Chen, Q and Jin, R (2013) Multilevel safety culture and climate survey for assessing new safety program. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(7), pp. 805-817. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction safety culture is becoming a typical proactive safety performance measurement and strategy for safety improvement. However, there is no accepted industry wide definition for safety culture. There is also no clear distinction between safety culture and safety climate. So far, little research has investigated how safety programs can be developed to improve safety culture and climate, which in turn can be used to assess the effectiveness of these programs. This paper presents a study that examined the multilevel safety culture and climate to assess a newly launched safety program. Specifically, three different questionnaires were used to survey 71 top executives, 229 site management personnel, and 350 field workers, respectively. This study found wide acceptance of the program across all three groups, strong management accountability in enforcing safety, and a positive general safety climate among workers. The results demonstrated the program's overall effectiveness in building positive safety culture and climate despite a few identified weaknesses. Based on these findings and insightful employee feedback, this paper offers generalized recommendations to help industry practitioners develop high-quality safety programs. The presented survey instruments and analysis methods can also be used to holistically assess safety programs and related safety culture and climate.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | focus 4 hazards; safety climate; safety culture; safety program |
| Index terms: | safety culture, becoming, site management, executive, effectiveness, personnel, safety climate, strategy, accountability, survey, program, questionnaire, practitioner, safety programs, construction safety, safety performance |
| Subjects: | occupational health and safety management, liability law, environmental health, philosophical process, performance management, software systems, management, health safety and environment, construction operations, data collection methods, practitioner |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Human Resources, Quality Management, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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