As a HSE professional one of my many duties I have been responsible for over the years has included writing management systems. In the term management systems I am talking about writing procedures, policies and generating forms.
In writing procedures or whatever you may call them (work methods, guidance documents, business practices, standard operating instructions, H&S arrangements etc.), I have looked at previous work I have done and utilised web searches to see other ideas in practice. I have spoken to fellow professionals and gathered thoughts. I have read guidance from the HSE and other bodies and the standards, the quality and the content differ hugely from document to document.
So what makes a procedure work or what should a ‘good’ procedure look like?
The last time I had a discussion on this fact using LinkedIn as part of a general discussion group, I got an email offline from someone I never even knew telling me I was wrong; and let me assure you they were very precious of their own method for writing a procedure or system document.
The discussion was around if procedures in general have to be lengthy, do they have to be written in technical spiel and go to the far end of the earth in detail? I merely commented that I had taken the approach to have procedures termed business practices and that I had 39 of them with the average size only about three to four pages. I defined that rather than massaging my own ego in writing beautiful documents (probably a lie really with my English skills!) fit for a lawyer, I would write simple documents that are easy to read and follow, supported by training. I stated my reasons and did not criticise any other person’s views. This other LinkedIn user found the need to reply to me offline. Their email informed me, my system was not robust enough, and I was intrigued after all without seeing the system they could pass comment; maybe they could help me identify risks that they may be able to see as foreseeable. They had more psychic ability than me that was for sure. I showed respect to this individual and was professional and polite in my response, after all what if writing a procedure is a black art and I had missed the picture completely, what if I was wrong with my approach.
In being fair to this anonymous individual who decided the need to email me, they had worked in insurance and suffered an instance, allegedly, in a court of law when the procedure did not describe everything that was required and subsequently found themself out of work as a scapegoat (or so they claimed in the email!). If true then maybe an unhappy story or maybe it was a wrong career choice or dare I say it a misunderstanding of how to write a procedure.
Taking this entire ramble of mine above on board, my question and thoughts are this. What makes a good procedure? Is it after all a black art that takes care and attention with a certain skillset or is it a process that takes logic and more thoughts in keeping it efficient in words? Is a good procedure one that is relevant to the key points and can a brief document be indeed sufficient or is it indeed insufficient merely down to its size?
My answer and honest belief is that the procedure needs to be as efficient as it can be i.e. without waffle. It needs to cover what is required, how this is delivered and the requirements. I still believe the majority of procedures can be short, snappy and straight to the point without explaining for pages why the procedure is in place, but appreciate in some industries with high risk then heavily written documents may still be needed. If the system is written in an easier format, less quantity and more quality then I honestly believe they stand a far better chance of being read, being understood and being followed.
I think in the instance above and albeit without the full facts of the case, if a prosecution did take place then it was nothing to do with the size of the document itself, it probably missed a key point. My impression is that some practitioners feel the need to write in depth procedures as they feel this will give them greater protection against any potential criminal or civil claims.
So is procedure writing a black art, should they be written in a different language than most other documents or do we as professionals in our chosen fields need to demystify this view and purely just ensure they cover the key points required without overdoing it?
HSE & Risk Management - My Thoughts 
Thank you for every other informative site. The place else could I am
getting that type of information written in such an ideal approach?
I’ve a challenge that I am just now working on, and I have been at the look out for such information.
A procedure should fulfill the purpose for which it is being written and should be perhpas, as short and as simple as possible. It is not black art, but of course it is taken as black art by some.
I am in agreement Abdul.
Why is it portrayed to be a black art and by who? Is this safety professionals trying to raise their value within a business or it down to lack of experience or confidence that drives this approach?
I like the way you write, Karel. I agree with you
Hi Karel.
Suitable and sufficient.
I am a qualified technical author and I sat and passed a “simple English” course. Both of these courses taught me the need for, and benefit of, clear, concise and accurate procedures and documents.
I believe that poorly written procedures, reports and documents destroy credibility and give those who wish to avoid taking action an excuse.
Regards
Robin
I agree that some poorly written documents can affect credibility, but I know some excellent professionals out there whose English skills are not the best.
Lets not undervalue the spoken work through simple communications and training to support such approaches.
What is a poorly written document though? Is this something of extensive length, something lacking detail or something with grammar and spelling errors within it?
I have seen 8 page documents that if you take the contents page, an amendment record and title page out of it you are down to 5. 3 pages dedicated to something not related to the actual purpose of the document. Although other reasons may exist to why companies follow this route.