ISM audits should be about safety, not paperwork. Yet too often they feel like dry boxticking exercises that frustrate crews and do little to improve safety. In fact, the ISM Code was conceived after tragedies like the 1987 Herald of Free Enterprise ferry sinking, to ensure companies set sensible standards and keep learning through continual improvement.
The code itself is a small book – it’s really about putting sensible rules in place, having crews follow them, then reviewing and improving those rules. The is to protect ships, seafarers and the environment – not to bury the crew in paperwork. Our point here is simple: internal audits should give crews something useful (a safer ship), not just more paperwork.
Why your safety management system can feel like an impossible maze
One of the biggest reasons audits feel frustrating is the Safety Management System (SMS) itself. In too many organisations, the SMS has evolved into something completely unwieldy – not because there’s too much information, but because of how it’s laid out.
It’s like the streets of Santorini. If you’ve been there, you’ll know the winding alleys were designed to confuse pirates. It’s a beautiful place, but it’s not easy to navigate – especially when you’re in a hurry. Some SMS documents feel exactly like that: maze-like, overloaded with outdated bulletins, tracked changes, and half-buried procedures. Trying to find the one thing you actually need can feel like wandering through a digital jungle.
Compare that to the clarity of a grid system. In a well-organised SMS, everything is structured, clean, and intuitive – like walking through a well-signposted city where even first-time visitors can find their way. That’s the difference. It’s not about the amount of content, it’s about whether people can use it.
When officers struggle to find procedures, it’s not because they’re lazy or non-compliant. It’s because they’ve spent too long digging through strikethroughs, annexes and contradictory updates. Some give up and email the office. Others just make a judgement call and get on with the job. Either way, consistency suffers – and so does compliance.
If your crew can’t find the right information when they need it, your SMS isn’t protecting the ship. It’s just weighing it down.
When audits feel like punishment
ISM audits can easily become something they were never meant to be – a form of punishment. Too often, the person carrying out the audit is too closely connected to the procedures. They go on board, find that the crew hasn’t followed every step to the letter, and hand out a raft of non-conformities. Then they head back to the office feeling they’ve done a good job, even if the crew was simply trying to work through an overcomplicated and outdated manual.
This is a classic case of “marking your own homework” and, unsurprisingly, it breeds frustration. From the crew’s perspective, it feels like being blamed for a system that was never designed with them in mind.
That kind of approach quickly erodes trust. Imagine you’re a crew member who’s just discovered that the procedure you’ve been following is no longer valid. Do you admit it, knowing it could lead to a mark against you? Or do you keep quiet and hope no one notices? It’s hard to raise a hand and say “we’ve got this wrong” when the likely outcome is being told off, not helped.
Instead of being a tool for improvement, the audit becomes a defensive exercise, on both sides. Management starts asking for more forms and proof, not better fixes. Crews stop flagging issues in case it affects their performance reviews or, worse, their pay. We’ve seen it time and again: when bonuses are tied to zero non-conformities, people simply stop reporting problems.
This creates a dangerous illusion of compliance, while real issues go unspoken or get buried in late, vague reports. It’s the opposite of a healthy safety culture. Instead of learning from mistakes, the system encourages people to hide them.
Turning ISM audits into a collaborative cleanup
It doesn’t have to be this way. Instead of an adversarial “fault finding” tone, an ISM audit can be run as a joint workshop, like tidying up the shed together.
You start by asking the crew what policies they never use, what’s confusing or broken. This simple consultative approach immediately changes attitudes. People are much more willing to help audit the system when they know the goal is to make their jobs easier, not to catch them out. It’s the “Inbox Zero” approach – a streamlined, clean system rather than hundreds of disorganised checklists scattered everywhere.
Practically, this means making the audit partly about removing clutter. If a procedure is outdated or irrelevant, scrap it. If two procedures conflict, fix them so they say the same thing. The goal is an SMS that a seafarer can actually use at sea.
When people see that an audit will deliver tangible improvements – for instance, a shorter morning check-off or clearer drill sheet – they are much more motivated to engage. This is truly two-way communication: the office learns how the ship really works, and the crew learns why rules are there.
How to make ISM audits useful again
If you want your ISM audit to do more than generate paperwork, you need to rethink how it’s done – from the questions you ask to the people you speak to. A useful audit doesn’t just confirm what’s written down; it tells you how things are really working on board.
Start by engaging with the full crew, not just the senior officers. It’s often the hands-on team who carry out the procedures, and they’ll give you the clearest view of what works and what doesn’t. Ask them how they find the policies in practice. Do they know what’s expected of them, or are they left guessing what the author of the SMS really meant?
Then look beyond the paperwork. A pristine digital checklist tells you very little. Just because a form says a task was done doesn’t mean it was. Get out into the spaces being audited. Ask the crew to walk you through what they do – not just what the document says.
Cross-checking is essential. If the logbook says all the lifeboats were lowered and manoeuvred in port on Wednesday, and the ship was actually at sea on Wednesday, something’s off. The point isn’t to catch people out, it’s to catch disconnects between policy and reality – because that’s where safety failures begin.
Most importantly, don’t make the audit purely about what the crew is doing wrong. Instead, make recommendations that improve the system itself. If a procedure is unclear, fix it. If a checklist is too long to be practical, trim it. That’s how you reinforce the idea that the audit is there to support the ship, not judge it.
Timing also matters. Audits are work. Cramming them into busy turnaround days or peak operations just adds stress. Be considerate and schedule audits at a time when the crew can engage properly. You’ll get better results and better conversations.
Finally, throw out the idea of a fixed checklist. If you only ever check the same few things, you’ll never see the rest of the operation. Broaden your scope. Tailor the audit to the vessel, the voyage, and the context. The best audits uncover what’s not being talked about and that only happens when you go off-script.
Done well, an audit should feel collaborative, not confrontational. It should involve the crew, not just observe them. And it should generate improvements that make their lives easier, not harder. When you approach it this way, audits become what they were meant to be: a tool to help protect people, ships and the environment – not just a box to tick.
Beyond the checklist ISM audits by Watermark
A good ISM audit shouldn’t feel like policing – it should feel like progress. At Watermark, we treat audits as conversations about real risks, not just rules. We look at actual incidents, near misses, and day-to-day challenges to see whether the SMS helps or hinders. Then we use that insight to make small, practical changes that lead to big safety gains.
The ISM Code was never meant to bury crews in paperwork. Its purpose is continual improvement, making ships safer by learning from experience. That only works when audits are grounded in reality and delivered by people who understand life at sea.
Our team has walked the decks. We know that a good procedure has to make sense at 3am, not just in the boardroom. And we know that crews work best when they’re heard. Performance follows when people feel supported. Treat audits as a chance to learn, not a test to pass, and the results will speak for themselves.
Find out more about Watermark.
