A multi-case study of the implementation of an integrated approach to safety in small enterprises

An integrative approach to managing safety has been proposed which is based on a combination of the behavior change and culture change approach to safety. The key features are a data-based and participatory problem-solving process and an explicit culture change process. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to operationalize and test the implementation of an integrative approach to safety in small (20-49 employees) enterprises within the metal and wood processing industries using a quasi-experimental, multi-case design with two intervention (Int1 and Int2) and two control enterprises Methods: Baseline measures included safety observations, questionnaires, interviews and inspection of machine safety. The intervention consisted of workshops where the safety organization, workers and supervisors discussed safety issues identified at baseline (the problem solving process), and a workshop on safety management and leadership, followed by several individual safety coaching sessions with supervisors (the culture change process). RESULTS: The results differed between the two intervention enterprises. In Int1 supervisors performed 80% of the activities planned in the coaching sessions, and 74% of the activities from the worker workshops, and 82% of the activities from the safety organization workshop were resolved, compared to only 48%, 59% and 20% respectively in Int2. Interviews with management and workers indicated a difference in management commitment to the process in the enterprises, and a lack of trust and perceived reciprocity between workers and supervisors in Int2. The effect measures showed improved safety leadership, safety knowledge, safety involvement and machine safety in Int1 at follow-up, and no improvements in Int2, as was also the case for the two control enterprises. The results show that it is possible to implement the approach successfully in small enterprises, although further and lengthier studies are needed to link the approach to culture change. It is crucial to ensure management commitment throughout the implementation.

[1]  Karen Albertsen,et al.  Workplace restructurings in intervention studies – a challenge for design, analysis and interpretation , 2008, BMC medical research methodology.

[2]  Kent Jacob Nielsen,et al.  Changes in safety climate and accidents at two identical manufacturing plants , 2008 .

[3]  John Whitmore.  Coaching for performance : Growing human potential and purpose: the principle and practice of coaching and leadership , 2009 .

[4]  Peter Hasle,et al.  Small Enterprise Owners' Accident Causation Attribution and Prevention , 2009 .

[5]  K. Nielsen,et al.  Success or failure? Interpreting and understanding the impact of interventions in four similar worksites , 2006 .

[6]  D. Zohar.  Modifying supervisory practices to improve subunit safety: a leadership-based intervention model. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[8]  H Laitinen,et al.  The validity of the TR safety observation method on building construction. , 1999, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[9]  Anton J. Kuzel,et al.  Coaching for Performance: Growing Human Potential and Purpose - The Principles and Practice of Coaching and Leadership , 2010 .

[10]  E. Schein.  Organizational Culture and Leadership , 1991 .

[11]  Gil Luria,et al.  The use of supervisory practices as leverage to improve safety behavior: a cross-level intervention model. , 2003, Journal of safety research.

[12]  Andrew Hale,et al.  Evaluating safety management and culture interventions to improve safety: Effective intervention strategies , 2010 .

[13]  David M. DeJoy,et al.  Behavior change versus culture change: Divergent approaches to managing workplace safety , 2005 .

[14]  Heikki Laitinen,et al.  A new-generation safety contest in the construction industry – A long-term evaluation of a real-life intervention , 2010 .

[15]  T. Kristensen.  Intervention studies in occupational epidemiology , 2005, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[16]  T. Rundmo,et al.  Managers’ attitudes towards safety and accident prevention , 2003 .

[17]  D. Zohar.  The effects of leadership dimensions, safety climate, and assigned priorities on minor injuries in work groups , 2002 .

[18]  Dov Zohar,et al.  Improving construction site safety through leader-based verbal safety communication. , 2010, Journal of safety research.

[19]  Josefinne Lund,et al.  Accident prevention. Presentation of a model placing emphasis on human, structural and cultural factors , 2004 .

[20]  Kent Jacob Nielsen,et al.  Realistic evaluation as a new way to design and evaluate occupational safety interventions , 2012 .

[21]  Peter Hasle,et al.  The working environment in small firms: Responses from owner-managers , 2012 .

[22]  Kent Jacob Nielsen,et al.  PREDICTIVE FACTORS FOR SELF-REPORTED OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AT 3 MANUFACTURING PLANTS , 2007 .

[23]  D. Zohar.  A group-level model of safety climate: testing the effect of group climate on microaccidents in manufacturing jobs. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[24]  Douglas M. Wiegand,et al.  Exploring the role of emotional intelligence in behavior-based safety coaching. , 2007, Journal of safety research.

[25]  Stephen J. Guastello,et al.  Do we really know how well our occupational accident prevention programs work , 1993 .

[26]  P. Hasle,et al.  A review of the literature on preventive occupational health and safety activities in small enterprises. , 2006, Industrial health.

[27]  Rhona Flin,et al.  Site managers and safety leadership in the offshore oil and gas industry , 2001 .