Hinze, J and Raboud, P (1988) Safety on large building construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 114(2), pp. 286-293. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Large building construction projects in Canada were studied to assess the degree that policies and practices of a company or project influence worker safety, as measured in terms of injury frequency. Results showed that company-level practices influence safety performance. Safety performances were better on projects of companies that employed a full-time company safety officer; those which exhibited stronger top-management support for safety; those which conducted safety meetings for supervisors; and those which monitored the safety performances of their supervisors. Lower injury rates were also noted on projects that employed a project safety officer; those on which specific job site safety tours were conducted; and those which included safety issues in regularly held coordination meetings. Better safety performances occurred on projects which employed more sophisticated scheduling methods. It was also noted that better safety results occurred when the owner or the owner’s representative was included in coordination meetings. Job pressures, particularly those imposed by budgetary constraints, were found to adversely affect safety performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | coordination, supervisor, Canada, owner, safety performance, scheduling, injury, building construction, safety issue |
| Subjects: | practitioner, operations research, management, Geography, financial risk, occupational health and safety management, health conditions and diseases, building construction, sociology |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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