Soltanmohammadlou, Nazi (2025) A sociotechnical system for earthmoving equipment safety in Australian construction sites. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
This thesis examines earthmoving equipment operations (EEOs) as a sociotechnical safety system within the Australian construction industry. It analyses causal risk factors across regulatory, organisational, and operational levels using Rasmussen’s Risk Management Framework. Through a mixed-methods approach combining qualitative and quantitative data, the study shows that safety solutions remain focused on workers and site operations, overlooking important cross-level influences. The research develops a systemic model identifying influential risk factors and demonstrates how understanding risk causes and effects across all levels of the safety management system can improve information flow, strengthen technological solutions, and enhance decision-making across the EEOs’ life cycle.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Hon, Carol and Drogemuller, Robin |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | earthmoving equipment operations; construction industry; sociotechnical systems; safety management; system thinking; rasmussen risk management framework; multi-criteria decision making; fuzzy logic theory |
| Index terms: | site operation, risk factor, risk management, safety management system, construction industry, earthmoving, fuzzy logic, life cycle, decision-making, safety management, information flow, construction site |
| Subjects: | occupational health and safety management, decision analysis, industry analysis, information systems, work location, data science, risk assessment, value management, environmental hazards, health safety and environment, operations management, construction operations |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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