Öney-Yazıcı, E and Dulaimi, M F (2015) Understanding designing for construction safety: The interaction between confidence and attitude of designers and safety culture. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 11(5), pp. 325-337. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Designing for construction safety (DfCS) can be defined as the consideration of construction site safety at the design stage of a construction project. Although the link between the design decisions and accidents on construction sites is well established in the literature, the number of studies searching for the designers' perspective on the issue is limited. The aim of this research study is to investigate the interaction between (i) the designers' reliance on their abilities, (ii) their attitudes towards DfCS and (iii) organizations safety culture and current practices. Data is collected by means of a web-based questionnaire. The sample for this study consists of 72 participants from 17 nationalities who are actively engaged in design activities for construction projects in the United Arab Emirates, including architects, civil and structural engineers, mechanical engineers, interior designers and electrical engineers. By providing empirical evidence from a multi-cultural working environment, the findings of this study suggest that (i) designers nationalities, age, experience and professional background have a significant impact on their attitudes towards DfCS; (ii) safety culture of the organization is highly correlated with the attitudes of the designers towards designing for safety. Moreover, hands-on experience is regarded to be an important component in enabling professionals to develop their knowledge and understanding of their role in influencing health and safety.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | attitudes; designers' confidence; designing for construction safety; safety culture; United Arab Emirates |
| Index terms: | designer, construction site, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, health and safety, safety culture, design decision, construction safety, interaction, United Arab Emirates, design stage, evidence, questionnaire, architect, construction project, structural engineer |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, profession, professional practice, work location, production management, health safety and environment, Geography, design practice, behavioral psychology, environmental health |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Site Management, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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