Plane Thermoelastic Waves in Infinite Half-Space Caused Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications Vol. 2, Issue 3, 2019, pp. 26-39 ISSN: 2620-1607 eISSN: 2620-1747 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta19030026l * Corresponding author. lukovacvesko@yahoo.com (V. Lukovac), tomiclazar17@gmail.com (L. Tomić), pavlegladovic@uns.ac.rs (P. Gladović) USING THE PROCESS FUNCTION METHOD TO ASSESS THE ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL IN DANGEROUS GOODS TRANSPORTATION1 Vesko Lukovac a*, Lazar Tomić b, Pavle Gladović c a University of Defense in Belgrade, Military Academy, Belgrade, Serbia b Serbian Armed Forces, Serbia c University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Republic of Serbia Received: 18 October 2019 Accepted: 27 November 2019 First online: 02 December 2019 Original scientific paper Abstract. As one of the most well-known methods for assessing the organizational level, the process function method represents a very effective tool for diagnosing the existing conditions and identifying what needs to be improved. The process function method can be used to evaluate the organization of business functions, organizational units, work areas work, business elements, workplaces, etc. In this paper, the process function method is applied in order to evaluate the organizational level in the dangerous goods transportation process in one of the units of the Serbian Armed Forces. Following the implementation of the methodology, the elements which should be improved to increase the existing level of the organization of dangerous goods transportation in the unit that was the subject matter of analysis were identified. Key words: process function; estimation, organization; dangerous goods transportation. 1. Introduction Transportation is the most dynamic process nowadays, without which the life and survival of people would be unthinkable. In the world today, it cannot be imagined – not for a moment – that no transportation of goods or passengers takes 1 This paper is an extended and amended version of the paper entitled “Application of Process Function Method for Estimating the Level of Organization in Transporting Dangerous Goods”, which was published at the conference entitled: “Security and Crisis Management – Theory and Practice, 2019”. mailto:lukovacvesko@yahoo.com Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 27 place. In addition to everything positive in terms of the development of society, the development of technologies, the urbanization of cities and towns, the development of the infrastructure and industry as a whole, pose a greater danger to the safety and health of both people and the environment. In traffic, the increasing presence of goods containing dangerous substances causes a greater use of vehicles for transporting them. In order to protect ourselves against the effects of the harmful effects of hazardous substances, we are compelled to study them, analyze their impact and determine the extent of such protection. Dangerous goods transportation is particularly pronounced in the army, because handling this type of goods on a daily basis is a normal thing in that type of the environment. This fact requires that, in addition to the development of the economy, the infrastructure, the introduction of various technologies and systems, the construction of facilities in which a large number of people live or work, appropriate measures should be taken so as to protect against accidents caused by transporting dangerous goods. The Rulebook on Dangerous Goods Transportation at the Ministry of Defense and in the Serbian Armed Forces (“Official Military Gazette”, no. 8/2018) regulates dangerous goods transportation, organized by the Ministry of Defense and the Military, as well as the military forces of the other states and organizations that use the traffic infrastructure of the Republic of Serbia under a special agreement. This rulebook is harmonized with the National Law on Dangerous Goods Transportation (“Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia”, 95/2018) and the European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR, 2017), the Regulations concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail (RID, 2017) and the European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Inland Waterways (ADN, 2017). This paper is aimed at assessing the level of the organization of the work done by the person in charge of organizing the dangerous goods transportation process in one of the units of the Serbian Armed Forces. The process of solving the considered problem was carried outby the application of the process function method. Apart from the introduction and the conclusion sections, this paper also consists of the following sections: in Section 2 of the project entitled “Dangerous Goods in Transport”, the notion of dangerous goods, the proportion of accidents in the case of the improper handling of dangerous goods, as well as the international agreements governing dangerous goods transportation by certain transportation modes, are emphasized. Rating the Organizational Process of Dangerous Goods Transportation by Means of the Process Function Method is the title of Section 3, in which the process function method is described and accordingly applied to the considered problem. In the Conclusion, i.e. in Section 4, the results are discussed and suggestions for the improvement of the current situation are given. 2. Dangerous Goods Transportation In order to more accurately understand potential hazards associated with working with a substance, it is necessary to know and analyze a large number of the physical and chemical properties of a substance, e.g. (Vidović et al., 2019): • the type of a danger, Lukovac et al./Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theor. Appl. 2 (3) (2019) 26-39 28 • the physical state, • viscosity, • the boiling point, • melting temperatures, • density, • the voltage of the steam, • flammability temperature, • auto-ignition temperature, • the limits of explosive mixtures, • reactivity with respect to other substances, and so on. The term “dangerous substance” refers to the factory declared physical-chemical characteristics of a substance determined based on the recognized and corresponding criteria. From the chemistry standpoint, the above-mentioned term “dangerous substance” is not adequate in order to define such a substance; the term “hazardous substance”, however, should rather be used (Jovanović et al., 2010). Using a wrong term may erroneously direct the determination of the status of dangerous substances during the transportation process, which directly affects both the application of an appropriate recovery procedure in the case of accidents, and finally the application of the methods that are contrary to the international rules and obligations. The term “dangerous goods” refers to a situation when a hazardous matter/substance is contained in an appropriate packaging/container or vehicle during the transportation process. , Criteria for the potential risks of hazardous substances are specifically determined for the transportation conditions (Jovanović et al., 2010). According to the Rulebook on Dangerous Goods Transportation at the Ministry of Defense and in the Serbian Armed Forces (“Official Military Gazette” no. 8/2018) and the Law on Dangerous Goods Transportation (“Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia”, no. 95/2018), dangerous goods are substances and articles forbidden from transport, i.e. those that are allowed if such transport takes place under international agreements on and regulations for dangerous goods transportation by the type of traffic (ADR, RID, ADN). There are numerous examples of an unprofessional and negligent treatment while handling (manipulating) dangerous goods transportation, having resulted in the suffering of people and the degradation of property and the environment. The consequences of road traffic accidents with vehicles transporting dangerous goods may also be such as to amount to a catastrophe. For example: − In Halifax (Nova Scotia) on 6th December 1917 (Figure 1), there was a collision caused by the accident of a French ship, “Mont Blanc”, and a Norwegian ship, “SS imo”, in the Halifax access port and channel, which had been moving at a low speed of about 2.5 km/h. The Mont Blanc was carrying about 3.2 million pounds of picric acid and TNT for the needs of the French army in World War II. The effect of the explosion reflected in the fragments of the ship, a shock wave and a tsunami of 18 meters in height created by the explosion. The estimated temperature of the explosion was about 5000°C. a pyro-trophic cloud rose to an altitude of about 3600m. The number of the victims has never been precisely determined. It is believed that about 1600 people were killed immediately and about 400 succumbed to injuries, 9000 were injured, 1600 homes were destroyed in a series of fires and 12000 homes were damaged. The industrial Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 29 sector of the city was completely destroyed. The Halifax disaster was the unofficial start of a systematic consideration of hazardous substances (Janković, 2016). Figure 1. The Halifax disaster in 1917; the explosion of the ship and the consequences (Janković, 2016); − In Los Alfaques (Spain) in 1978, a fuel tank was overloaded. Due to high heat and pressure, the tank exploded and the fuel caught fire, killing 216 people (Figure 2). Figure 2. The consequences of the tank accident on the way to Los Alfaques in 1978. − In Okobie (a Nigerian town) on 12th July 2012, there was an explosion of road tanker gas transportation vehicles (Figure 3). A total of 121 people were killed in the accident and 75 were injured. Lukovac et al./Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theor. Appl. 2 (3) (2019) 26-39 30 Figure 3. The consequences of the accident in Okobie (Nigeria) on 12th July 2012 (Janković, 2016); − In Šabac in 1986, a railroad tank carrying ammonia (NH3) was hanging off the overpass due to the consequences of the accident. The valves were loose and the gas began to release. A favorable wind and the timely intervention of specially trained workers prevented a greater catastrophe from happening. In order to avoid suchlike and similar situations and reduce risks to a minimum, it is necessary that all persons coming into contact with dangerous goods, or those such dangerous goods may have an impact on, should comply with the regulations and guidelines defining the manner in which dangerous goods should be handled and also the way in which they should properly trained and prepared for their work. Based on these problems, the experts of the United Nations considered giving the basic recommendations and guidelines for the international agreements on the Convention-related procedure for dangerous goods in certain transportation modes (Vidović et al., 2019; Jovanović et al., 2010; Janković, 2016; Jovanović, 2004; Petrović, 2004), as in Figure 4: − ADR – European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road; − RID – Regulations concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail; − ICAO–TI – International Civil Aviation Organization – Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air; − IMDG–CODE – International Maritime Dangerous Goods–Code; − ADN – European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Inland Waterways. Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 31 Figure 4. International agreements on dangerous goods transportation 3. Rating the Organizational Process of Dangerous Goods Transportation by Means of the Process Function Method The process function method can be used to evaluate the organizational level of an entire organization or only certain organizational units, functions, and so forth. According to (Erić, D., 2000), the term ‘process functions’ implies the activities necessary for the successful completion of the entire task at all workplace levels in an organization. There are 10 basic phases of the process functions (Pamučar, 2013; Lukovac et al., 2018; Lukovac et al., 2015; Savić et al., 2017; Tomić, 2019) that appear in the work process, as in Table 1. Table 1. An overview of the process functions with tags and the meaning Name of the function Index Meaning Recording Rec Covering all business developments in the organization Informing Inf Delivering data and information to all workplaces in the organization Controlling Con Comparison of the activities performed with pre-set benchmarks, standards and guidelines Analysis An Disassembling, comparing and concluding on the causes of deviations Deciding De Re-intervening on developments in the existing processes and shaping future processes Lukovac et al./Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theor. Appl. 2 (3) (2019) 26-39 32 Planning Pl Providing the necessary elements to execute decisions Synchronization Sy Combining and directing individual efforts into a total effort Organizing Org Finding and designing appropriate organizational procedures and performing work tasks Performance Per Concrete execution of tasks in all workplaces in the organization Command Co Assigning tasks to subordinate units and authorities. In this paper, the activities performed by the person in charge of organizing the dangerous goods transportation process in one of the units of the Serbian Armed Forces are analyzed, as in Table 2. Table 2. The jobs analyzed Index Jobs 01 Determining the availability of the drivers capable of transporting dangerous goods 02 Determining the availability of the vehicles intended for dangerous goods transportation 03 Consulting with the safety advisor on dangerous goods transportation 04 Developing an engagement plan 05 Preparing the driver to complete the task 06 Controlling the equipment that a dangerous goods transportation vehicle must have 07 Controlling the driver and the vehicle documentation 08 Checking the knowledge of the procedure in the event of a failure or a traffic accident 09 Communicating occupational safety and health, environmental and fire safety measures when performing the task 10 Tracking the completion of the task 11 Submission of reports within prescribed deadlines The listed tasks are performed within the individual work areas by the process functions. Given the fact that not every job has to contain all the process functions, it is necessary to determine their connection with the process function, which is determined by entering a “+” sign into the “The connection between the jobs and the process functions” table where the sum of such “+” signs represents the sum of the frequencies (F) (Table 3) for the job containing one of the process functions. If a job contains no process functions, a “-” sign is entered into the table. Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 33 Table 3. The connection between the jobs and the process functions Jobs Process function F Rec Inf Con An De Pl Sy Org Per Co 01 + + + + + + + + + + 10 02 + + + + + + + + + + 10 03 + + + + + + + + + + 10 04 + + + + + + + + + + 10 05 + + + + + + + + + + 10 06 + + + + + + + + + + 10 07 + + + + + + + + + + 10 08 + + + + + + + + + + 10 09 + + + + + + + + + + 10 10 + + + + + + + + + + 10 11 + + + + + + + + + + 10 Not all jobs have the same importance. Some are more significant, whereas others are less significant; it is necessary to perform their weighting. The weighting is performed by selecting one of the weights on a scale from 0 to 5, according to the criteria accounted for in Table 4. Table 4. The weighting criteria Weight Criterion 5 The execution of the jobs is necessary, without which no business would be possible 4 The execution of the jobs has a big impact on the overall business 3 The execution of the jobs affects the economy of the business 2 A failure to do the job causes a deficiency in business, but business is nonetheless possible 1 The execution of the jobs affects the integrity of business 0 The execution of the jobs is unnecessary The process functions are weighted according to the same criteria, because not all of them have the same importance for the job. The selected job weights, as well as the process function weights, are a result of a survey conducted with the person performing these tasks in the Serbian Military Unit that was the subject matter of this analysis. The weighting of the jobs and the process functions was performed by multiplying the selected job weights by the selected process function weights, and the resulting products are the theoretical weights for the jobs by process function, or for the process functions by job, as given in Table 5. Lukovac et al./Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theor. Appl. 2 (3) (2019) 26-39 34 Table 5. The theoretical weighting of the jobs by process function Jobs Process function ∑ Re c Inf Co n An De Pl Sy Or g Pe r Co Weight Index Weight 3 3 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 01 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 02 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 03 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 04 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 05 4 12 12 20 20 20 20 16 20 20 20 180 06 4 12 12 20 20 20 20 16 20 20 20 180 07 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 08 4 12 12 20 20 20 20 16 20 20 20 180 09 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 10 5 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 11 4 12 12 20 20 20 20 16 20 20 20 180 ∑ 15 3 15 3 25 5 25 5 25 5 25 5 20 4 25 5 25 5 25 5 2295 The next step implies the evaluation of the jobs by process functions, with the rating from 1 to 5, according to the criteria for determining the ratings based on the observed organizational attitude in the observed workplace, as shown in Table 6. Table 6. The job evaluation criteria Rating Criterion 1 The jobs are not done 2 The jobs are done occasionally 3 The jobs are not done on employees’ own initiative, but upon order 4 The jobs are done according to the instructions received from the superiors 5 The jobs are done according to the organizational regulations The job ratings by process function are shown in Table 7 and they are also a result of the survey conducted with the person performing the tasks that were the subject matter of this analysis. Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 35 Table 7. The job ratings Jobs Process function Rec Inf Con An De Pl Sy Org Per Co 01 3 3 3 3 5 5 4 5 5 5 02 3 3 3 3 5 5 4 5 5 5 03 4 3 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 04 5 5 4 3 5 4 4 5 5 5 05 5 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 06 3 3 3 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 07 5 3 5 3 5 5 4 5 5 5 08 3 3 5 3 5 5 4 5 5 5 09 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 11 3 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 After the job evaluation by process functions, the calculation of the actual job weights ( s P ) is performed by using Equation 1: = p s o P ×O P S (1) where − p P – the required (theoretical) weighting of the job, − O – the job evaluation by process functions, − o S – the rating scale (5). The actual job weights are shown in Table 8. Table 8. The actual jobs weights Jobs Process function ∑ Rec Inf Con An De Pl Sy Org Per Co 01 9 9 15 15 25 25 16 25 25 25 189 02 9 9 15 15 25 25 16 25 25 25 189 03 12 9 20 20 25 25 16 25 25 25 202 04 15 15 20 15 25 20 16 25 25 25 201 05 12 12 16 16 20 20 12.8 20 20 20 168.8 06 7.2 7.2 12 16 20 20 12.8 20 20 20 155.2 07 15 9 25 15 25 25 16 25 25 25 205 08 7.2 7.2 20 12 20 20 12.8 20 20 20 159.2 09 15 15 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 225 10 15 9 25 25 25 25 20 25 25 25 219 11 7.2 12 20 16 20 20 16 20 20 20 171.2 ∑ 123. 6 113. 4 213 190 255 250 174. 4 255 255 255 2084. 4 Lukovac et al./Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theor. Appl. 2 (3) (2019) 26-39 36 The next step in applying this method implies the calculation of the average job ratings (O ) by using Equation 2:   s o p P O= ×S P (2) The average job ratings are shown in Table 9. Table 9. The average job ratings Jobs  sP  pP O 01 189 225 4.20 02 189 225 4.20 03 202 225 4.49 04 201 225 4.47 05 168.8 180 4.69 06 155.2 180 4.31 07 205 225 4.56 08 159.2 180 4.42 09 225 225 5.00 10 219 225 4.87 11 171.2 180 4.76 Total 2084.4 2295 4.54 Analogously to Equation 2, the average ratings of the process functions ( pf O ), which are shown in Table 10, are calculated by using the weights given in Tables 5 and 8. Table 10. The average ratings of the process functions Process function  sP  pP pfO Recording 123.6 153 4.04 Informing 113.4 153 3.71 Controlling 213 255 4.18 Analysis 190 255 3.73 Deciding 255 255 5.00 Planning 250 255 4.90 Synchronization 174.4 204 4.27 Organizing 255 255 5.00 Performance 255 255 5.00 Command 255 255 5.00 Total 2084.4 2295 4.54 Based on the average job and process function ratings, the jobs (Table 11) and the process functions are ranked, as in Table 12. Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 37 Table 11. The job ranks Rank Job index Weights O 1. 09 5 5.00 2. 10 5 4.87 3. 11 4 4.76 4. 05 4 4.69 5. 07 5 4.56 6. 03 5 4.49 7. 04 5 4.47 8. 08 4 4.42 9. 06 4 4.31 10. 01 5 4.20 10. 02 5 4.20 Table 12. The process function ranks Rank Process function Weights pfO 1. Deciding 5 5.00 1. Organizing 5 5.00 1. Performance 5 5.00 1. Command 5 5.00 2. Planning 5 4.90 3. Synchronization 4 4.27 4. Controlling 5 4.18 5. Recording 3 4.04 6. Analysis 5 3.73 7. Informing 3 3.71 4. Conclusions Average job evaluation is an assessment of the organizational level in a particular workplace. Accordingly, based on the value of the average job rating (4.54) obtained in this research study, it can be concluded that it is characteristic of the organizational level that the execution of jobs does not entirely base on organizational regulations, but also on the instructions received from superiors. This especially applies to the jobs rated lower than the average job rating; in this case, these are the following jobs: − 01 – Determining the availability of the drivers capable of transporting dangerous goods, − 02 – Determining the availability of the vehicles intended for dangerous goods transportation, − 06 – Controlling the equipment that a dangerous goods transportation vehicle must have, − 08 – Checking the knowledge of the procedure in the event of a failure or a traffic accident, − 04 – Developing an engagement plan, and Lukovac et al./Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theor. Appl. 2 (3) (2019) 26-39 38 − 03 – Consulting with the safety advisor on dangerous goods transportation. Based on the average process function rating, we came to know the process functions that need to be upgraded. This primarily applies to those process functions that are rated lower than the average (4.54); so, in this specific case of ours, the improvement measures should focus on the process functions of: − Synchronization, − Controlling, − Recording, − Analysis, and − Informing. The good and the bad sides of the organizational level can also be seen from the analysis of the relationship between the assigned weights and the calculated ratings. According to the analysis carried out, it is also possible to see which process functions and jobs need to be paid greater attention to, which primarily applies to those process functions and jobs that are assigned high weights and have low average ratings. From this point of view, the jobs marked “01”, “02”, “03” and “04” are interesting, as well as the “Controlling” and “Analysis” process functions. Given the fact that the jobs marked “01”, “02”, “03” and “04”, as well as the “Controlling” and “Analysis” process functions, were identified as the weaknesses in both cases, the measures for the improvement of the existing situation should first focus on improving these jobs and process functions. However, it is necessary to emphasize that the results of this analysis should be critically viewed in order for a more appropriate analysis of the observed problem to be performed and that the opinions of a larger number of persons (or groups of experts) involved in the subject-matter problem should be considered. References Erić, D. (2000). Uvod u menadžment, Čigoja štampa, Beograd. European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (2017). European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Inland Waterways (2017). Janković, Z. (2016). Razvoj modela za proračun rizika u logističkim sistemima opasnih materija, doktorska disertacija, Fakultet tehničkih nauka Univerziteta u Novom Sadu, Novi Sad. Jovanović, V. (2004). Transport opasnih materija, Saobraćajni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu, Beograd. Jovanović, V., Milovanović, B. & Mladenović, D. (2010). Transport opasne robe u drumskom saobraćaju, Saobraćajni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu, Beograd. Law of the Transport of Dangerous Goods (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, 95/2018) Lukovac, V., Pamučar, D. & Miletić, A. (2015). Primena metode procesnih funkcija za procenu nivoa organizovanosti zaštite od požara i eksplozija, Rizik i bezbednosni inženjering, Kopaonik. Using the Process Function Method to Assess the Organizational Level in Dangerous Goods Transportation 39 Lukovac, V., Savić, D. & Jovanović, V. (2018). Fuzzy process approach to level assessment of environmental protection organization, The 2nd International Conference on Management, Engineering and Environment - ICMNEE 2018, Beograd. Pamučar, D. (2013). Dizajniranje organizacione strukture upravnih organa logistike korišćenjem fuzzy pristupa, doktorska disertacija, Vojna Akademija, Beograd. Petrović, Lj. (2004). Transport opasne robe u drumskom saobraćaju – Upoznavanje restrukturiranog ADR-a, Trigon inženjering, Beograd. Regulations concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail (2017). Rulebook of the Transport of Dangerous Goods in the Ministry of Defense and the Serbian Armed Forces (Official Military Paper number 8, 2018.) Savić, D., Lukovac, V. & Urošević, L. (2017). Application method of process function for Evaluation of the of organisational level of workplace, ICDQM 2017, Prijevor. Tomić, L. (2019). Analiza transporta opasne robe u Ministarstvu odbrane i Vojsci Srbije u periodu 2016. – 2018. godine, završni rad, Vojna Akademija, Beograd. Vidović, M., Radivojević, G. & Ratković, B. (2019). Roba u logističkim procesima, Saobraćajni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu, Beograd. © 2019 by the authors. Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).