Comparing a multi-linear (STEP) and systemic (FRAM) method for accident analysis

5Citations
Citations of this article
43Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Accident models and analysis methods affect what accident investigators look for, which contributing factors are found, and which recommendations are issued. This paper contrasts the Sequentially Timed Events Plotting (STEP) method and the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) for accident analysis and modelling. The main issues addressed in this paper are comparing the established multi-linear method (STEP) with the systemic method (FRAM) and evaluating which new insights the latter systemic method provides for accident analysis in comparison to the former established multi-linear method. Since STEP and FRAM are based on a different understandings of the nature of accidents, the comparison of the methods focuses on what we can learn from both methods, how, when, and why to apply them. The main finding is that STEP helps to illustrate what happened, whereas FRAM illustrates the dynamic interactions within socio-technical systems and lets the analyst understand the how and why by describing non-linear dependencies, performance conditions, variability, and their resonance across functions. © Taylor & Francis Group, London.© 2009 Taylor & Francis Group.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Herrera, I. A., & Woltjer, R. (2009). Comparing a multi-linear (STEP) and systemic (FRAM) method for accident analysis. In Safety, Reliability and Risk Analysis: Theory, Methods and Applications - Proceedings of the Joint ESREL and SRA-Europe Conference (Vol. 1, pp. 19–26). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482266481-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free