Partnering: Incorporating safety management

Matthews, J and Rowlinson, S (1999) Partnering: Incorporating safety management. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 6(4), pp. 347-357. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

The philosophy that underpins this paper is that partnering needs the partners to set mutual objectives these objectives are agreed upon and stipulated within a project charter. Objectives within the charter should be regularly reviewed and performance assessed. The question addressed is - can this mechanism, which has proved successful in a commercial context, assist in applying safety legislation, rules and management systems to a construction project? Also, partnering advocates an open and trusting relationship between all parties - can this philosophy be used to assist the management of site safety? Implementing the partnering concept in the construction project environment provides an opportunity for the continuous improvement of safety performance. This paper addresses partnering as a concept and draws from examples of partnering in the UK and Hong Kong. A number of characteristics of partnering agreements have been identified that can all assist in promoting safety. These characteristics are: continuous evaluation, the project charter, mutual objectives and team building. The context in which partnering in safety can be undertaken is reviewed and a discussion takes place of how the global trend to move away from prescriptive legislation towards performance-based legislation in the regulation of safety provides an ideal opportunity to adopt partnering as a methodology for safety improvement.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: partnering; site safety; safety management systems; project charter; accident reduction
Index terms: safety management, performance-based, safety performance, construction project, methodology, regulation, philosophy, legislation, management system, agreements, safety management system, continuous improvement, team building, partnering, Hong Kong
Subjects: management, performance measurement, research methods, production management, health safety and environment, Geography, partnership management, occupational health and safety management, philosophical studies, political science, contract formation, legal systems
Topics: Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Health and Safety
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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