Hadikusumo, B H W and Rowlinson, S (2004) Capturing safety knowledge using design-for-safety-process tool. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(2), pp. 281-289. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
An organization must strive to maintain its most valuable resource, knowledge, in order to be more productive and competitive. One of the steps to manage the knowledge is to capture contents of the knowledge. In construction site safety, success in capturing the tacit knowledge of safety officers is of paramount importance; however without a good mechanism, this process might be difficult due to time and hazard perception constraints. This paper discusses research in a design-for-safety-process tool, which aims at: (1) capturing safety knowledge from safety engineers about construction safety hazards and the safety measures required; (2) assisting a safety engineer to identify safety hazards in construction projects and determine the safety measures required; and (3) training students and inexperienced safety engineers in identifying safety hazards and the measures required. In this paper, the first objective is discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accident prevention; computer aided simulation; computer graphies; information management; occupational safety; safety factors |
| Index terms: | safety measures, engineer, computer aided simulation, occupational safety, accident prevention, construction site, construction project, safety factor, tacit knowledge, construction safety |
| Subjects: | profession, work location, modelling and simulation, production management, health safety and environment, professional development, financial risk, occupational health and safety management, environmental health |
| Topics: | Site Management, Digital Applications, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Information Management, Cost Management, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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