International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 4

Number 4

December 2010

461

1 INTRODUCTION

According to the latest surveys, officer shortage will

be continued increasingly (BIMCO, 2005). Chemi-

cal tankers are complex ships that they are designed

to carry many different type and dangerous chemical

substances; so this type of ships requires well edu-

cated and trained seafarers (Arslan & Er 2008). Es-

pecially for chemical tanker ships, it is needed more

qualified seafarers regarding to the environmental

and safety concern of public and industry. Therefore,

training of seafarers has become more important

than ever before (Arslan & Turker 2008). Training

of seafarers in office environment before sea period

is as important as training at training institutions and

on-the-job training. Therefore, measuring of seafar-

ers’ performance and planning of individual training

programs for each seafarer has become more im-

portant than ever. In order to develop the quality of

seafarer training and consequently maintaining safe

and profitable shipping, the factors which are im-

portant for evaluating the chemical tanker crew are

determined and clustered in hierarchical manner; the

weighting of factors for each rank are observed by

utilizing Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Method;

the trainings which should be given to seafarers re-

lated to scores of evaluation factors are determined

then the Seafarer Evaluation and Training Software

DEPEDES (SETS) is created by utilizing Visual

Basic Software. In this study, the content of SETS

software is evaluated with details. Consequently, the

main aim of this study is to maintain safe chemical

tanker shipping by utilizing SETS software.

2 METHODS USED IN THIS STUDY

After the observing of evaluation factors, the evalua-

tion factors are clustered in hierarchical structure

and the weighting of factors are calculated by utiliz-

ing Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Method.

A New Tool for Evaluating and Training Of

Chemical Tanker Crew: Seafarer Evaluation

And Training Software: DEPEDES (SETS)

O. Arslan, O. Gurel & M. Kadioglu

Istanbul Technical University Maritime Faculty, Tuzla, Istanbul, Turkey

ABSTRACT: Shipping industry is growing regularly and regulative bodies of the industry put more emphasis

on safety and environmental management of ships and ship management companies. With regard to the short-

age of human resource officers, which will be continued by following years according to latest surveys, ship-

ping industry has hard times to employ qualified officers in their fleets. Especially for chemical tanker ships,

it is needed more qualified seafarers regarding to the environmental and safety concern of public and industry.

Therefore, training of seafarers has become more important then ever before. Training of seafarers in office

environment before sea period is as important as training at training institutions and on-the-job training.

Therefore, measuring of seafarers’ performance and planning of individual training programs for each seafar-

er has become more important than ever.

In order to develop the quality of seafarer training and consequently maintaining safe and profitable shipping,

the factors which are important for evaluating the chemical tanker crew are determined and clustered in hier-

archical manner; the weighting of factors for each rank are observed by utilizing Analytic Hierarchy Process

(AHP) Method; the trainings which should be given to seafarers related to scores of evaluation factors are de-

termined then the Seafarer Evaluation and Training Software DEPEDES (SETS) is created by utilizing Visual

Basic Software. In this study, the content of SETS software is evaluated with details. Consequently, the main

aim of this study is to maintain safe chemical tanker shipping by utilizing SETS software.

462

AHP is a mathematical tool that is developed by

Saaty (Saaty, 1980). It is used for analyzing complex

decision problems with multiple criteria (Vaidya &

Kumar, 2006). Generally it is widely used in several

areas such as solving decision problems and

strategic planning etc. AHP is based on pair-wise

comparisons that enables decision makers to assign a

relative priority to each factor. In this study, the pair-

wise comparisons among evaluation factors has

done by crewing managers and operation managers

of a chemical tanker company. Seafarer Evaluation

and Training Software (SETS) is created by using

Visual Basic Programming Software.

3 SEAFARER EVALUATION

3.1 Seafarer Groups

Four different seafarer groups are observed for dif-

ferent criteria or weight of criteria. These groups are

Senior officer group (Master, Chief Officer, Chief

Engineer and Second Engineer); Junior officer group

(2nd, 3rd and other deck officers, 3rd, 4th and other

engine officers; electrician and other officers), Rat-

ing Group (Boatswain, A/B, O/S, deck boy, don-

keyman, oiler, wiper, fitter, pump man and other

deck and engine department ratings) and Service

group (Cook and Steward). 34 evaluation criteria

for Senior officer evaluation and 31 criteria for jun-

ior officer group, rating group and cook & steward

group evaluation observed and the evaluation crite-

ria grouped in four main clusters:

− Professional Knowledge & Skill and Adaptation

to Safety Rules

− Professional Behavior

− Leadership and Social Behavior

− Adaptation to Sea and Ship Life

3.2 Senior Officer Evaluation Criteria

The Following Evaluation factors are observed for

senior officer evaluation:

Professional Knowledge & Skill and Adaptation

to Safety Rules group criteria:

− Profession knowledge (General)

− Profession experience

− English level

− Understanding talent

− Work planning

− Working carefulness

− Knowledge of equipment

− Evaluation and timing of requisitions

− ISM knowledge and adaptation

− Operational knowledge and adaptation (cargo,

bunkering)

− ISPS knowledge and adaptation

− MARPOL / Environmental knowledge and adap-

tation

− Reporting

− Knowledge and adaptation on safety rules (Gen-

eral)

− Carefulness (General)

− Implementation the Company instructions / tim-

ing

− Team culture

Professional Behavior evaluation criteria:

− Cooperation and sharing knowledge

− Behavior, relationships with inferiors / superiors

− Adaptation of marine usage and customs

− Taking lessons from mistakes

− Loyalty to the Job & Company

− Computer knowledge & skill

Leadership and Social Behavior evaluation crite-

ria:

− Adaptation to Sea and Ship Life

− Reliability

− Motivation ability and follow events, peoples and

judgment

− Sharing Responsibility

− To share his/her knowledge and instructiveness

− Could he/she shortly explain his/her request.

Speech ability

− Individual improvement / Has effort to improve

the System

− Personnel cleanness

− Apparel / presentable and keeps clean his/her cab-

in/associate

Adaptation to sea/ship life group criteria:

− Suitability to job basis health/physics

− Adaptation on Drug and Alcohol policy

− Adaptation on sea life

The priorities of evaluation groups for senior of-

ficers are shown in figure 1.

Figure 1: Priority of criteria groups for senior officers

Serie1;

Profession

Knowledg

e & Skill

and …

Serie1;

Profession

Behavior ;

45 10%

Serie1;

Leadershi

p and

Social

Behavior ;

90; 20%

Serie1;

Adaptatio

n to

sea/ship

life ; 75;

17%

Professional

Knowledge &

Skill and

Adaptation

to Safety

Rules

Professional

Behavior

463

3.3 Officer and Other Crew Evaluation Criteria

The Following Evaluation factors are observed for

junior officer group; rating group and cook & stew-

ard groups evaluation:

Professional Knowledge & Skill and Adaptation

to Safety Rules group criteria:

− Profession knowledge (General)

− Profession experience

− English level

− Hand skill and use of equipment

− Understanding talent and application

− Work planning & timing

− Knowledge of equipments and maintenance

− ISM knowledge and adaptation

− Operational knowledge and adaptation

− ISPS knowledge and adaptation

− MARPOL / Environmental knowledge and adap-

tation

− Knowledge and Adaptation on safety rules (Gen-

eral)

− Carefulness

− Participation to drills and achievement

− Safety &Team culture

− Computer knowledge& skill

Professional Behavior evaluation criteria:

− Cooperation and sharing his/her knowledge

− Behavior, relations to his/her inferiors

− Adaptation to sea & ship tradition

− Taking lessons from mistakes

− Loyalty to the Company

Leadership and social behavior evaluation crite-

ria:

− Reliability

− Individual relationships

− Capability of explain his/her request. Speech abil-

ity

− Motivation ability and follow events

− Sharing Responsibility

− Personnel cleanness

− Apparel / presentable and keeps clean his/her cab-

in/associate areas

Adaptation to sea/ship life group criteria:

− Suitability to job basis health/physics

− Adaptation on Drug and Alcohol policy

− Adaptation on sea life

The weighting of evaluation groups is different

for all seafarer groups. The priorities of evaluation

groups for junior officer group, rating group and

cook&steward group are shown in figure 2.

Figure 2: Priorities of Criteria Groups

3.4 Trainings

26 different trainings that can be given in a chemical

tanker management company observed. These train-

ings and training codes are:

1 Environmental Officer Training Course

2 Incident Investigation

3 Safety Officer Training

4 Shipboard Familiarization

5 Rescue Techniques from Confined Spaces

6 Lifeboats

7 Keeping Up Standards

8 Ship Vetting Inspection

9 Chemical Tanker Operation

10 Safety and Pollution Prevention

11 MARPOL and Environmental Protection

12 Chemical Tank Cleaning & Inspection

13 Search Techniques

14 Crisis Management

15 Marine Risk Assessment

16 Permit to Work Systems

17 Recognizing Suspicious Behavior

18 Identifying Explosives and Weapons

19 Watch keeping

20 Maintenance

21 Nitrogen Generator and Inerting

22 Bunkering

23 Drug and Alcohol Policy

24 Requisition

25 Hygiene on Board

26 Company Policies and Procedures

4 MAIN CHARECTERISTICS OF DEPEDES

(SETS) SOFTWARE

The main idea of Seafarer Evaluation and Training

Software (SETS) is firstly to measure the perfor-

mance of seafarers quantitatively then to give neces-

sary trainings according to their scores. The program

recommends different trainings for each rank and

scores. The weighting of factors which are computed

by utilizing AHP is enlarged to meaningful marks.

Likert scale was used for marking. The scores of cri-

464

teria and trainings to be given according to evalua-

tion is shown in Table-1.

Table-1: Scores and Trainings to be given

CRITERIA

Training No

Knowledge of equipments

07-24

Evaluation and Timing of requisitions

07-24-26

ISM knowledge and adaptation

03-04-20

Operational knowledge and adaptation

9-12-20-21-22

ISPS knowledge and adaptation

2-13-14-17-18

According to the columns, marks are shown in

VG ‘Very Good’; G ‘Good’; M ‘Moderate’; P

‘Poor’ and VP ‘Very Poor’ columns. The numbers

shown in mark columns are the weightings of each

score. The yellow marks shows training needs and

the red one’s show dismissal suggestion that should

be discussed by the management. The column

‘Training No’ shows the training numbers which are

described section 3.4 of this paper. SETS software is

developed by utilizing Visual Basic programming

language. The program is using ‘if-then-else’ rule

codes such as:

'k 13 Knowledge

If q61.Value Then

Knowledge.Fields("k13") = 15

ElseIf q62.Value Then Knowledge.Fields("k13") =

ElseIf q63.Value Then Knowledge.Fields("k13") = 9

ElseIf q64.Value Then Knowledge.Fields("k13") = 6

ElseIf q65.Value Then Knowledge.Fields("k13") = 3

End If

Figure 3: SETS Software

The Seafarer Evaluation and Training Software

(SETS) can also lists and graphically shows seafar-

ers’ scores according to their rank groups and scores,

working dates and etc. Evaluation and Training

Module of SETS is shown in figure 3.

5 CONCLUSION

The main aim of this study is to improve the seafarer

evaluation during sea period and consequently en-

hancement of safety and ship management perfor-

mance to prevent accidents and casualties in mari-

time transportation by utilizing SETS software. It

should be considered that the evaluation criteria;

priority of criteria; trainings that can be given by the

company and training needs can vary among differ-

ent ship management companies. This software is

prepared considering the capacity and needs of

chemical tanker Management Company

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge supports and

data that are given by Sener Shipping Company and

Edmar Marine Software Company during prepara-

tion of this study.

REFERENCES

Arslan, O., Er, I. D., 2008. A SWOT Analysis for Successful

Bridge Team Organization and Safer Marine Operations,

Process Saf. Prog. 27-1, 21-28.

Arslan, O., Turker F., 2008. Analytical Comparison of Differ-

ent Tanker Simulators By Utilizing AHP Method, Interna-

tional Maritime Lecturers Association 16

Conference on

MET (IMLA-2008), 14-17 October 2008 Izmir

BIMCO, 2005, BIMCO/ISF Manpower Update 2005, Report

Johnson, H.L. 1965.

Saaty, T. L., 1980 The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-

Hill, New York

Vaidya, S. O., Kumar, S., 2006. Analytic hierarchy process: An

overview of applications, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 169, 1–29.