Hinsberg, K L (2025) Crisis and governance communication for construction safety. PhD thesis, Arizona State University, USA.
Abstract
High-risk industries like construction are prone to safety failures, necessitating risk mitigation strategies for organizations and the workforce. Effective communication is crucial to maximizing safe production and minimizing organizational damage when safety failures do occur. Deficiencies in systematic communication across the construction industry has led to gaps in organizational and safety risk management. This research identified proactive crisis communication strategies used in general industries and adapted these strategies specifically for construction organizations following worksite fatalities to address communication gaps. It was found that worksite fatalities can be categorized as a preventable crisis where ingratiation, mortification and corrective action messaging strategies will be most beneficial to address financial, legal and reputational risks. Two communication frameworks were developed to be used as a foundation in crisis strategy following a fatality to help facilitate decision making and crisis messaging. A survey of construction organizations was also used to identify the extent of financial, legal and reputational impacts following a fatality and the effectiveness of crisis communication planning. Results suggest that financial impacts are perceived to be the most significant risk compared to legal and reputational factors. The survey results suggest there is a misunderstanding of the severity of fatality events on organizational success, contradicting previous literature. The study identified gaps in safety regulation, compliance, and communication based on misalignments in risk perception to help address organizational risks prior to safety failures. A participative framework model was proposed to help align worker risk perceptions with organizational governance through policy creation, policy compliance, stakeholder participation and feedback. Utilizing proper discourse and cyclical communication the proposed framework aimed to increase safety fidelity, compliance, and participation in the construction industry through a more inclusive and collaborative governance strategy. Methods to improve organizational communication and performance across the construction industry by addressing barriers to safety compliance and crisis communication strategies following safety failures have been identified.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Lamanna, A |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | communication; compliance; construction safety; decision making; feedback; governance; participation; policy; regulation; risk management; safety; stakeholder; workforce |
| Index terms: | decision-making, regulation, risk mitigation, construction safety, misalignment, compliance, risk perception, strategy, survey, effectiveness, risk management, construction industry, stakeholder participation, fatalities, construction organization, governance |
| Subjects: | community and social dimensions, data collection methods, risk assessment, business, industry analysis, environmental health, political science, decision analysis, management, health risk and incident analysis, performance management, engineering problems, organization, environmental hazards, health safety and environment, financial risk |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Quality Management, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| 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