Cause–Effect Structure and Structural Pathways of Resilience Engineering in an Iranian Petrochemical Complex: An Integrated Fuzzy DEMATEL–MMDE–SEM Study
This study employs an integrated fuzzy DEMATEL–MMDE–SEM framework to empirically map and validate the causal structure of resilience engineering in an Iranian petrochemical complex, revealing that management commitment and awareness act as primary drivers that positively influence adaptive capacities like flexibility and self-organization to enhance overall resilient performance.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In the high-stakes world of industrial safety, a major shift has occurred in how experts think about preventing disasters. For decades, the prevailing strategy was to treat safety as a puzzle of finding and fixing broken parts, assuming that if every procedure was followed and every machine was perfect, accidents would simply not happen. This view, however, struggled to cope with the messy reality of modern factories, where thousands of complex systems interact in unpredictable ways. A newer approach, known as resilience engineering, suggests that safety is not about building a system that never fails, but about building one that can bend without breaking. It focuses on the ability of a team to notice trouble early, adapt quickly to changing conditions, and keep working even when things go wrong. This concept relies on specific human and organizational traits, such as the ability to learn from mistakes, the willingness to speak up about concerns, and the capacity to reorganize tasks on the fly when a crisis hits. Understanding how these traits connect to one another is crucial, because if we do not know which factors drive the others, we might be trying to fix the wrong problems.
Researchers in Iran recently set out to map these connections within a massive petrochemical complex, a facility where volatile chemicals are processed under extreme conditions. They wanted to move beyond simple lists of what makes a plant safe and instead uncover the hidden structure of how these safety factors influence one another. To do this, they brought together two distinct groups: ten senior experts who knew the industry inside out, and 343 employees who worked on the plant floor every day. The experts were asked to judge how much one safety factor, like management support or worker awareness, influenced another. The employees filled out detailed surveys about their own experiences with these same factors. By combining the deep theoretical knowledge of the experts with the real-world data from the workers, the team built a comprehensive picture of the plant's safety ecosystem.
The analysis revealed a clear hierarchy of influence. The experts identified certain factors as the "drivers" of the system—elements that push changes through the organization. These included strong commitment from leadership, a culture where workers feel safe reporting problems, a shared habit of learning from both successes and failures, and the ability of teams to work together seamlessly. At the top of this list was the concept of awareness: the collective ability of the workforce to understand what is happening around them, to spot subtle signs of trouble, and to interpret complex information correctly. On the other side of the equation were the "receivers," or the outcomes that depend on these drivers. These included the ability to prepare for emergencies, the flexibility to change plans when needed, and the capacity to tolerate faults without catastrophic failure. The study found that while preparedness and flexibility are critical, they are largely the result of the underlying drivers rather than the causes themselves.
When the researchers tested these relationships using the survey data from the employees, the pattern held up with remarkable consistency. The data confirmed that awareness is the single most powerful force in the system. It was not just that aware workers were safer; rather, awareness seemed to act as a catalyst that strengthened the entire organization's ability to adapt. When workers were highly aware of their environment, they were better able to organize themselves, remain flexible in their tasks, and anticipate potential issues. This awareness also boosted the plant's "buffering capacity," which is the extra margin of time, resources, and equipment available to absorb a shock. This buffer, in turn, made it much easier for the plant to be prepared for emergencies and to tolerate failures without stopping production. The study showed that awareness does not directly create a safety net of spare parts or backup machines, but it ensures that these resources are recognized, maintained, and ready to be used when needed.
One of the most important findings was that you cannot simply buy your way to safety by stockpiling equipment or writing more emergency plans. The research demonstrated that these tangible assets are only effective if they are supported by the right human and cultural conditions. A plant might have perfect redundancy and fault-tolerance on paper, but if the workers lack awareness or if management does not support open communication, those features will not function when a crisis strikes. The study suggests that the most effective way to improve safety is to invest in the upstream factors: fostering a culture of learning, ensuring leadership is genuinely committed to safety, and training workers to be hyper-aware of their surroundings. These elements create the conditions where preparedness and flexibility can naturally emerge.
The researchers were careful to note that their work describes a snapshot in time and does not prove that one factor causes another in a strict, unchangeable way. However, the convergence of expert opinion and employee data provides strong evidence for a specific structure of resilience. It suggests that in a complex industrial setting, safety is not a collection of isolated checklists but a dynamic web where the ability to see and understand the system is the foundation upon which all other adaptive capabilities rest. By focusing on building this foundation of awareness and supportive culture, industrial operators can create systems that are not just rigidly safe, but truly resilient, capable of withstanding the unexpected challenges that define the modern industrial world.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.