Weinstein, M; Gambatese, J and Hecker, S (2005) Can design improve construction safety? Assessing the impact of a collaborative safety-in-design process. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(10), pp. 1125-1134. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper analyzes the impact of a large-scale safety-in-design initiative during the design and construction of a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. Drawing on multiple data sources including individual interviews, group interviews, construction documentation, and an expert panel involved in the initiative, the writers identify 26 potential design changes on the project and assess the importance of timing, trade contractor involvement, and the type of design change in determining whether a proposed design change was ultimately integrated into the final construction plans. The writers further consider whether adopted design changes would have occurred in the absence of the safety-in-design initiative and whether the accepted design changes ultimately impacted construction site safety on the project. This analysis of a full-scale safety-in-design initiative provides important insights into how injury prevention efforts in the construction industry can begin upstream by involving designers, engineers, and trade contractors in preconstruction processes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accident prevention; design; injuries; safety |
| Index terms: | designer, engineer, design and construction, construction industry, prevention, injury, design process, accident prevention, interview, United States, documentation, construction site, design change, drawing, semiconductor, trade contractor, construction safety |
| Subjects: | environmental health, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, professional development, financial risk, Geography, contractual arrangements, electrical systems, work location, technical documentation, design methods, practitioner, data collection methods, profession |
| Topics: | Site Management, Design Practice, Procurement, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Cost Management, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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