Zhang, P; Lingard, H; Blismas, N; Wakefield, R and Kleiner, B (2015) Work-health and safety-risk perceptions of construction-industry stakeholders using photograph-based q methodology. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(5): 04014093, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Work health and safety (WHS) on construction sites can be influenced by decisions made upstream from the construction stage. The effectiveness of WHS risk management relies on decision makers' ability to decide appropriate strategies to mitigate/control risks. However, it is unclear whether upstream decision makers share similar WHS risk perceptions with those who undertake the construction work. This study used Q methodology to explore WHS risk perceptions of architects, engineers, construction managers, and WHS professionals. Photographs depicting different technologies/methods were used to capture professionals' WHS risk judgments. Data were analyzed to identify the within-group and between-group similarity/difference in professionals' WHS risk perceptions. The data-analysis result indicates the coexistence of within-group difference and similarity, as well as between-group difference and similarity in WHS risk perceptions. The research contributes to the body of knowledge by showing that WHS risk is subjective in nature and that social, psychological, and technical factors interact to shape subjective risk judgments. The research finding challenges traditional risk-management thinking, which assumes risk is objective and easily quantifiable.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | engineer, construction site, architect, Q methodology, body of knowledge, effectiveness, strategy, health and safety, construction manager, construction work, risk management, judgment, risk perception |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, work location, performance management, environmental hazards, health safety and environment, management, knowledge management, data analysis and analytics, dispute resolution, operations management, profession |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Risk Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Site Management, Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Project Management, Information Management, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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