MAST Conference will focus on ‘contributory factors’

12.00 | 9 December 2013 | | 5 comments

The 2014 MAST Annual Conference (11 March) will focus on the new dataset for those working in the public sector, ‘MAST Professional’, which includes ‘contributory factors’ (CFs).

The conference will feature extensive coverage of the use of CFs in MAST Professional, including a case study of how to use them with a live demonstration and a break out session to delve into the more technical aspects of contributory factor analysis. 

The keynote speaker at the conference is Dr Simon Christmas, an independent insight expert with a reputation for solving problems and moving debates forward through the application of clear thinking and design and delivery of qualitative research.

The conference will take place on Tuesday 11 March 2014 at Dunchurch Park Hotel, Rugby. Each MAST member organisation is entitled to one free delegate place, and additional delegate spaces and places for non-members are available for a fee of £60 plus VAT. Please email to book.

More detailed information about the conference and agenda will be available after the Christmas break.

For more information about MAST Online membership, and MAST Professional, contact Tanya Fosdick at Road Safety Analysis on 07795 385770.



Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    I am sure that Duncan was not totally dismissing Mast by the fact that a bad apple can upset the apple cart but the point is that there are other causes or causations that may have bearing on why an accident happened which have not previously been recognised or even considered, for whatever reason.

    Being involved in motorcycling has given me and many other motorcyclists a different perspective as to what is or maybe considered dangerous or not. Far different from a driver of a car.

    bob craven Lancs
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    Probably beyond the remit of the conference anyway, but a discussion at the outset on the validity and reliability of contributory factors in general would be useful. There’s a fine line between ‘contributory factor’ and ‘excuse’ and frankly, some of the listed contributory factors we have now can be taken ‘as read’ in the context of the accident itself. Perhaps ‘contributory factors’ should only be used for any verifiable extraordinary or exceptionally noteworthy factors that could not be presumed from the accident details.

    Hugh Jones, Cheshire
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    Thsi discussion thread is in danger of straying away from the subject of the news item but I feel I must respond to your post below.

    You are, of course, entitled to your view but in my opinion you are entirely incorrect in your apparent assumption that all, or a majority of, road safety professionals subscribe to a ‘punishment culture’.

    Nick Rawlings, editor, Road Safety News
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    Sadly Bob, no such organisation exists, not in the field of road safety anyway. There are plenty of organisations that fit the bill in the aviation, maritime, nuclear and rail safety industries, but as every one of them has rejected ‘bad apple theory’ and its associated punishment culture as being entirely the wrong way of preventing accidents from happening it is unlikeley that their methods would find traction in our industry.

    Duncan MacKillop, Stratford on Avon
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    I do believe in contributory factors. In my estimation some underlining causation can sometimes exist which hasnt been previously recognised because no one’s been looking for it and and it doesn’t come out in Stats 19. Something perhaps pertaining to road conditions or vehicle design or driving condition not recognised, like the strobe effect of sunlight through open branches or railings or the dust given up when harvesting.

    There are many things out there that are not catered for, a badly designed mini roundabout perhaps that people know is dangerous but can’t see the design fault and no one dare complain.

    Being independent of any (higher) authority or paymaster it’s sometimes up to the lay individual to make these points. Now at last an organisation that can correlate such info for the benefit of all.

    An organisation that can stand scrutiny and be informative about numerous incidents that at one time seemed may have appeared insular and insignificant but where there is or maybe common causation.

    How do I join.

    bob craven Lancs
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.