Reiman, A; Pedersen, L M; Väyrynen, S; Sormunen, E; Airaksinen, O; Haapasalo, H and Räsänen, T (2019) Safety training parks–cooperative contribution to safety and health trainings. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 15(1), pp. 19-41. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Recent debate regarding the possibility for decreasing the risk of accidents within the construction industry has emphasized the need for innovative training methods. Training should combine behavior- and culture-based approaches, simulate real-life situations, and involve multiple methods. The concept of Safety Training Park (STP) has been developed to meet these challenges. Eighty stakeholders from the Finnish construction industry have been involved in the construction and financing of the STP in northern Finland (STPNF). This unique cooperation has contributed to the immediate success of the park. However, little is known regarding the creation process and how the utilization of the STPNF could be improved. This article presents as a case study the concept, joint creation process and lessons learned this far. Detailed descriptions of the STPNF, findings from focus group interviews, and evidence from the literature are presented with a focus on the pros and cons of the STPNF. The STP is a new and innovative method for safety training that stimulates different learning styles and inspires changes in individuals’ behavior and in the organizations’ safety climate. The stakeholders’ high commitment, a long-term perspective, and a strong safety climate are identified as preconditions for the STP concept to work.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction education; learning; occupational safety and health; safety training park; stakeholder |
| Index terms: | construction industry, safety training, occupational safety and health, Finland, case study, cooperation, lessons learned, financing, construction education, evidence, commitment, learning style, interview, safety climate, focus group |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, occupational health and safety management, professional development, learning methods, data collection methods, professional education, health safety and environment, Geography, economic analysis, psychology, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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