Benefits and barriers of construction health and safety management (HSM): Perceptions of practitioners within design organisations

Chileshe, N and Dzisi, E (2012) Benefits and barriers of construction health and safety management (HSM): Perceptions of practitioners within design organisations. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 10(2), pp. 276-298. ISSN 1726-0531

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the perceptions of practitioners working within the UK design organisations on the perceived benefits of health and safety management (HSM). It further explores whether these perceptions could be influenced by the external factors such as the length of service in employment, organisation size, and the professional disciplines and educational backgrounds of the respondents. The study proposes the HSM index, an indicator reflecting the level of benefits from HSM approaches within the construction sector. Design/methodology/approach: Using a data triangulation approach involving quantitative and qualitative methods and a KAP (knowledge, attitudes and perceptions) approach, a total of 110 questionnaires were distributed to the practitioners drawn from the small and medium sized design organisations within the UK, of which only 30 were deemed usable, giving a response rate of 27.3 per cent. Findings: The ranking analysis suggest that "safer workplace", "enhanced company reputation", and "decrease in accidents" as the most important benefits arising from deployment of HSM programmes among the practitioners whereas "improved work performance", "increased organisational performance ", and "reduced sickness and absence from work" though least ranked, still attained medium level of benefits. The findings further identified organisational skills as the most desirable for the effective implementation of safety management by project managers. The overall weighted HSM Index of 3.68 implies that the small and medium sized UK constructional related organisations perceive the benefits that arise from the deployment of HSM systems as medium. Originality/value: The findings may help construction practitioners in reviewing decisions factors when they consider implementing HSM during the various stages of the construction process, from feasibility, design, tender and actual construction stage, also for improving their HSM approaches through considerations of the cognitive impacts.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: design organizations; health and safety; health and safety management; project performance; small to medium-sized enterprises; United Kingdom
Index terms: health and safety, programme, construction practitioner, qualitative method, United Kingdom, questionnaire, practitioner, construction process, methodology, triangulation, safety management, construction sector, project manager, employment, organizational performance, project performance, work performance, health and safety management, implementation
Subjects: operations management, contractual arrangements, research design and methodology, profession, data collection methods, practitioner, building construction, project controls, occupational health and safety management, industry analysis, research methods, performance measurement, management, project management theory and practice, professional development, health safety and environment, Geography
Topics: Time Control, Site Management, Quality Management, Human Resources, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Information Management, Health and Safety
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here