Building a framework for dynamic organisational capabilities in design for safety (dfs) for Malaysian construction organisations

Che Ibrahim, C K I; Manu, P; Cheung, C; Guo, B H W and Agyekum, K (2025) Building a framework for dynamic organisational capabilities in design for safety (dfs) for Malaysian construction organisations. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 23(6), pp. 1958-1978. ISSN 1726-0531

Abstract

Purpose – Despite the growing construction subject of Design for Safety (DfS) in Malaysia, little effort has been made to understand the construction organisational DfS capability in a dynamic environment. This study aims to propose a framework for dynamic DfS capabilities for construction organisations in Malaysia. Design/methodology/approach – A quantitative research methodology was used for this study. Data were gathered from three hundred and six (306) practitioners from diverse construction organisations, including government agencies, consultants, contractors and developers in Malaysia, using an online questionnaire survey during four online DfS webinars. Descriptive and inferential analysis, as well as content analysis techniques, were used to analyse the collected data. Findings – Analysis of the survey data showed that all six key DfS organisational capability elements identified in the literature, which the respondents were required to assess, have a strong influence on determining the DfS capabilities of construction organisations. The elements ranked as most influential include DfS knowledge of the designer; DfS experience of the designer; Top management's commitment to DfS; Design risk management; and Project review. Based on these findings, a framework for dynamic DfS organisational capabilities is proposed. This framework incorporates four essential capabilities – sensing, learning, integrating and coordinating – and is anchored by the aforementioned six key elements as foundational to deriving value from DfS practices. Practical implications – The proposed DfS organisational capabilities framework will facilitate construction organisations' focus on the dynamic environment while striving for successful DfS practice in construction projects. Originality/value – This study extends the DfS literature in the construction context by providing deeper insights into the conceptualisation of dynamic DfS organisational capabilities where DfS regulatory framework is still evolving. This study also highlights organisations' importance in perceiving and prioritising their abilities to sense changes, learn and internalise new competencies, integrate resources and coordinate activities, reflecting their unique strategic focuses and operational needs toward DfS practice.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction; construction management; design for safety; dynamic capabilities; health and safety; organisation; organisational management
Index terms: methodology, top management, dynamic capability, construction project, design for safety, practitioner, design risk, questionnaire, organizational capability, health and safety, government agency, commitment, organizational management, content analysis, survey, construction organization, Malaysia, quantitative research, prioritizing, designer
Subjects: management, administrative law, sociology, decision analysis, business, profession, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, financial risk, health safety and environment, Geography, production management, research methods, practitioner, organization, psychology
Topics: Legal Issues, Risk Management, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Project Management, Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice
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