한국항해항만학회지 (Journal of Navigation and Port Research)

  • 제47권5호
  • /
  • Pages.296-304
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 1598-5725(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2093-8470(eISSN)
한국항해항만학회 (Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Communication Failures During Chemical Tanker Cargo Operations

  • Guzel Ahmet Turgut (Graduate School of Korea Maritime and Ocean University) ;
  • Wamugi Juilet Wangui (Graduate School of Korea Maritime and Ocean University) ;
  • Camliyurt Gokhan (Graduate School of Korea Maritime and Ocean University) ;
  • Dae-won Kim (Division of Marine Traffic Engineering Korea Maritime and Ocean University) ;
  • Young-soo Park (Division of Marine Traffic Engineering Korea Maritime and Ocean University)
  • 투고 : 2023.10.10
  • 심사 : 2023.10.31
  • 발행 : 2023.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Chemical tankers handle a diverse range of cargo types, necessitating varied cargo handling procedures due to the hazards associated with each type. Consequently, operations require heightened precautions and attention. Any misinterpretation or oversight can result in irreversible accidents. The incidence of cargo overflow in prior chemical tanker operations was reported by 56.09% of 353 Turkish, Korean, and Indonesian participants in this study, substantiating the gravity of the matter. In this study, the variables that caused communication failure during cargo operations and countermeasures are discussed in detail. The analysis leveraged survey data processed using factor analysis via SPSS. All of the top five factors leading to communication failure were attributed to human errors. Notably, unfamiliarity with cargo operations emerged as the most prevalent cause of communication failures, and stopping a blaming culture was the first among the countermeasures. The identified causes of communication failures could be solved by the countermeasures suggested by the survey participants. The solutions will promote effective communication during hazardous cargo operations and subsequently contribute to safety with significant potential to provide valuable insight into companies operating a fleet of chemical tankers.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Arslan, O. and Er, I. D.(2008). SWOT analysis for safer carriage of bulk liquid chemicals in tankers. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 154(1-3), pp. 901-913.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.10.113
  2. Aydin, M., Camliyurt, G., Akyuz, E. and Arslan, O.(2021). Analyzing human error contributions to maritime environmental risk in oil/chemical tanker ship. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 27(7), pp. 1838-1859.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2021.1910011
  3. Braaf, S., Manias, E. and Riley, R.(2011). The role of documents and documentation in communication failure across the perioperative pathway. A literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 48(8), pp. 1024-1038.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.05.009
  4. Buyukozturk, S.(2007). Sosyal Bilimler icin Veri Analizi El Kitabi. Ankara: Pegem A Yayincilik. 
  5. Celik, M.(2010). Enhancement of occupational health and safety requirements in chemical tanker operations: The case of cargo explosion. Safety Science, 48(2), pp. 195-203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2009.08.004
  6. Costello, A. B. and Osborne, J.(t.y.). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. 
  7. Dos Santos, I. C., Vieira, A. M. and Morais, P. R. D.(2014). POOR COMMUNICATION SKILLS MEANS HIGH RISK FOR AVIATION SAFETY. Gest?o & Regionalidade, 30(88). 
  8. Eaton, R. M.(2017). Hierarchy in the Medical Field 
  9. Harpe, S. E.(2015). How to analyze Likert and other rating scale data. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 7(6), pp. 836-850.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2015.08.001
  10. Holmes-Smith, P.(2000). Introduction to Structural Equation Modelling. ACSPRI 2000, p. 143. 
  11. Isle of Man Ship Registry, E.(2001). Casualty Investigation Report CA 68. 
  12. Jebb, A. T., Ng, V. and Tay, L.(2021). A Review of Key Likert Scale Development Advances: 1995-2019. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 637547. 
  13. Jiang, M., Lu, J., Yang, Z. and Li, J.(2020). Risk analysis of maritime accidents along the main route of the Maritime Silk Road: A Bayesian network approach. Maritime Policy & Management, 47(6), pp. 815-832.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1730010
  14. Khan, R. U., Yin, J., Mustafa, F. S. and Wang, S.(2022). Analyzing human factor involvement in sustainable hazardous cargo port operations. Ocean Engineering, 250, 111028. 
  15. McCabe, R. and Healey, P. G. T.(2018). Miscommunication in Doctor-Patient Communication. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(2), pp. 409-424.  https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12337
  16. Razmjooee, Y.(2012). Risks Related to the Maritime Transportation of Oil and Gas (mainly Crude oil, LPG, and LNG) -A Conceptual Study and Empirical Outlook on the Baltic Sea and UK Territorial Waters to Mitigate Risks (Dissertation, University of Bor?s/School of Engineering). Retrieved from https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-16497. 
  17. Saruchera, F.(2020). Determinants of effective high-risk cargo logistics at sea ports: A case study. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management. 
  18. Sakar, C. and Zorba, Y.(2017). A Study on Safety and Risk Assessment of Dangerous Cargo Operations in Oil/Chemical Tankers. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 5(4), pp. 396-413.  https://doi.org/10.5505/jems.2017.09226
  19. Stranks, J.(2007). Human Factors and Behavioural Safety (1st ed.). Routledge. 
  20. Suhr, D. D.(2006). Exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis?. 
  21. Wanjari, S.(2019). Feedback in Medical Education, 5(2).