Apply This Thinking
These analyses are not about assigning blame.
They examine how systems behave under real operating conditions — revealing where assumptions about performance, redundancy, and protection do not hold when actually tested.
Most failures follow predictable patterns. Equipment behaves as designed. People follow procedures. Yet the system as a whole fails to deliver its intended function.
Typical Gaps Observed
- •Unclear performance limits: Systems designed for one operating envelope fail when conditions shift beyond design assumptions.
- •Hidden failures in standby systems: Protective equipment that is never challenged until the primary system fails, revealing latent defects.
- •Assumptions not validated by evidence: Redundancy and independence claims that have not been tested under realistic failure scenarios.
- •Operating contexts treated as identical: Maintenance modes, startup conditions, or degraded states assumed to have the same protection as normal operation.
This type of system-level examination is commonly used in reliability and asset care programs to improve availability, safety, and long-term performance.
It identifies where protective strategies depend on assumptions that may not hold, where operating modes create hidden vulnerabilities, and where system behavior under stress differs from design intent.