGOYB
FIRID
FNPLU
FYGXN
G-2
G-Q
GBLVA
HEH
HMK
HMO
HMY
HVGLF
HZ~
IHE
J1W
JJJVA
KOM
LCYCR
M29
M3W
M3Y
M41
MO0
N9A
NAHTW
O-L
O9-
OAUVE
OZT
P-8
P-9
P2P
PC.
PQQKQ
PRBVW
Q38
R2-
RIG
ROL
RPZ
SAE
SDF
SDG
SES
SEW
SNG
SPC
SPCBC
SSB
SSG
SSH
SSL
SSO
SSS
SST
SSZ
T5K
UHS
WH7
WUQ
YHZ
~02
~G-
AATTM
AAXKI
AAYWO
AAYXX
ABWVN
ACIEU
ACRPL
ACVFH
ADCNI
ADNMO
AEIPS
AEUPX
AFJKZ
AFPUW
AGCQF
AGQPQ
AGRNS
AIGII
AIIUN
AKBMS
AKRWK
AKYEP
ANKPU
APXCP
CITATION
ABXSW
ADTPV
AOWAS
D8T
DG8
EFKBS
ZZAVC
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-1193d52067a09ac88053acc685da4fab5b02fb95084bc5be93cd16d785bcc4fb3
IEDL.DBID AIKHN
ISSN 0925-7535
1879-1042
IngestDate Tue Sep 09 23:56:54 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 22:59:37 EDT 2025
Tue Jul 01 01:47:06 EDT 2025
Fri Feb 23 02:35:41 EST 2024
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Keywords Recommendations
Blunt end
Investigative practice
Incident investigation
Safety management
Work-as-done
Language English
License This is an open access article under the CC BY license.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c382t-1193d52067a09ac88053acc685da4fab5b02fb95084bc5be93cd16d785bcc4fb3
OpenAccessLink https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753522001643
ParticipantIDs swepub_primary_oai_DiVA_org_liu_187275
crossref_citationtrail_10_1016_j_ssci_2022_105825
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ssci_2022_105825
elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_ssci_2022_105825
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2022-10-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2022-10-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 10
  year: 2022
  text: 2022-10-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationTitle Safety science
PublicationYear 2022
Publisher Elsevier Ltd
Publisher_xml – name: Elsevier Ltd
References Milch, Laumann (b0095) 2016; 82
Drupsteen, Hasle (b0025) 2014; 72
Underwood, Waterson (b0155) 2013; 55
Korolija, Lundberg (b0065) 2010; 48
Hulme, Stanton, Walker, Waterson, Salmon (b0055) 2019; 117
Woods (b0170) 2015; 141
Simon (b0140) 1956; 63
Wrigstad, Bergström, Gustafson (b0180) 2014; 4
Turner (bib181) 1978
Hollnagel (b0030) 2002
Licu, Cioran, Hayward, Lowe (b0075) 2007; 92
Lundberg, Rollenhagen, Hollnagel, Rankin (b0080) 2012; 45
Kirwan, Reader, Parand (b0060) 2018; 38
Cook, Woods (b0015) 1994
Stemn, Bofinger, Cliff, Hassall (b0145) 2018; 101
Patriarca, R., Di Gravio, G., Woltjer, R., Costantino, F., Praetorius, G., Ferreira, P., Hollnagel, E., 2020. Framing the FRAM: A literature review on the functional resonance analysis method. Saf. Sci. 129, 104827.
Vaughan (b0160) 1999; 25
Rae, Provan (b0105) 2019; 111
Woltjer, Pinska-Chauvin, Laursen, Josefsson (b0165) 2015; 141
Leveson (b0070) 2002
Hollnagel (b0050) 2018
Wrigstad, J., 2018. The inside of a paradigm. An expedition through an incident reporting system, Faculty of Medicine. Lund University, Lund.
Lundberg, Rollenhagen, Hollnagel (b0085) 2009; 47
Reason, J., 1997. Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Ashgate, Burlington, VT.
Cedergren (b0010) 2013; 53
Hollnagel (b0045) 2012
Rollenhagen, Westerlund, Lundberg, Hollnagel (b0125) 2010; 48
Rankin, A., Lundberg , J., Woltjer, R., 2014. A Framework for Learning from Adaptive Performance, In: Nemeth, C., Hollnage, E. (Eds.), Resilience Engineering in Practice, Volume 2 - Becoming Resilient. Ashgate, Farnham, UK, pp. 79-95.
Salmon, Goode, Taylor, Lenné, Dallat, Finch (b0135) 2017; 59
Dekker, Cilliers, Hofmeyr (b0020) 2011; 49
Hollnagel (b0035) 2004
Hollnagel (b0040) 2009
Amalberti (b0005) 2001; 37
Underwood, Waterson (b0150) 2012
Lundberg, Josefsson (bib182) 2018
Lundberg, Rollenhagen, Hollnagel (b0090) 2010; 42
Reason, J., 1990. Human error. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
Salmon, Cornelissen, Trotter (b0130) 2012; 50
10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0175
Cook (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0015) 1994
Rollenhagen (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0125) 2010; 48
Simon (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0140) 1956; 63
Stemn (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0145) 2018; 101
Kirwan (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0060) 2018; 38
Dekker (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0020) 2011; 49
Licu (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0075) 2007; 92
Leveson (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0070) 2002
Lundberg (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_bib182) 2018
Turner (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_bib181) 1978
Lundberg (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0090) 2010; 42
Lundberg (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0085) 2009; 47
Wrigstad (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0180) 2014; 4
Hollnagel (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0050) 2018
Salmon (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0135) 2017; 59
Hollnagel (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0045) 2012
Korolija (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0065) 2010; 48
Cedergren (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0010) 2013; 53
Milch (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0095) 2016; 82
10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0115
Amalberti (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0005) 2001; 37
10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0110
10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0120
Hulme (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0055) 2019; 117
Salmon (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0130) 2012; 50
Vaughan (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0160) 1999; 25
Hollnagel (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0035) 2004
Underwood (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0150) 2012
Woods (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0170) 2015; 141
Drupsteen (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0025) 2014; 72
Hollnagel (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0030) 2002
Rae (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0105) 2019; 111
Hollnagel (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0040) 2009
Underwood (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0155) 2013; 55
Lundberg (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0080) 2012; 45
10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0100
Woltjer (10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0165) 2015; 141
References_xml – volume: 45
  start-page: 455
  year: 2012
  end-page: 467
  ident: b0080
  article-title: Strategies for dealing with resistance to recommendations from accident investigations. Accident Analysis
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
– volume: 48
  start-page: 859
  year: 2010
  end-page: 867
  ident: b0125
  article-title: The Context and Habits of Accident Investigation Practices: A Study of 108 Swedish Investigators
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– volume: 53
  start-page: 133
  year: 2013
  end-page: 141
  ident: b0010
  article-title: Implementing recommendations from accident investigations: A case study of inter-organisational challenges
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
– year: 2018
  ident: b0050
  article-title: Safety-II in Practice
– volume: 141
  start-page: 5
  year: 2015
  end-page: 9
  ident: b0170
  article-title: Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering
  publication-title: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
– reference: Rankin, A., Lundberg , J., Woltjer, R., 2014. A Framework for Learning from Adaptive Performance, In: Nemeth, C., Hollnage, E. (Eds.), Resilience Engineering in Practice, Volume 2 - Becoming Resilient. Ashgate, Farnham, UK, pp. 79-95.
– volume: 49
  start-page: 939
  year: 2011
  end-page: 945
  ident: b0020
  article-title: The complexity of failure: Implications of complexity theory for safety investigations
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– year: 2012
  ident: b0045
  article-title: FRAM: The Functional Resonance Analysis Method - Modelling Complex Socio-technical Systems
– reference: Reason, J., 1990. Human error. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
– year: 1978
  ident: bib181
  publication-title: Man-made Disasters
– volume: 82
  start-page: 9
  year: 2016
  end-page: 17
  ident: b0095
  article-title: Interorganizational complexity and organizational accident risk: A literature review
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– reference: Wrigstad, J., 2018. The inside of a paradigm. An expedition through an incident reporting system, Faculty of Medicine. Lund University, Lund.
– volume: 4
  year: 2014
  ident: b0180
  article-title: Mind the gap between recommendation and implementation—principles and lessons in the aftermath of incident investigations: a semi-quantitative and qualitative study of factors leading to the successful implementation of recommendations
  publication-title: BMJ Open
– start-page: 199
  year: 2018
  end-page: 210
  ident: bib182
  article-title: A pragmatic approach to uncover blind spots in accident investigation in ultra-safe organizations - A case study from air traffic management
  publication-title: Advances in Human Error, Reliability, Resilience, and Performance. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE 2018). 21-25 July
– year: 2009
  ident: b0040
  article-title: The ETTO Principle: Efficiency-Thoroughness Trade-Off - Why Things That Go Right Sometimes Go Wrong
– volume: 47
  start-page: 1297
  year: 2009
  end-page: 1311
  ident: b0085
  article-title: What-You-Look-For-Is-What-You-Find - The consequences of underlying accident models in eight accident investigation manuals
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– volume: 59
  start-page: 637
  year: 2017
  end-page: 648
  ident: b0135
  article-title: Rasmussen's legacy in the great outdoors: A new incident reporting and learning system for led outdoor activities
  publication-title: Appl. Ergon.
– volume: 111
  start-page: 119
  year: 2019
  end-page: 127
  ident: b0105
  article-title: Safety work versus the safety of work
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– volume: 48
  start-page: 157
  year: 2010
  end-page: 165
  ident: b0065
  article-title: Speaking of human factors: Emergent meanings in interviews with professional accident investigators
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– year: 2002
  ident: b0070
  article-title: System Safety Engineering: Back To The Future
– volume: 38
  start-page: 200
  year: 2018
  end-page: 217
  ident: b0060
  article-title: The safety culture stack–the next evolution of safety culture?
  publication-title: Saf. Reliab.
– reference: Patriarca, R., Di Gravio, G., Woltjer, R., Costantino, F., Praetorius, G., Ferreira, P., Hollnagel, E., 2020. Framing the FRAM: A literature review on the functional resonance analysis method. Saf. Sci. 129, 104827.
– volume: 50
  start-page: 1158
  year: 2012
  end-page: 1170
  ident: b0130
  article-title: Systems-based accident analysis methods: A comparison of Accimap, HFACS, and STAMP
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– start-page: 385
  year: 2012
  end-page: 394
  ident: b0150
  article-title: A critical review of the STAMP, FRAM and Accimap systemic accident analysis models
  publication-title: Advances in Human Aspects of Road and Rail Transportation
– volume: 141
  start-page: 115
  year: 2015
  end-page: 130
  ident: b0165
  article-title: Towards understanding work-as-done in air traffic management safety assessment and design
  publication-title: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
– year: 2002
  ident: b0030
  article-title: Understanding accidents-from root causes to performance variability
  publication-title: Proceedings of the IEEE 7th Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants
– volume: 92
  start-page: 1162
  year: 2007
  end-page: 1169
  ident: b0075
  article-title: EUROCONTROL—Systemic Occurrence Analysis Methodology (SOAM)—A “Reason”-based organisational methodology for analysing incidents and accidents
  publication-title: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
– reference: Reason, J., 1997. Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Ashgate, Burlington, VT.
– volume: 42
  start-page: 2132
  year: 2010
  end-page: 2139
  ident: b0090
  article-title: What you find is not always what you fix–How other aspects than causes of accidents decide recommendations for remedial actions
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
– volume: 117
  start-page: 164
  year: 2019
  end-page: 183
  ident: b0055
  article-title: What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– year: 2004
  ident: b0035
  article-title: Barriers and Accident Prevention
– volume: 101
  start-page: 313
  year: 2018
  end-page: 325
  ident: b0145
  article-title: Failure to learn from safety incidents: Status, challenges and opportunities
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– start-page: 225
  year: 1994
  end-page: 310
  ident: b0015
  article-title: Operating at the sharp end: the complexity of human error
  publication-title: Human Error in Medicine
– volume: 55
  start-page: 154
  year: 2013
  end-page: 164
  ident: b0155
  article-title: Systemic accident analysis: Examining the gap between research and practice
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
– volume: 37
  start-page: 109
  year: 2001
  end-page: 126
  ident: b0005
  article-title: The paradoxes of almost totally safe transportation systems
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
– volume: 72
  start-page: 351
  year: 2014
  end-page: 358
  ident: b0025
  article-title: Why do organizations not learn from incidents? Bottlenecks, causes and conditions for a failure to effectively learn
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
– volume: 25
  start-page: 271
  year: 1999
  end-page: 305
  ident: b0160
  article-title: The dark side of organizations: Mistake, misconduct, and disaster
  publication-title: Ann. Rev. Sociol.
– volume: 63
  start-page: 129
  year: 1956
  end-page: 138
  ident: b0140
  article-title: Rational choice and the structure of the environment
  publication-title: Psychol. Rev.
– volume: 37
  start-page: 109
  issue: 2–3
  year: 2001
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0005
  article-title: The paradoxes of almost totally safe transportation systems
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00045-X
– volume: 50
  start-page: 1158
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0130
  article-title: Systems-based accident analysis methods: A comparison of Accimap, HFACS, and STAMP
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.009
– volume: 42
  start-page: 2132
  issue: 6
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0090
  article-title: What you find is not always what you fix–How other aspects than causes of accidents decide recommendations for remedial actions
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
  doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.07.003
– ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0110
– volume: 141
  start-page: 5
  year: 2015
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0170
  article-title: Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering
  publication-title: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.018
– volume: 48
  start-page: 157
  issue: 2
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0065
  article-title: Speaking of human factors: Emergent meanings in interviews with professional accident investigators
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.07.004
– volume: 141
  start-page: 115
  year: 2015
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0165
  article-title: Towards understanding work-as-done in air traffic management safety assessment and design
  publication-title: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.010
– volume: 47
  start-page: 1297
  issue: 10
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0085
  article-title: What-You-Look-For-Is-What-You-Find - The consequences of underlying accident models in eight accident investigation manuals
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.01.004
– volume: 55
  start-page: 154
  year: 2013
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0155
  article-title: Systemic accident analysis: Examining the gap between research and practice
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
  doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.041
– ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0175
– volume: 92
  start-page: 1162
  issue: 9
  year: 2007
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0075
  article-title: EUROCONTROL—Systemic Occurrence Analysis Methodology (SOAM)—A “Reason”-based organisational methodology for analysing incidents and accidents
  publication-title: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2006.08.010
– volume: 45
  start-page: 455
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0080
  article-title: Strategies for dealing with resistance to recommendations from accident investigations. Accident Analysis
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
  doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.08.014
– volume: 48
  start-page: 859
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0125
  article-title: The Context and Habits of Accident Investigation Practices: A Study of 108 Swedish Investigators
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.04.001
– ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0115
  doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139062367
– start-page: 199
  year: 2018
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_bib182
  article-title: A pragmatic approach to uncover blind spots in accident investigation in ultra-safe organizations - A case study from air traffic management
– year: 2004
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0035
– volume: 72
  start-page: 351
  year: 2014
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0025
  article-title: Why do organizations not learn from incidents? Bottlenecks, causes and conditions for a failure to effectively learn
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
  doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2014.07.027
– ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0100
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104827
– volume: 4
  year: 2014
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0180
  article-title: Mind the gap between recommendation and implementation—principles and lessons in the aftermath of incident investigations: a semi-quantitative and qualitative study of factors leading to the successful implementation of recommendations
  publication-title: BMJ Open
  doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005326
– volume: 59
  start-page: 637
  year: 2017
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0135
  article-title: Rasmussen's legacy in the great outdoors: A new incident reporting and learning system for led outdoor activities
  publication-title: Appl. Ergon.
  doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2015.07.017
– volume: 49
  start-page: 939
  issue: 6
  year: 2011
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0020
  article-title: The complexity of failure: Implications of complexity theory for safety investigations
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.01.008
– year: 2012
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0045
– volume: 111
  start-page: 119
  year: 2019
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0105
  article-title: Safety work versus the safety of work
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.07.001
– year: 2002
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0030
  article-title: Understanding accidents-from root causes to performance variability
– volume: 101
  start-page: 313
  year: 2018
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0145
  article-title: Failure to learn from safety incidents: Status, challenges and opportunities
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2017.09.018
– year: 2018
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0050
– volume: 117
  start-page: 164
  year: 2019
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0055
  article-title: What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.04.016
– start-page: 385
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0150
  article-title: A critical review of the STAMP, FRAM and Accimap systemic accident analysis models
– volume: 53
  start-page: 133
  year: 2013
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0010
  article-title: Implementing recommendations from accident investigations: A case study of inter-organisational challenges
  publication-title: Accid. Anal. Prev.
  doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.01.010
– start-page: 225
  year: 1994
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0015
  article-title: Operating at the sharp end: the complexity of human error
– year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0040
– volume: 82
  start-page: 9
  year: 2016
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0095
  article-title: Interorganizational complexity and organizational accident risk: A literature review
  publication-title: Saf. Sci.
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.08.010
– volume: 38
  start-page: 200
  issue: 3
  year: 2018
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0060
  article-title: The safety culture stack–the next evolution of safety culture?
  publication-title: Saf. Reliab.
  doi: 10.1080/09617353.2018.1556505
– year: 1978
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_bib181
– volume: 63
  start-page: 129
  year: 1956
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0140
  article-title: Rational choice and the structure of the environment
  publication-title: Psychol. Rev.
  doi: 10.1037/h0042769
– ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0120
– year: 2002
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0070
– volume: 25
  start-page: 271
  issue: 1
  year: 1999
  ident: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825_b0160
  article-title: The dark side of organizations: Mistake, misconduct, and disaster
  publication-title: Ann. Rev. Sociol.
  doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.271
SSID ssj0001361
Score 2.3713093
Snippet •The paper presents a method to identify and address investigative blind spots (MIBS).•Blind spots are issues that are systematically not addressed in...
Ultra-safe organizations, such as Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), have extensive safety management organizations and generally excellent safety...
SourceID swepub
crossref
elsevier
SourceType Open Access Repository
Enrichment Source
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 105825
SubjectTerms Blunt end
Incident investigation
Investigative practice
Recommendations
Safety management
Work-as-done
Title A method to identify investigative blind spots (MIBS): Addressing blunt-end factors of ultra-safe organizations’ investigation-work-as-done
URI https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105825
https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-187275
Volume 154
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3NbtQwEB612wNICEEBUX4qHxACIbNOHOeHWyhUW1B7KUW9Wf5FQaukarJIXBAvwAPwejwJduwsy4EeOCaZsS2PMx5bM98H8CTPiWWGaJwTZXDmQn5cSe0pwyzJK-cPmfQX-scn-eIse3fOzrfgYKqF8WmV0fcHnz566_hmHmdzftE081NSueXm0UnSESeKbsNOSquczWCnPnq_OFk75ISOsKleHnuFWDsT0rx617Y7JqapZ7wtPWP2P_anTSDRcfM5vAU3Y9SI6jCw27Bl2l24NhUV97twI1y_oVBVdAd-1ChwQ6OhQ81YjGu_ouYPqMYXg5xCq5E71g49enZ89Pr0-StUaz0mxraf3OdVO2DjRCInD-osWi2HS4F7YQ3qNqs4f33_udl612Kf8IVFj3XXmrtwdvj2w8ECR-YFrGiZDjhxYZ1mHtldkEoo948zKpTKS6ZFZoVkkqRWegLZTComTUWVTnJdlEwqlVlJ78Gsdc3fB1RkSttCUFt46LBCC-WOcIwIQVItaJ7tQTLNN1cRltyzYyz5lH_2mXsbcW8jHmy0By_WOhcBlONKaTaZkf-1tLjbNa7Uexpsvu7DQ3G_aT7W3M0wXzYrnpQu_GMP_rODh3DdP4XUwEcwGy5X5rELcQa5D9svvyX7cSH_BmQs_Tk
linkProvider Elsevier
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Lb9QwELbK9lAkhKCAKE8fEAIha52H8-AWCtUu7e6lLerN8hMFrZKqySJx4w_wA_h7_BLGsbMsB3rgGnvsyGOPZ6yZ70PoRZZRywzVJKPKkBRcflJK7SjDLM1KsIdMugf9xTKbnacfL9jFDjoca2FcWmWw_d6mD9Y6fJmG1Zxe1vX0lJaw3Rw6STzgRCU30G7KINqboN1qfjxbbgxylAywqa4_cQKhdsaneXUwNoSJcewYbwvHmP2P-2kbSHS4fI7uoNvBa8SV_7G7aMc0-2hvLCru9tEt__yGfVXRPfSjwp4bGvctrodiXPsN139ANb4aDAKNxhDW9h1-tZi_O339FldaD4mxzWdoXjc9MdAlcPLg1uL1qr8SpBPW4Ha7ivPX95_bo7cNcQlfRHREt425j86PPpwdzkhgXiAqKeKeRODWaeaQ3QUthYIzzhKhVFYwLVIrJJM0ttIRyKZSMWnKROko03nBpFKplckDNGlg-IcI56nSNheJzR10WK6FghCOUSForEWSpQcoGtebqwBL7tgxVnzMP_vCnY640xH3OjpAbzYylx6U49rebFQj_2trcbg1rpV76XW-mcNBcb-vP1UcVpiv6jWPCnD_2KP_nOA52pudLU74yXx5_BjddC0-TfAJmvRXa_MU3J1ePgvb-Td1m_8o
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A+method+to+identify+investigative+blind+spots+%28MIBS%29%3A+Addressing+blunt-end+factors+of+ultra-safe+organizations%E2%80%99+investigation-work-as-done&rft.jtitle=Safety+science&rft.au=Lundberg%2C+Jonas&rft.au=Woltjer%2C+Rogier&rft.au=Josefsson%2C+Billy&rft.date=2022-10-01&rft.issn=0925-7535&rft.volume=154&rft.spage=105825&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.ssci.2022.105825&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1016_j_ssci_2022_105825
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0925-7535&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0925-7535&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0925-7535&client=summon