BARS – on the window.

[Kharon]

Serious question here, no messing about. I have now had 3 experiences with the BARS audit system and for ease of use, correction and acquittal I have to say it feels to me, 'skewed', clumsy and somehow, just not quite right.

There appears to be no flexibility; does anyone else find it's a another one size fits all, blunt instrument and word feast which seems to decide in "Green , Amber or Red" terms if an operation is sound ?.

Definitely not casting nasturtiums on a honest attempt to make thing better, but some of the 'check items' are really fluffy and not remotely related to 'practical' solutions and appearing quite esoteric when taken in isolation. (Do East West oriented paper clips relate to CFIT). etc.

If this system which was supposed to be 'the bees knees' for smaller operators is to be adopted by the 'Big end' of the contract world perhaps some considered, sensible industry comment could ease the pain of 'yet another' mindless box ticking exercise and produce some 'real value' measurable safety issues.

Only my (in this case humble) opinion of course, but the question stands none the less for that.

[excrewingbod]

I've only had a single experience of a BARS audit. Whilst I can understand the sentiment and logic behind the principle, the checklist approach, in my opinion, will not give them the results I believe the client wants.

These organisations should, in my opinion, move away from the old fashioned compliance style model of rigid checklist questions and into a process style audit process. Of course there needs to be a balance of documented evidence that certain policies/procedures are implemented, but there is too much emphasis on the contents of regulatory operations manuals, rather than witnessing first hand what happens out on the line.