Risk assessment using
Scoring System Methodology (SSM)
as holistic substitute
for Height & Area Table
Presented by John Valiulis, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer, Hilti, Inc.
The challenge



H&A Table [overly?] prescriptive
Incomplete with respect to assessing all
relevant factors that make a given building
size safe or unsafe
Goals:


Holistic approach
Acceptable level of fire safety for communities,
occupants, emergency responders
Scoring System Methodology



Widely used throughout global economy for risk
assessment
pioneered by banking industry to assess likelihood
for default with loan applications
Other applications:





IRS audit decisions
Parole board decisions
Mass mail and telemarketing decisions
Insurance industry customer screening
Hospital patient procedure decisions
Other formal risk assessment tools
1.
What-If Analysis : Forward Modeling of Accidents


2.
Fault Tree Analysis: Backward Modeling of Accidents



3.
proceed from the complete or final event and branch back to root causes
useful in identifying risk prevention options
identify the minimal set of necessary conditions for the accident to occur
Checklists




4.
Proceed from an initiating event and branch to a set of possible or final events.
useful for modeling the impact of risk reduction options
Qualitative risk assessment.
Avoids direct characterization of risk.
Decision making through constraints. Inspect for compliance with
performance code which implies that risk is being maintained below
some acceptable level.
Easy to implement ‘either-or’ decisions but ignores trade-off or
substitution activity in risk management.
Scoring Systems: Risk Index Models
Example using SSM
SSM development for IBC


Define one or more risk metrics
For each risk measure, define set of measurable and observable risk
factors,


defined with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
Examples:







Set needs to be reasonably complete
Define relative importance of each risk factor




Occupancy classification
Height
Area
Full menu of active and passive risk mitigation measures
Expected emergency response
Use statistical data when available
Risk factor weights usually determined by SMEs
This process needs to be systematic; specific procedures have been developed
(ref papers)
Define acceptable levels of fire safety for each risk measure

Determined with SMEs
Available to give it a try…..
NAME: Prof Frank Noonan
TITLE: Associate Professor of Management
Affiliated with WPI’s Fire Protection Engineering Program
WPI Ombudsperson - Special Assistant to the President
COLLEGIATE AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
Lesley College, Cambridge, MA – M.A., 1996, Major: Counseling Psychology
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA - Ph.D., 1973, Major: Industrial Engineering &
Operations Research
Northeastern University, Boston, MA – M.S., 1968, Major: Mathematics
Boston College, Boston, MA - B.S., 1963, Major: Physics
TEACHING EXPERIENCE
1978 to present: Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Worcester, MA
Associate Professor of Management & Industrial Engineering
Affiliated with Manufacturing Engineering Program
Affiliated with Fire Protection Engineering Program
Affiliated with School of Industrial Management
1975- 1978: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Assistant Professor of Industrial & Operations Engineering
BUSINESS, PROFESSIONAL, MILITARY EXPERIENCE
1977-present: Consultant to over 10 businesses, universities and non-profit organizations in
operations risk analysis.
1999-2001: Special faculty sabbatical appointment with the U.S.C.G. R&D Center.