Proactive vs. Reactive Risk Management in Demolition

In terms of safety, it’s widely accepted that proactive risk management is better than reactive management. The saying "prevention is better than cure" is especially true when it comes to reducing costs and preventing unexpected events. However, proactive risk management in demolition is more complex due to the many external factors that make planning ahead difficult. This is particularly true in New Zealand, where older buildings, inaccurate service records, and hidden structural issues can complicate projects.

Here are some of the key challenges that make proactive risk management difficult in demolition:

• Incomplete Information:
  When demolishing a structure or doing excavation work, we often lack full knowledge of the building’s materials or the strength of structural elements. For older buildings, accurate records may not exist, and sometimes the actual condition of a structure is only discovered during the demolition process.

• Unknown Subsurface Conditions:
  Footing or pile removal comes with its own set of risks. Excavation often uncovers unexpected issues, such as deeper or stronger footings than initially expected. Additionally, underground services—like water, gas, or electrical lines—can be inaccurately marked on outdated or incomplete plans, leading to potential hazards.

Because of these unknowns, proactive risk management in demolition often isn’t fully possible. However, it doesn’t mean planning ahead is useless. In demolition, proactive planning is about preparing for the unexpected and having a range of contingency plans in place. This allows us to respond quickly and effectively as new information arises.

Planned Reactive Risk Management in Demolition

In the context of demolition, planned reactive risk management means:

• Utilising Experience:
  Drawing on our past experiences helps to anticipate potential challenges. For example, if we’re dealing with older buildings, we can anticipate the likelihood of discovering unknown materials or weak structural components. This allows us to plan for different scenarios.

• Creating Contingency Plans:
  Since it’s impossible to predict every detail before work begins, we prepare multiple methods and processes that we can use depending on what we discover. This includes having alternative approaches for excavation, pile removal, or handling services that might be inaccurately mapped.

• Planned Reaction:
  This concept involves planning for a response to new information, even if we can’t implement the plan until the project is already underway. For instance, we may prepare a range of methods for removing a structural column, but we won’t choose the exact method until we see how strong or deep the column is. By planning in advance, we can "proactively react" when new details come to light.

Final Words

In the demolition industry, true proactive risk management is limited by the many unknowns we encounter. However, by using experience and contingency planning, we can still manage risks effectively. This approach allows us to adapt to new information safely and efficiently while keeping costs and timelines under control.

Things rarely go according to the original plan, safety in demolition depends on our ability to adapt and be flexible, with a blend of proactive planning and reactive action. By establishing hold points, preparing for potential risks, and being ready to adjust our methods, we can ensure both safety and project success in an unpredictable environment.