Well, Greg Smith doesn’t mince words about the application of Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) – being typically a “shambolic mess … with incoherent risk assessments built off the back of equally incoherent risk matrices”.
He also argues that they fail to properly address issues of criticality, where the management of high-risk work activities is “lost in the dross” of the overall verbose SWMS, with controls for every single possible activity”.
This runs the risk of diluting the high-risk safety message.
He then nicely highlights an example from one of the Macondo blowout hearings relating to the company restriction of knives. Problematically, there was evidence on the lack of cutting devices to sever the tether for life raft.
This was indicative of a disconnect between the trivial (restricting cutting device) versus critical (ensuring proper systems of emergency response).
Grab this book – it’s a fantastic compliment to Paper Safe.
Ref: Smith, G. (2024). Proving Safety wicked problems, legal risk management and the tyranny of metrics
Ref link: https://www.waylandlegal.com.au/proving-safety
My site with more reviews: https://safety177496371.wordpress.com
Safety & Performance Research Summaries 
One thought on “Safe Work Method Statements a “shambolic mess … with incoherent risk assessments built off the back of equally incoherent risk matrices” – Greg Smith, Proving Safety”