Why Hardware Barrier Management Projects Fail:
The 10 Most Common Pitfalls
Across the industry, many organizations have initiated Hardware Barrier or Safety Critical Element Management projects to improve transparency and control over Process Safety barriers. Despite good intentions, a large proportion of these projects fail to deliver the expected outcomes.
The root causes are rarely technical. They are systemic.
The Reality Behind Failed Implementations
Based on experience gained from numerous Hardware Barrier Management projects worldwide, the same issues repeatedly undermine implementation efforts. These challenges are predictable and, more importantly, preventable.
The Ten Most Common Pitfalls
- Prerequisites were not in place before the project started e.g., asset register was not complete.
- Work process was not clearly defined/documented e.g., no SCE Identification and Management Manual, Deviation procedure.
- Maintenance execution was not effective in implementing timely inspection/testing (Preventive Maintenance, PM) and Maintenance tasks (Corrective Maintenance, CM).
- The selection criteria for SCE (i.e. boundary conditions) were not clear
- Learning from other similar projects were not incorporated
- Project management was not appreciated (plan, delivery steps, stage gates, governance, KPIs)
- Change management was not implemented (e.g., stakeholder management, communication, impact assessments)
- Project team was not on boarded, roles and responsibilities were not clear
- Handshakes were not completed, end user acceptance was not obtained
- Training and coaching was not provided at sufficient level
What Successful Projects Do Differently
Successful Hardware Barrier Management projects address these issues upfront. They focus on foundations before tools, governance before configuration, and ownership before automation. When these elements are treated as prerequisites rather than lessons learned, projects deliver lasting value.
I have led Hardware Barrier Management projects for nearly two decades across multiple regions and asset types. By establishing strong foundations, applying structured delivery frameworks, onboarding and training teams, configuring maintenance systems correctly, and operationalizing processes in the field, sustainable results can be achieved.
In practice, this approach has enabled significant improvements in project delivery and the establishment of effective Hardware Barrier Management systems for multi-asset organizations in less than 18 months.
A practical, proven, collaborative way forward
At SnSD, our approach to SCE identification and management is deliberately collaborative and grounded in operations. We do not arrive with pre-defined lists or generic templates. Instead, we work side-by-side with your Reliability, Integrity, and Maintenance teams to identify what truly prevents major accidents in your assets and operating context.
Together, we define the Safety Critical Elements, clarify their performance standards, and test whether these standards are practical, measurable, and genuinely understood by those responsible for delivering them. This co-creation approach builds ownership, strengthens interfaces between functions, and ensures SCEs move beyond documentation into day-to-day decision-making and execution.
