The statement that all maritime organizations need public health procedures is not particularly groundbreaking, yet its justification extends beyond mere legal obligation and regulatory compliance. A company’s public health procedures serve as a compass for its day-to-day operations, preventing adverse health events on board such as illness and even death. Moreover, they play a crucial role in influencing employee motivation, loyalty, and—fundamentally—the quality of work performed.
Emphasizing the importance of public health policy offers a clear and quantifiable approach for maritime executives to protect the health and wellbeing of their crew and clientele. Industry leaders recognize that minimizing health-related incidents reduces the associated costs and risks, including those linked to P&I insurance, crew productivity, and a company’s reputation. However, what often goes overlooked is that achieving success in public health involves more than just the dissemination of generic Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Ensuring adherence to SOP requirements by team members both on board and ashore can present challenges. Nonetheless, there are identifiable reasons why the public health procedures of numerous companies fail to fulfil their intended objectives.
Why Most Company SOPs Fall Short
In the maritime industry, ‘public health’ encompasses a broad spectrum of aspects from the provision of potable water to food safety; from the implementation of pest management strategies to sanitation protocols; from the operation of recreational water facilities to the prevention and management of infectious diseases.
Despite the universal desire among maritime companies to foster a safe working environment on board, the integration of public health as a core value often falls short. Team members don’t always follow company-approved processes, and oversight from management can vary.
Let’s examine some of the reasons why company public health procedures are ineffective.
1. Company SOPs don’t provide sufficient guidance
Numerous vessel owners, operators, and ship management companies have implemented procedures that mirror existing public health regulations with one, simple addition: defining the allocation of responsibilities. This approach is inadequate as regulatory guidelines typically only outline the requirements to be adhered to, without providing a clear methodology for achieving compliance. Essentially, they explain WHAT needs to be done, not HOW to do it.
An SOP serves a similar purpose to a culinary recipe; it’s designed to guide an individual towards the successful completion of a task. If it lacks the necessary detail to assist in that endeavor, its usefulness comes into question.
Consider the example of baking a cake. If the guidance consists solely of oven temperatures and cooking times, the resulting cake is unlikely to meet taste expectations. Similarly, if a company procedure for the shock chlorination of a vessel’s potable water system merely specifies the required chlorine concentration and contact time, should one expect the process to be effective in completely eliminating microbial contamination?
The primary objective of an SOP is to assist crew in successfully accomplishing a given task, regardless of whether they are new on board or experienced seafarers. Although it’s necessary for procedures to adhere to regulatory standards, they should not be viewed as bureaucratic formalities; instead, SOPs need to be practical and useful for the intended operations.
2. Crew receive mixed messages from management
Another common reason for the inconsistent application of procedures is the inadvertent, yet conflicting directives from senior management. The success of a company’s public health policies depend as much on the clarity of communication as on their implementation and execution.
When a company proclaims to its employees that safety vis-à-vis public health is of utmost importance, yet simultaneously treats SOP requirements as optional based on circumstances, it inevitably has consequences. Team members may disregard company-approved protocols, particularly when faced with tight deadlines or difficult operational decisions, opting for shortcuts that simplify their work.
In respect of public health, beyond essential requirements such as ensuring the safe provision of food and water, numerous industry standards serve more as recommendations and guidelines rather than enforceable regulations. Should a company choose to overlook a particular hygiene standard, it’s important to evaluate the associated risks, implement appropriate mitigation measures, and transparently reflect this decision in its operational policies. Ensuring that SOPs are in harmony with actual practices is essential to their success.
3. Public health is driven by policy rather than culture
As discussed in our previous article—Why Public Health Culture ‘Eats Strategy For Breakfast’—a company’s culture plays a pivotal role in shaping its employees’ actions, more so than any well-written SOP. The success of organizational strategies aimed at improving public health standards will be limited if the root cause of unsafe behavior remains unaddressed.
Discrepancies between an organization’s documented policies and the actions of its executives and senior leaders—for example, stating public health matters but in practice prioritizing task completion—renders policy-based initiatives ineffective. Enhancing hygiene standards at sea necessitates acknowledging that the culture of a company influences the behavior of its team members. Moreover, that the culture is defined by the very behaviors it permits.
Reflect on how your company conveys the importance of public health, both intentionally and unintentionally. Assess whether the availability of spare parts is consistent. Question whether reinforcing hand hygiene protocols is a routine practice. Consider if officers lead by example. Contemplate the implications of the message “preparing for an audit” from the crew’s perspective: could it be perceived that hygiene rules are only enforced in anticipation of a ship sanitation inspection?
In order for any maritime company to operate effectively and successfully, it is imperative to have policies and procedures in place. Nonetheless, even the greatest procedures in the world will be ineffective unless a company’s culture endorses and encourages steadfast commitment to appropriate public health practices day-in-day-out.
4. The use and misuse of training
Training crew in procedural requirements is critical to their successful execution. A team member can’t comply with an SOP if they’re unaware of its existence. However, simply handing employees a procedure and asking them to acknowledge it falls short of ensuring actual comprehension and adherence.
The key to effective policy implementation lies in educating all team members—managers included—on what tasks need to be performed, how to execute them correctly, and why they are important. Additionally, supervisors must conduct subsequent evaluations to verify the trainees have understood the knowledge imparted and its practical application in their routine duties on board.
Training undeniably offers the opportunity to enhance the skill and expertise of your team, which in turn benefits individual and organizational performance: even so, training alone is not a panacea for all procedural compliance challenges. Infrequent training sessions do not address the deeper cultural issues that give rise to hazardous practices. Furthermore, it implies that the management considers public health to be a concern for the crew alone, rather than a corporate-wide responsibility.
Education without application is merely an exercise in theory. When team members perceive their leaders do not practice what is preached, or if there are no consequences for ignoring the lessons learned, skepticism about the purpose and value of the training is justified.
Without a firm commitment to genuine cultural transformation, maritime companies are squandering resources on training initiatives that offer little beyond a fleeting educational experience. In essence, unless the training leads to a significant shift in the status quo, the investment of time and money into such ventures is futile, as they fail to make a meaningful contribution to improving public health.
5. There are no consequences for not following company procedures
Another frequent problem related to policy implementation is the tendency of team members to disregard company public health requirements under the assumption that they won’t face any consequences, especially if it is believed operational needs justify such actions. At the heart of this problem lies a prevalent absence of accountability. It is incumbent upon every manager, whether at sea or ashore, to ensure compliance with health and safety procedures.
All team members, irrespective of their experience or skill level, require feedback to excel. To ensure that outstanding employees maintain exceptional levels of performance, it’s vital to acknowledge and reward their efforts. Conversely, if a team member’s performance deteriorates or falls short of expectations, constructive criticism must be provided. In the event that such measures prove ineffective, there must be tangible consequences.
While providing a supportive environment where lessons can be learned from mistakes made is a crucial component for the growth of any individual—to err is human—there needs to be a clear distinction between a sincere error and a deliberate action. If employees are not held responsible for adhering to public health standards, company procedures will not be effective in mitigating risk.
How to Improve Your Public Health Procedures
Maritime organizations have a dual responsibility, both morally and legally, to implement public health procedures that are effective—so far as is reasonably practicable—in preventing illness and loss of life on board. Understandably, it’s quite disheartening for companies and their employees who have dedicated time and resources to develop comprehensive SOPs, only to see them ignored.
When this happens, it’s important to take a step back and evaluate why team members might be overlooking your procedures. As discussed, there are likely several underlying causes contributing to this issue.
Ultimately, the true significance of public health transcends mere compliance with policies and procedures. It’s about establishing clear standards for acceptable behavior and consistently upholding them, making them integral to all aspects of business operation. It involves integrating the principles of continuous improvement into a company’s core values, ensuring that public health is something that applies to every level of the organization, from the top management to the newest crew members on board.
The key to accomplishing this lies in fostering a culture of public health. This approach will not only enhance compliance with organizational processes—the aim of this particular article—but position your company as a leading entity committed to protecting the health and safety of its crew and all who sail on board.
By realigning your focus to building a successful and sustainable public health culture, your company will be taking the first steps in developing a work environment where individuals do more than just comply with the rules: they live and breathe them.