INSHPO's survey project: results, design, implementation NSHPO обзор проекта: результаты, проектирование, внедрение Bradley Turner American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) Conference on Developing an International Standard of Practice, Moscow 910 July
Who am I? Кто я такой • Currently (в настоящее время) o. Data analyst, ASSE, since March 2012 (Данные аналитиков, Асс, с марта 2012) • Past (прошлое) o. Fulbright Fellow, University of Helsinki, Philosophy of Economics (Фулбрайта, Университет Хельсинки, философия экономики) o. M. A. Social Science University of Chicago, IL (М. А. социальных наук университета Чикаго, штат Иллинойс) o. B. S. Economics Syracuse University, NY (Закладная Экономика Сиракузского университета, штат Нью. Йорк)
Objectives and outline (Цели и план) 1. Retrospective and context of the survey project (Ретроспективные и контекст исследования проекта) 2. The survey (Опрос) 3. Data analysis (анализ данных) a. Descriptives b. Cross-tabs (Кросс-вкладки) 4. Discussion (обсуждение)
Retrospective and context (Ретроспективные и контекст) • International Social Security Association (ISSA) working group (Международная ассоциация социального обеспечения (МАСО) рабочая группа) • • ENSHPO / INSHPO takeover (ENSHPO / INSHPO поглощение) What do SPs / OSH Ps actually do? (Что SPS / ОШ Ps самом деле) Scope and function (Область применения и функции) Research goals (исследование целей) 1. Common Body of Knowledge for OSH professionals (Общий Свод знаний по охране труда специалистов) 2. 3. • Core competencies (Ключевые компетенции) International certification, licensing (Международная сертификация, лицензирование) Main literature on the survey (Главная литература по обследованию) o o National : Ytrehus 2003 (NO); Bianchi 2004 (IT); Borys et al. 2005 )AU); Dudka 2004 (PL); Jones 2004 (UK); Miguel et al. 2004 (PL); Lang 2004 (CH); Perttula & Saari 2004 (FI); Rillie 2005 (SG); Pryor 2006 (AU); Brauer & Schoolcraft 2008 (US); Pryor & Sawyer 2009 (AU); Toft et al. 2010 (AU). Europe: Hale et al. 2005; Hale & Ytrehus 2004; Hale & Guldenmund 2006.
15 Countries surveyed (at least)(Обследованных стран (по крайней мере)) 1. Austria 2. Australia 3. Canada 4. Switzerland 5. Cyprus 6. Germany 7. Finland 8. Italy 9. The Netherlands 10. Norway 11. Poland 12. Portugal 13. Singapore 14. United Kingdom 15. United States (A) (AU) (CA) – No raw data and not represented in analysis (CH) (CY) – No raw data and not represented (DE) – No raw data but usually represented (FI) (IT) (NL) (NO) (PL) (PT) (SG) (UK) (US) Note: country sample size is 12 or 13. (Примечание: размеры страны образца 12 или 13. ) No raw data and not represented in analysis (Нет исходных данных и не представлены в анализе)
The survey and data outline (Исследования и данные плана) A. Organization information (информация об организации) B. Tasks (83 - 1 not in USA = 82) (Задачи (83 - 1, не в США = 82)) C. Types of hazards/ issues (31) (Виды опасности / вопросы (31)) D. Relations with people (internal, external) (36 – 1 = 35) (Отношения с людьми (внутренний, внешний) (36 - 1 = 35)) E. Personal information (Персональная информация)
A. Organization information and E. Personal information А. Организация информации и Е. Персональная информация A AU CA* CH DE* FI IT NL NO PL PT SG UK US Total Sample size 217 629 987 274 1330 303 195 508 505 112 30 158 1632 1057 (% Full) (4%) (11%) -(5%) (3%) (9%) (2%) (1%) (3%) (29%) (19%) 5620 Response Rate 22% 40 33 44 44 24 5 46 45 19 12 22 60 21 32% Male Full-time Safety Internal, External** 96 Multi-Site 71 -- 92 93 45 83 70, 58, 23 28 --- 54 65, 19 70 85 -- Multi-Country 17 48 -- Edu: High, 19, Mid, 58, Low 24 Experience: 73, 0 -10, >10 27 66, 24, 08 44, 57 26, 46, -21 02, 81, 98 19 78 93 96 82 82 63 29 64, 72, 27 08 71 59, 28 66 60, 33 69 55, 31 72 70 27 69 82 13 8 10 05 30, 66, 12 51, 49 20, 48, 24 64, 36 38, 0, 60 63, 36 77 94 89 88 87 56 67 94, 50, 03 50 77 77, 14 87 54, 26 94 55, 12 77 59, 22 68 63 47 68 90 78 76 22 26 12 00 39 25 32 27 14, 85, 01 50, 49 38, 63, 0 44, 55 17, 44, 39 37, 63 10, 90, 0 76, 24 64, 27, 04 63, 38 0, 56, 41 25, 75 47, 50, 03 08, 91 27, 50, 20 38, 63 *CA, DE not in Total **Other categories: "Social insurance and other insurance", "Government agency", and "Other"
A. Organization information and E. Personal information А. Организация информации и Е. Персональная информация Sample size (% Full) Размер выборки (% Full) Response Rate Скорость отклика Male мужчина Full-time Safety Полный рабочий день безопасности Internal, External** Внутренняя, внешняя ** Multi – Site Multi – сайт Multi-Country Многострановой Edu : High, Mid, Low Edu: высокая, средняя, низкая Experience: 0 -10, >10 Опыт работы: 0 -10, > 10 *CA, DE not in Total * CA, DE, не в общем **Other categories: "Social insurance and other insurance", "Government agency", and "Other « ** Другие категории: "Социальное страхование и другие страховые", "государственное учреждение" и "Другие « Total общий
The education question (Вопрос образования) Hale-Guldenmund 06 / Me 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Blank Rubric пустая Рубрика University/Masters/Ph. D Bachelors Polytechnic-High / Associate Polytechnic-Low / Some College Secondary School Other US AU IT UK DE CH-De
The education question (Вопрос образования) • • Hale - Guldenmund 06 / Me University/Masters/Ph. D Bachelors Polytechnic-High / Associate Polytechnic-Low / Some College Secondary School Other Хейл - Guldenmund 06 / Me Университет / Мастера / Ph. D Бакалавры Политехнический-High / Associate Политехнический-Low / Некоторые колледжа средняя школа другой
Education образование A Graduate 19% 66 Undergraduate 0 Associate / Polytechnic. High 58 Some college / Polytechnic-Low 10 Secondary school 14 AU CH FI IT NL NO PL PO SG UK US All countries 26 20 38 14 38 17 10 64 0 47 27 11 31 48 0 63 46 30 87 0 56 48 41 13 15 0 0 22 17 14 3 27 0 2 9 7 13 24 60 1 0 0 37 3 17 1 9 0 1 0 0 38 0 4 4 0 3 1 6 8 2 0 0 5 3 1 2 Other 0 High 19% 66 26 20 38 14 38 17 10 64 00 47 27 Mid 58 24 46 48 0 85 63 44 90 27 56 50 50 Low 24 8 21 24 60 1 00 39 0 4 41 3 20
Education образование • • • Graduate Выпускник Undergraduate студент Associate / Polytechnic-High Associate / Политехнический-High Some college / Polytechnic – Low Средне / Политехнический – низкая Secondary school средняя школа Other другой High высокий Mid средний Low низкий • All countries Все страны
All values are % 19 66 26 20 38 14 38 1 7 10 6 4 56 47 87 63 3 0 48 58 31 46 60 48 1 4 15 37 11 3 8 24 13 2 7 22 10 13 17 14 7 9 3 6 8 21 19 4 5 2 4 3 3
The ”Years of experience as a safety professional” question Blank Rubric E 1 How many years have you been working as a safety professional? 175 1 0 -5 Years 2 6 -10 Years 3 11 -20 Years 4 More than 20 Years US
Years of experience as a safety professional A AU CH FI IT NL NO PL PO SG UK US All countries 0 -5 years 28 17 54 43 19 21 19 14 52 31 01 0 14 6 -10 years 45 27 27 21 44 30 25 23 24 32 24 8 24 11 -20 years 21 36 13 20 21 36 32 29 7 23 47 34 35 > 20 years 6% 21 6 16 15 14 23 34 17 15 28 57 28 0 -10 73 44 81 64 63 50 44 37 76 63 25 08 38 >10 27 57 19 36 36 49 55 63 24 38 75 91 63
6% 21 21 6 16 15 14 23 28 34 17 15 57 13 20 21 36 36 7 27 32 24 45 21 54 27 29 44 21 47 32 52 30 25 43 34 23 31 28 24 17 19 21 19 14 8 1
Task, hazards, relations at three levels: respondent, country, sample. 1. Respondent Dichotomized: 1 0 o Whether respondent does (1) or does not (0) at least yearly complete a task, deal with a hazard , or have a relation. 2. Country o If completion % is ≥ 60 for a country then task/hazard/relation is core to that country. 3. Sample o If task/hazard/relation is core to 10 -13, 4 -9, or 0 -4 countries it is hard-core, or sub-core to the survey sample.
Average completion rates for tasks, hazards, relations by country # AU CH DE FI IT NL NO PL PO SG UK US All countries B. Tasks 82 60% 64 63 50 58 49 56 61 67 68 69 60 A C. Hazards 31 65 69 66 68 55 58 66 47 51 49 57 73 61 D. Relations 35 54 63 59 63 57 64 63 60 55 50 56 65 69 60 148 60% 65 62 64 53 59 61 51 55 56 62 68 70 60 All
Two task distributions: % in hard-core by country range & # of countries 0 -3 countries 32% 0 countries 17% 1 11% 4 -9 countries 15% 10 -13 countries 54% 10 9% 11 7% 12 17% 13 countries 21% 82 Tasks 2 2% 3 1% 4 2% 5 1% 6 2% 7 4% 8 2% 9 2%
Two hazard distributions: % in hard-core by country range & # of countries 0 -3 countries 32% 0 countries 13% 1 6% 2 10% 4 -9 countries 26% 10 -13 countries 42% 4 6% 9 6% 11 10% 12 13% 13 countries 19% 31 Hazards 3 3% 5 3% 6 2% 7 3% 8 2% 9 6% 10 0%
Two relations distributions: % in hard-core by country range & # of countries 0 -3 countries 34% 0 countries 11% 2 6% 1 0% 3 17% 4 -9 countries 29% 4 9% 6 6% 8 9% 10 -13 countries 37% 11 9% 12 6% 13 countries 20% 35 Relations 5 3% 7 3% 9 0% 10 3%
B. Tasks: 82 tasks in 8 groups BI. Problem identification, analysis (5) BII. Developing, implementing solutions (28) BIII. Training, information, communication (13) BIV. Inspection and research (8) BV. Emergency procedures, settlement of damage (9) BVI. Regulatory tasks (- 1 not in USA) (8) BVII. Knowledge management (6) BVIII. Management and financial (5)
17/44 hard-core tasks ≥ 60% in all 13 countries Task % of all respondents that do task 1. Read professional safety literature (BVII: knowledge management) 98 2. Attend courses or workshops about safety subjects (VII) 96 3. Investigate and evaluate workplace or plant risks (I: problem id, analysis) 94 4. Exchange knowledge, practical experience with colleagues at local or national level (VII) 92 5 -9. Inform/discuss with all levels in company on risk [safety committee, employees, supervisors, line managers, top management] (III: training, info, comm. ) 87 -91 10, 13, 16, 18. Machinery, process, workplace - check compliance; specify safety measures; develop/improve procedures; give instruction (II: develop, implement solutions) 80 -84 11. Check compliance with the law (II) 84 12. Investigate accidents/incidents (IV: inspection, research) 84 17. Carry out physical inspections (IV) 81 19. Make recommendations for improvement arising out of investigations (IV) 80
14/44 hard-core tasks ≥ 60% in 12 countries 14. Perform job safety analysis (I: problem id, analysis) 82% not NO 15. Give safety training programmes, courses, workshops (III: training, info, comm) 82 FI 20, 21, 25. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) - prepare policy; monitor use; design improve procedures (II: develop, implement solutions) 75 -78 NO 22. Propose improvements to safety culture (II) 77 PL 23. Lead or advise on organizational change to improve safety performance (II) 77 FI 24. Design safety training programs or workshops (II) 77 NO 26. Conduct workplace audits of safe behavior (IV: inspection and research) 74 NO 29, 32. Emergency procedures - design, improve; prepare policy (incl. intervention, first aid) (V: emergency procedures, settlement of damage) 73 NO 31. Machines, processes, workplaces - prepare company policy (II) 73 NO 33. Contribute to annual plan for safety (VIII: management, financial) 71 PT 39. Contribute to annual report on safety (VIII) 69 FI
13/44 hard-core tasks: ≥ 60% in 10 -13 countries 27, 38, 41. Dangerous materials - check compliance with safety procedures; specify risk measures; design procedures for use and storage (II: develop, implement solutions) 69 -74% not FI, NO, PL 28. PPE - Specify which to purchase (II) 74 FI, NO 30, 34. Safety management system - Improve, develop (II) 73, 71 DE, NO, PL 35. Assess safety culture (II) 71 NO, PL 36. Keep statistics about accidents and incidents (IV: inspection and research) 70 FI, NO 37. Carry out risk analyses (I: problem id, analysis) 70 FI, NO, PL 40. Prepare company policy relating to safety training (III: training, info, communication) 69 FI, NO 42, 43. Safety campaign – design; implementation (III) 68, 67 FI, NL, NO 44. Publish about safety in company newsletter or internal communicque (III) 71 FI, NL, NO
12/12 core tasks ≥ 60% in 5 -9 countries 45, 48, 52, 55. Safety management system - monitor; conduct audits; design performance indicators; document (II: develop, implement solutions) 54 -67 4 -7 countries 46. Prepare company policy on safety culture (II) 66% DE, NO, PL, PT 47. Dangerous materials - prepare policy (II) 65 CH, IT, NL, NO 49. Design team – integrate safety in design (I: problem id, analysis) 63 FI, NL, NO, PL, SG 50. Develop policy for sustainable processes, products (II) 61 A, FI, IT, NO, PL 51. Review a design as external to the design team (I) 60 7 53. Organize practice of emergency procedures (V: emergency procedures, settlement of damage) 57 5 54. Keep records of safety training (III: training, info, communications) 55 6 56. Check compliance with permits to work (II) 50 4
13/26 sub-core tasks ≥ 60% in 1, 2, 3 countries 57. Advise on/ set budget for safety (VIII: management, financial) 50 yes US 64. Advise employer/employee about damage or injury claims (V: emergency procedures, damage settlements) 44 yes PL, UK, US 58. Investigate environmental incidents (IV: inspection, research) 46 PL, SG 59. Exchange knowledge, exp. at international level (VII: knowledge management) 44 PT, SG 60. Carry out cost-benefit analysis of safety measures, policies (VII) 44 SG 61. Develop environmental policy (II: develop, implement solutions) 43 SG 62, 65. Large scale maintenance, modifications - assess plan; member of planning team (II) 43, 39 US, 0 63. Manage other safety or working conditions professionals (VIII) 43 US 66. Prepare permits for dangerous work (II) 38 SG 67. Answer questions from the public about safety (VI: regulatory tasks) 38 PL 66. Selection criteria for new employees (III) 36 US 74. Design guidance, standards for training at nat'l, industry level (VI) 22 PT
13/26 sub-core tasks ≥ 60% in no country 69. First aid courses (V: emergency procedures, damage settlement) 27% 70. Keep stats about sickness absence (IV: inspection, research) 26 71. Involved with national/regional/industry-wide safety laws, rules (VI: regulatory) 25 72. Prepare policy on insurance and compensation (V) 24 73. Write on safety in professional, scientific literature (VII: management, financial) 23 75. Manage company fire-fighting team (V) 22 76. Act as expert witness in legal cases or claims (V) 20 77. Be a member of fire-fighting team (V) 18 78. Advise on damage claims (VI) 17 79, 80, 82. Be a member of standards committee for safety management systems; safety competence/skills; product safety (VI) 13, 12, 8 81. Advise on insurance premiums (VI) 12
Task distribution: ≥ 60% in 10 -13 countries is hard-core; 5 -9 is core; 0 -3 is sub-core Hard- Core Mid Sub. Core All 13 countries 12 # All tasks 82 44 12 26 100 % 54% 15% 32% 17 21% 14 6 7 2 2 3 2 1 2 9 14 17 % 7% 9% 2% 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% 11%17% 5% 1 1 0 0 0 0 28% 64% 21% 14% 5 6 4 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 3 1 13% 85% 8% 8% 5 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 63% 13% 25% 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 22% 11% 67% 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 BVI: Regulatory 8% tasks 0% 0% 100% 0 0 0 2 6 BVII: Knowledge 6% management 50% 17% 33% 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 BVIII: Management, financial 40% 0% 60% 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 All tasks % BI: Problem id, analysis BII: Develop, implement solutions BIII: Training, info, comm. BIV: Inspection, 8% research BV: Emergency procedures, damage 9% settlement 5% 60% 40% 0% 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Task distribution: ≥ 60% in 10 -13 countries is hard-core; 5 -9 is core; 0 -3 is sub-core Total Hard- Sub- All 13 Total # % Core countries 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 All tasks # 82 100% 44 6 2 3 2 1 2 9 14 All tasks % 82 100% 54% 15% 32% 21% BI: Problem ID & analysis 5 BII: Develop, implement solutions 28 BIII: Training, info, comm. 13 BIV: Inspection, research 8 BV: Emergency procedures, damages settlement 9 6% 12 26 60% 40% 0% 34% 64% 16% 85% 8% 8% 10% 63% 13% 25% • 11% 22% 11% 67% 10% 0% 0% BVII: Knowledge management 6 7% 50% 17% 33% 5 • 21% 14% BVI: Regulatory tasks 8 BVIII: Management, financial 17 6% 40% 0% 100% 60% • • 14 7 2 17% 7% 9% 2% 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% 11% 17% Highest group: Training, information, and communication o Inform and discuss safety cluster (5 hard-core tasks) drives result o Safety campaign cluster (3), training, record/keeping, publishing. o Sub core: involve in selection criteria for employees, keep records High o Develop and implementing solutions o Inspection and research o Problem ID and analysis Middle: Knowledge management (highest % tasks) Lowest: Regulatory, Emergency procedures, damages, settlement.
Tasks take aways • Polarized distribution. Well-defined int’l hard-core (and periphery) o 10 -13 countries : 54% or 44 tasks o 13 countries: 21% or 17 tasks o 10 -13 at 80%: 16% or 13 tasks • Reflects conventional, technically oriented SP o Training information and communication group means contact with all levels of company employees. o Develop and implement solutions group means machinery, process, workplace safety; personal protective equipment o Knowledge management group means continued education is key o Low: regulatory, environmental/sustainability, emergency procedures.
C. 31 Hazards; groups • Core safety (10) • Industrial hygiene (9) • Ergonomics (4) • Psychosocial (4) • Environmental/sustainability (2) • Product areas (2)
Hard-core & core hazards 14. Toxic, carcinogenic substances 68% FI, NO, PL, PT 15. Mental workload/stress 65 IT, NL, PT, SG 13 16. Explosion 60 FI, IT, NO, PL 80 13 59 6 6. Electricity 80 13 17. Causes of other occ. diseases 7. Lighting 79 not NO 18. Vibration 57 5 8. Falls 79 PL 19. Road/transport 56 7 9. VDUs 79 NO, SG 10. Fire 78 PL 11. Other physical workload 77 NO 12. Extremes of cold or heat 75 NO, SG 13. Vehicles 73 NO, PT 1. Human errors 85% 13 countries 2. Lifting 85 13 3. Working posture 85 13 4. Machinery and installations 84 5. Noise
Sub-core hazards 20. Environmental pollution 51% yes IT, SG 21. External safety 49 AU, NL, UK, US 22. Bio risk 45 AU, NL, UK, US 23. Drugs/alcohol 45 AU, DE, FI 24. Subsidence and collapse 42 PL, US 25. Non-ionising radiation 41 US 26. Accidents to patients, passengers, students, others 39 UK 27. Bullying and harassment 37 AU, FI 28. Ionising radiation 35 0 29. Lack of sustainability of products/production 32 0 30. Violence against employees 31 0 31. Product liability 28 0
Hazards groups • • • Ergonomics: core to 82% respondents, 12. 25 countries o Lifting (13), working posture (13), other physical workload (12), visual display units (VDUs) (11) Core safety: core to 69% respondents, 9. 6 countries o Electricity (13), machinery and installations (13), human error (13), falls (12), fire (12), vehicles (11), explosion (9), road/transport (7), subsidence and collapse (2), external safety (4). Industrial hygiene: core to 60% respondents and 6. 8 countries o Noise (13), lighting (12), cold/heat (11), toxic/carcinogenic substances (9), occupational disease(6), vibration (5), bio risk (4), non-ionising radiation (1), ionising radiation (0). Psychosocial: core to 45%, 3. 25 countries o Mental workload/stress (8), bullying and harassment (2), drugs/alcohol (3), violence against employees (0) Environmental/sustainability: core to 42%, 1 country o Environmental pollution (2), Lack of sustainability of production or products (0) Product areas: core to 34%, 0. 5 countries o Accidents (to patients, passengers, students, or other clients) (1), product liability (0)
D. Hard-core & core relations 1. Employees 95% 13 countries 14. Professional association 63 A, CH, NO, PL, PT 2. Line management 94 13 15. External safety consultant 63 A, DE, FI, NL, PL, PT 3. Top management 94 13 16. Local fire service 61 AU, CH, NL, NO, PT 4. Tech/maintenance service 87 13 5. Personnel/HR dept. 85 13 17. Environmental expert 60 6 6. Gov inspector (nat’l, local) 81 13 18. Educational establishment 57 IT, NL, PT, SG 7. Safety committee or rep 81 not A, CH 19. Lawyer 56 5 8. Safety officers of other org. 79 A, FI 21. Designer 52 6 9. Occupational physician 77 SG 25. Other medical specialist 45 yes AU, CH, FI, US 10. Visitors 75 13 26. Trade-union official (nat’l, local) 44 AU, FI, NO, UK 11. Works council / equivalent 72 AU, PT, SG 12. Financial division 68 A, PT 13. Quality dept. 65 FI
Core and sub-core relations 20. Occ. /industrial hygenist 55 yes AU, NL, US 30. Company planner 42 IT, US 22. Certification body 48 NL, SG, US 31. Inspector of (social) insurance 35 CH, DE, PL 23. Occupational health and safety service 47 NL, NO, US 32. Standards body 35 0 24. Ergonomist 46 AU, NL, US 33. Employer’s federation 35 0 27. Poilcy maker, planner in local authority 43 IT, NO, US 34. People living around site 32 0 28. Industry federation 43 IT, NL 35. Work and organization psychologist 27 0 29, Insurer 42 FI, UK, US
Summary and take-aways • • • Hard core: 54% or 44 tasks, 42% or 13 hazards, 37% or 13 relations. o 13 countries: 21% or 17 tasks, 19% or 6 hazards, 20% or 7 relations o 10 -13 at 80%: 16% or 13 tasks, 10% or 3 hazards, 20% or 7 relations Hard core reflects conventional, technically oriented SP o Contact with all levels of employees, focus on machinery, process, workplace safety; personal protective equipment § Tasks, hazards, and relations. o Knowledge management, staying current and ongoing education is key. o Ergonomics is a key, high-completion-rate sub-group. Low: o Regulatory tasks including being a member of standards comimittee, keeping statistics about sickness, being a member of fire team o Environmental/sustainability tasks and environmental pollution hazard; o Contact with industry and national federations.
Potential limitations to inference • • Besides some demographics, the survey data is consistent and comparable across all countries. Probably not problems o o Questionnaire fatigue (169 questions, ~ 1 hour). Analysis sensitive results? Definitions and cut-points Recoding and processing schemes Sample and target population Selection bias Sampling through professional associations. Heterogeneity and representativity § Country idiosyncrasies § Language and translation § Education and affiliation distinctions Response rate and sample size: big country effects
Potential further analysis • Finer analysis of tasks, hazards, relations • • Exploit ordinal data: daily, weekly, yearly, quarterly, yes but not yet, no, never, other. Factor analysis and clustering of tasks (see Hale et al 2005, Hale & Guldenmund 2006 and others) • • • By country, region, country groups By demographic variables: education, experience Measuringing or expanding representativity Improving response rates Bias elimination strategies
Thank you! • For presentation, paper write-up • bradley. Rturner@gmail. com
Скачать презентацию INSHPO s survey project results design implementation NSHPO обзор
d144dd628233be54664c9634280991ca.ppt