SQT Blog

Our latest cohort of students of the NEBOSH International Certificate in Occupational Health and Safety just received their results and we are delighted to report an overall pass rate of 98% across all three exams. This compares with a NEBOSH pass rate of 55% for the three exams across all centres offering this course.

Sincere congratulations to all students and to their tutor Finbarr Stapleton.

The NEBOSH International General Certificate in Occupational Health and Safety meets the academic requirements for Technician Membership (Tech IOSH) of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH – www.iosh.co.uk) and Associate membership (AIIRSM) of the International Institute of Risk and Safety Management (IIRSM – www.iirsm.org).

Our next NEBOSH International Certificate course commences on 8th October.

A NEBOSH survey carried out during the first half of this year among 1,600 successful Certificate level students, revealed that Course Provider reputation was far more important than course cost for example, when deciding who to study with.

The survey showed the relative importance of the following factors in choosing a course provider:
– Reputation 30%
– Location 22%
– Study Method 11%
– Availability of dates 10%
– Cost 6%

“These are very interesting findings,” said NEBOSH Accreditation Manager, Matthew Powell-Howard, who led the study. “The survey clearly shows that building a strong reputation through recommendation from students, employers and other influential parties is vital.”

“The study also showed that students tend to judge the performance of their Course Provider primarily by the relationship they have with their tutor.” Maintaining the same tutor was also important. Less satisfied students tended to have several different tutors.

We here, at SQT, found this NEBOSH research encouraging.

We would hope that the solid reputation we have built up in delivering both the NEBOSH International Diploma and Certificate in Occupational Health & Safety is evident to prospective students.

Objective evidence includes:
– Feedback from delegates who attended the last 2 Diploma and Certificate courses revealed that 90% were fully or very well satisfied with their course.
– Exam results reveal that SQT candidates consistently out-perform NEBOSH averages for all providers. In a spirit of openness and transparancy, we publish all NEBOSH exam results on our website.

SQT always has the same tutor deliver the full NEBOSH courses. Finbarr Stapleton is our NEBOSH tutor and has extensive experience of deliverering both the NEBOSH International Certificate and Diploma in Occupational Health & Safety.

We are currently taking bookings on the next NEBOSH Diploma course commencing on 20th September and the next NEBOSH Certificate course commencing on 8th October.

It is very common, in my experience, to see people in industry undertaking capability analysis, without reference to the corresponding control charts. This is understandable to a degree where there is very little data available, for example, during the early stages of process validation, or during preliminary R&D work. However, when there is adequate data available, it is of vital importance that the control chart is studied in conjunction with the capability analysis.

Many people are aware that there are two sets of capability indices, Cp/Cpk and Pp/Ppk, although they frequently don’t understand how the difference between them arises. This distinction between the indices is of recent origin, and I have seen its arrival on the capability analysis scene in the mid 1990’s. The first published document to distinguish clearly between the two sets of indices was the SPC manual that accompanied the QS 9000 standard produced by the American “Big Three” automotive companies, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler in 1995. Prior to the 1990’s there was only one set of indices in use, namely, Cp/Cpk; the lower Pp/Ppk values were there, but were not distinguished from Cp/Cpk.

In my SPC training courses, I emphasise the importance of understanding the difference between the two sets of indices, and explaining how the differences arise. It is common to find a considerable difference between Cp/Cpk on one hand, and Pp/Ppk on the other hand, with Pp/Ppk at a lower, less attractive, level. To understand this difference, the practitioner must look at the control chart. The instability, should it exist, leading to poorer capability, and the difference between Cp/Cpk and Pp/Ppk, can be readily seen on the control chart.

I am a great fan of control charts. I see them as one of the most powerful of analytical tools, and this useful application is over and above their main function, which is to assist in the control of manufacturing processes. When people send me data, and I have analysed millions of data values over the years, the first thing I will do is to analyse the data on a control chart. I can immediately see important features of the manufacturing operation, in particular, whether is the process is being run in a stable condition.

SPC practitioners can be readily trained in the correct interpretation of control charts, and how they lead to better understanding of capability analysis.

The FSAI (Food Safety Authority of Ireland) has published a booklet on New Food Information Regulation. The booklet gives food businesses operators (FBOs) an easy to understand overview of some of the upcoming changes to food labelling under the new food information regulations.

According to the FSAI webiste While the original objectives and components of current labelling legislation still apply, some new requirements are being introduced under Regulation No. (EU) 1169/2011, which will modernise the current system.

The booklet highlights new elements of the Regulation including allergen information, date of minimum durability, nutrition declaration, front of pack labelling and country of origin labelling.

The FSAI is encouraging all food businesses to familiarise themselves with the new regulatory requirements and download the booklet, which is available on their website.

Today’s blog post is written by Albert Plant who delivers a wide range of Continuous Process Improvement courses.

I am greatly surprised at the number of experimenters I meet who still don’t understand the basics of designing experiments. This includes engineers and scientists, many with PhD’s in leading multinational companies with household names, who are using outdated methods to design experiments. It is odd to see experimenters making calls on their most up to date iPhones, but using experimental design techniques from the nineteenth century. The most common error is the use of the OFAT approach. OFAT stands for “one factor at a time”; essentially, the experimenter has several factors in which they have an interest, but they study the factors one at a time.

There are two serious downsides to using OFAT; (a) the method is grossly inefficient, leading to an unnecessarily large number of experimental runs, (b) more seriously, the experimenter is unable to study interactions among the factors. The alternative and correct approach is to use factorial methods, in which the levels of all factors of interest are varied simultaneously. I think my students are surprised to learn that the factorial approach to designing experiments has been in use since the 1920’s, and, therefore, the OFAT method they are using is almost a century out of date!! It is true that in the early days many people would have found the analytical methods of the factorial approach complex to use, but this is no longer the case with an array of special DOE (Design of Experiments) computer software programmes readily available at reasonable prices.

Engineers and scientists can be readily trained to use the most up to date and most mathematically advanced software tools to design and analyse their experiments, and thereby gain the maximum amount of information from their work.

- Research conducted by NEBOSH this year showed that a NEBOSH qualification and/or Technician Membership of IOSH or higher was specified in 90 out of 100 jobs advertised in the UK for health and safety managers and advisors.
– The Diploma holder may use the designatory letters IDipNEBOSH after their name.
– The Diploma holder may apply for Graduate membership (Grad IOSH) of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, the major UK professional body in the field. This is the first step to becoming a Chartered Safety and Health Practitioner as a Chartered Member of IOSH (CMIOSH).
– This qualification is also accepted by the International Institute of Risk and Safety Management as meeting the academic requirements for full membership (MIIRSM).
– In the current economic climate, with more competition for fewer jobs, being suitably qualified has never been more important.

Why would you do an Internationally recognised NEBOSH International Diploma in Occupational Health & Safety with SQT Training?
– Over the past years, the pass rate for SQT Diploma students has consistently out-performed the NEBOSH average pass rate for all centres.
– The International Diploma course syllabus covers International legal frameworks and codes of practice but our course also covers Irish legislation. (Other centres run the National Diploma which is based only on UK legislation.)
– Demand for this course has remained very solid despite the recession. We have a new course commencing on 20th September which is already well subscribed, contact us soon to reserve your place.