Track maintenance train operators’ attitudes to job, organisation and management, and their correlation with accident/incident rate

The present paper reports the results of a questionnaire-based survey of night train operators’ attitudes toward management, operating procedures, and other organisational issues that potentially impact on safety. Responses were collected from all of the operators of track maintenance trains servicing the Japanese high-speed railway (Shinkansen). Two versions of the questionnaire, the TMAQ (Train Management Attitudes Questionnaire), were developed based on Helmreich’s FMAQ (Flight MAQ) and its derivative, the SMAQ (Ship MAQ). The TMAQ and its progenitor seek to elicit respondents’ views of, and attitudes to, a range of safety related factors including morale, motivation, leadership and human relations in their organisation.To identify dimensions of safety culture as elicited through the TMAQ, a principal component analysis was applied to the questionnaire responses of the original TMAQ. The analysis yielded seven attitude factors, including morale and motivation. Of the seven factors, a close correlation was identified between the factor scores representing operators’ morale and motivation and the actual accident/incident rates for each of the five branches belonging to a single-track maintenance company. A branch that employed train operators having relatively higher morale and motivation exhibited a lower accident/incident rate. Furthermore, the very same correlation was also found for company based responses collected from all track maintenance companies working for the high-speed railway.In addition to the branch and company based comparisons for track maintenance train operators, we also compared attitude factors between different groups of operators (drivers and supervisors), and between two different periods surveyed in a two year interval. Finally, we examined differences in terms of attitude factors between track maintenance operators and seafarers surveyed by applying slightly different variants of the same generic form of questionnaire (Helmreich’s SMAQ). Based on these survey results, we discuss potential risk factors for accidents of track maintenance trains and some implications for improving railway safety.

[1]  H. B. Andersen,et al.  Motivation and morale of night train drivers correlated with accident rates , 1999 .

[2]  D. Zohar.  Safety climate in industrial organizations: theoretical and applied implications. , 1980, The Journal of applied psychology.

[3]  R. Helmreich,et al.  Culture at Work in Aviation and Medicine: National, Organizational and Professional Influences , 1998 .

[4]  Ian Donald,et al.  Measures of safety management performance and attitudes to safety at major hazard sites , 1996 .

[5]  van W Wim Vuuren,et al.  Cultural influences on risks and risk management: six case studies , 2000 .

[6]  S. Clarke.  Perceptions of organizational safety: implications for the development of safety culture , 1999 .

[7]  Kathryn Mearns,et al.  Measuring safety climate: identifying the common features☆ , 2000 .

[8]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Cognitive reliability and error analysis method : CREAM , 1998 .

[9]  R L Helmreich,et al.  Cockpit Management Attitudes , 1984, Human factors.

[10]  Martha Grabowski,et al.  Using system simulation to model the impact of human error in a maritime system , 1998 .

[11]  Arnon E. Reichers,et al.  On the Etiology of Climates. , 1983 .

[12]  Alistair Cheyne,et al.  Assessing safety culture in offshore environments. , 2000 .

[13]  R. Helmreich.  Culture and error in space: implications from analog environments. , 2000, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[14]  R. B. Williamson,et al.  Safety Management Assessment System (SMAS): a process for identifying and evaluating human and organization factors in marine system operations with field test results , 1999 .

[15]  Rosa Isla Díaz,et al.  Safety climate and attitude as evaluation measures of organizational safety. , 1997 .

[16]  Sharon G. Clarke.  The effect of habit as a behavioural response in risk reduction programmes , 1996 .

[17]  R L Helmreich,et al.  The evolution of Crew Resource Management training in commercial aviation. , 1999, The International journal of aviation psychology.

[18]  N. Pidgeon.  Safety Culture and Risk Management in Organizations , 1991 .

[19]  Ann Williamson,et al.  The development of a measure of safety climate: The role of safety perceptions and attitudes , 1997 .

[20]  R R Amalberti.  AUTOMATION IN AVIATION: A HUMAN FACTORS PERSPECTIVE. IN: HANDBOOK OF AVIATION HUMAN FACTORS , 1999 .

[21]  James T. Reason,et al.  Managing the risks of organizational accidents , 1997 .

[22]  D. T. Bryant.  The Human Element in Shipping Casualties , 1991 .

[23]  David V. Canter,et al.  Employee attitudes and safety in the chemical industry , 1994 .

[24]  D K Griffiths.  Safety attitudes of management. , 1985, Ergonomics.

[25]  Andrew Hale,et al.  Culture's confusions , 2000 .

[26]  Ian Donald,et al.  Managing safety: an attitudinal‐based approach to improving safety in organizations , 1996 .

[27]  D. D. Heea,et al.  Safety Management Assessment System ( SMAS ) : a process for identifying and evaluating human and organization factors in marine system operations with field test results , 1999 .

[28]  Patrick Sherry,et al.  Person-environment fit and accident prediction , 1991 .

[29]  Kanichi Takagi,et al.  Human error and human reliability , 1967 .