Stress,burnout and diminished safety behaviors: An argument for Total Worker Health® approaches in the fire service

Introduction: Firefighting is stressful work, which can result in burnout. Burnout is a safety concern as it can negatively impact safety outcomes. These impacts are not fully understood within the fire service. Further, the fire service needs support that safety strategies are needed to protect and promote the health and wellbeing of firefighters. Methods: Structural equation modeling was completed to examine a hypothesized model that linked stress and burnout to diminished safety behavior outcomes among a sample of career firefighters. Results: Findings support a full mediation model. Firefighter stress perceptions were positively associated with burnout and burnout was negatively associated with safety compliance behavior, personal protective equipment behavior, safe work practices, and safety citizenship behavior. Conclusions: These results illustrate the negative impact of health impairment on firefighter safety behaviors. Practical Applications: These outcomes suggest that interventions aimed at protecting and promotion firefighter health are needed. Total Worker Health® (TWH) approaches may provide the framework for these interventions.     

Exposure to fall hazards and safety climate in the aircraft maintenance industry

PROBLEM: Falls represent a significant occupational hazard, particularly in industries with dynamic work environments. This paper describes rates of noncompliance with fall hazard prevention requirements, perceived safety climate and worker knowledge and beliefs, and the association between fall exposure and safety climate measures in commercial aircraft maintenance activities. METHODS: Walkthrough observations were conducted on aircraft mechanics at two participating facilities (Sites A and B) to ascertain the degree of noncompliance. Mechanics at each site completed questionnaires concerning fall hazard knowledge, personal safety beliefs, and safety climate. Questionnaire results were summarized into safety climate and belief scores by workgroup and site. Noncompliance rates observed during walkthroughs were compared to the climate-belief scores, and were expected to be inversely associated. RESULTS: Important differences were seen in fall safety performance between the sites. The study provided a characterization of aircraft maintenance fall hazards, and also demonstrated the effectiveness of an objective hazard assessment methodology. Noncompliance varied by height, equipment used, location of work on the aircraft, shift, and by safety system. DISCUSSION: Although the expected relationship between safety climate and noncompliance was seen for site-average climate scores, workgroups with higher safety climate scores had greater observed noncompliance within Site A. Overall, use of engineered safety systems had a significant impact on working safely, while safety beliefs and climate also contributed, though inconsistently. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: The results of this study indicate that safety systems are very important in reducing noncompliance with fall protection requirements in aircraft maintenance facilities. Site-level fall safety compliance was found to be related to safety climate, although an unexpected relationship between compliance and safety climate was seen at the workgroup level within site. Finally, observed fall safety compliance was found to differ from self-reported compliance.     

Safety climate and firefighting: Focus group results

BackgroundFirefighting is a hazardous occupation and there have been numerous calls for fundamental changes in how fire service organizations approach safety and balance safety with other operational priorities. These calls, however, have yielded little systematic research.MethodsAs part of a larger project to develop and test a model of safety climate for the fire service, focus groups were used to identify potentially important dimensions of safety climate pertinent to firefighting.ResultsAnalyses revealed nine overarching themes. Competency/professionalism, physical/psychological readiness, and that positive traits sometimes produce negative consequences were themes at the individual level; cohesion and supervisor leadership/support at the workgroup level; and politics/bureaucracy, resources, leadership, and hiring/promotion at the organizational level. A multi-level perspective seems appropriate for examining safety climate in firefighting.ConclusionsSafety climate in firefighting appears to be multi-dimensional and some dimensions prominent in the general safety climate literature also seem relevant to firefighting. These results also suggest that the fire service may be undergoing transitions encompassing mission, personnel, and its fundamental approach to safety and risk.Practical applicationsThese results help point the way to the development of safety climate measures specific to firefighting and to interventions for improving safety performance.     

The association between subcontractor safety management programs and worker perceived safety climate in commercial construction projects

Problem: Safety management programs (SMPs) are designed to mitigate risk of workplace injuries and create a safe working climate. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the relationship between contractors’ SMPs and workers’ perceived safety climate and safety behaviors among small and medium-sized construction subcontractors. Methods: Subcontractor SMP scores on 18 organizational and project-level safety items were coded from subcontractors’ written safety programs and interviews. Workers completed surveys to report perceptions of their contractor’s safety climate and the safety behaviors of coworkers, crews, and themselves. The associations between SMP scores and safety climate and behavior scales were examined using Spearman correlation and hierarchical linear regression models (HLM). Results: Among 78 subcontractors working on large commercial construction projects, we found striking differences in SMP scores between small, medium, and large subcontractors (p < 0.001), related to a number of specific safety management practices. We observed only weak relationships between SMP scales and safety climate scores reported by 746 workers of these subcontractors (β = 0.09, p = 0.04 by HLM). We saw no differences in worker reported safety climate and safety behaviors by contractor size. Discussion: SMP only weakly predicted safety climate scales of subcontractors, yet there were large differences in the quality and content of SMPs by size of employers. Summary: Future work should determine the best way to measure safety performance of construction companies and determine the factors that can lead to improved safety performance of construction firms. Practical applications: Our simple assessment of common elements of safety management programs used document review and interviews with knowledgeable representatives. These methods identified specific safety management practices that differed between large and small employers. In order to improve construction safety, it is important to understand how best to measure safety performance in construction companies to gain knowledge for creating safer work environments.     

Exploring patterns of multiple climates and their effects on safety performance at the department level

Introduction: This paper represents a first attempt to fill a gap in research about different specific climates and safety outcomes, by empirically identifying patterns of climates and exploring the possible effect of different climates at the department level on some specific safety outcomes. The first objective was to explore how different specific climates (safety, communication, diversity and inclusion) can be associated to each other, considering the department level of analysis. The second objective was to examine the relationships between those patterns of climates with safety performance (compliance and participation behaviors). Method: A total of 429 blue-collar workers in 35 departments answered a questionnaire covering safety, diversity, inclusion, and communication climate measures. Cluster analysis was performed to identify clusters of departments with different climate patterns and their impact on safety compliance and safety participation behaviors. Subsequently, a hierarchical multiple linear regression was conducted at the individual-level to test the effect of climate patterns, by controlling for some sociodemographic variables. Results: Results showed the existence of four differentiated clusters of departments. Three of those clusters showed homogenous patterns (coherent association among perceptions of low, medium and high climates) and one heterogeneous (low and medium perceptions). The findings also revealed that the higher the climates perceptions, the higher the levels of safety participation and safety compliance, with safety participation being more affected than compliance. Conclusions: The present research showed the associated effects of some organizational climate factors, such as fair treatment, inclusion, safety and communication within the organization, which had not been previously studied in their combined relationships, on safety behaviors. Practical applications: Several other organizational climate factors, such as fair treatment, inclusiveness and communication, may play an important role in safety, showing the importance of broadening the focus on safety climate as one of the main predictors of safety behaviors.     

Testing safety commitment in organizations through interpretations of safety artifacts

Problem

Safety culture relates to injuries and safety incidents in organizations, but is difficult to asses and measure. We describe a preliminary test of assessing an organization's safety culture by examining employee interpretations of organizational safety artifacts (safety signs).

Method

We collected data in three organizations using a new safety culture assessment tool that we label the Safety Artifact Interpretation (SAI) scale; we then crossed these data with safety climate and leadership evaluations.

Results

SAI were interpreted by employees in accordance with two conceptually distinct themes that are salient in the literature on organizational safety culture: safety compliance and commitment to safety. A significant correlation exists between SAI scores and the organizational safety climate. A similar (though insignificant) relationship was observed between SAI scores and leadership ratings.

Impact on industry

Employee perceptions and interpretations of safety artifacts can facilitate assessments of safety culture and can ultimately lead to understanding of and improvements in the level of organizational safety.     

The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior

Relatively little previous research has investigated the meechanisms by which safety climate affects safety behavior. The current study examined the effects of general organizational climate on safety climate and safety performance. As expected, general organizational climate exerted a significant impact on safety climate, and safety climate in turn was related to self-reports of compliance with safety regulations and procedures as well as participation in safety-related activities within the workplace. The effect of general organizational climate on safety performance was mediated by safety climate, while the effect of safety climate on safety performance was partially mediated by safety knowledge and motivation.     

Is there agreement between worker self and supervisor assessment of worker safety performance? An examination in the construction industry

Introduction: Individual safety performance (behavior) critically influences safety outcomes in high-risk workplaces. Compared to the study of generic work performance on different measurements, few studies have investigated different measurements of safety performance, typically relying on employees' self-reflection of their safety behavior. This research aims to address this limitation by including worker self-reflection and other (i.e., supervisor) assessment of two worker safety performance dimensions, safety compliance and safety participation. Method: A sample of 105 workers and 17 supervisors in 17 groups in the Chinese construction industry participated in this study. Comparisons were made between worker compliance and participation in each measurement, and between workers' and supervisors' assessment of workers' compliance and participation. Multilevel modeling was adopted to test the moderating effects on the worker self-reflection and supervisor-assessment relationship by group safety climate and the work experience of supervisors. Results: Higher levels of safety compliance than participation were found for self-reflection and supervisor assessment. The discrepancy between the two measurements in each safety performance dimension was significant. The work experience of supervisors attenuated the discrepancy between self- and supervisor-assessment of compliance. Contrary to our expectations, the moderating effect of group safety climate was not supported. Conclusions: The discrepancy between worker self- and supervisor-assessment of worker safety performance, thus, suggests the importance of including alternative measurements of safety performance in addition to self-reflection. Lower levels of participation behavior in both raters suggest more research on the motivators of participatory behavior. Practical applications The discrepancy between different raters can lead to negative reactions of ratees, suggesting that managers should be aware of that difference. Assigning experienced supervisors as raters can be effective at mitigating interrater discrepancy and conflicts in the assessment of compliance behavior.     

Relation between senior managers’ safety leadership and safety behavior in the Chinese petrochemical industry

Senior managers in organizations are authorized and obliged to maintain organizational safety. However, to date, little research has considered the relation of senior managers' safety leadership to safety behavior. This study addresses this gap by using path analysis to confirm the validity of a hypothetical model that relates six dimensions of senior managers' safety leadership to two safety behaviors through the safety climate in the petrochemical industry. A questionnaire survey was sent randomly to workers (other than senior managers) in two petrochemical companies in China, and data from 155 usable responses were compiled for the path analysis. Results indicate that in the petrochemical industry, senior managers' safety leadership has a positive impact on safety behavior, and the safety climate plays an intermediary role between them. From the perspective of the dimensions of senior managers' safety leadership and safety behavior, safety concern has the greatest positive effect on safety compliance. Moreover, safety vision has the greatest positive impact on safety participation, whereas safety inspiration and safety awards and punishment have negative effects on safety compliance. Personal character does not directly influence any dimension of safety behavior but indirectly does so by influencing the safety climate. On the basis of these results, measures of improving senior managers' safety leadership in the petrochemical industry are presented to help improve the overall safety performance of the industry. A new view is provided for the petrochemical industry in China to suggest that senior managers’ safety leadership can be treated earnestly.     

Behaving safely under pressure: The effects of job demands,resources, and safety climate on employee physical and psychosocial safety behavior

Introduction: Previous research has shown that employees who experience high job demands are more inclined to show unsafe behaviors in the workplace. In this paper, we examine why some employees behave safely when faced with these demands while others do not. We add to the literature by incorporating both physical and psychosocial safety climate in the job demands and resources (JD-R) model and extending it to include physical and psychosocial variants of safety behavior. Method: Using a sample of 6230 health care employees nested within 52 organizations, we examined the relationship between job demands and (a) resources, (b) safety climate, and (c) safety behavior. We conducted multilevel analyses to test our hypotheses. Results: Job demands (i.e., work pressure), job resources (i.e., job autonomy, supervisor support, and co-worker support) and safety climate (both physical and psychosocial safety climate) are directly associated with, respectively, lower and higher physical and psychosocial safety behavior. We also found some evidence that safety climate buffers the negative impact of job demands (i.e., work–family conflict and job insecurity) on safety behavior and strengthens the positive impact of job resources (i.e., co-worker support) on safety behavior. Conclusions: Regardless of whether the focus is physical or psychological safety, our results show that strengthening the safety climate within an organization can increase employees' safety behavior. Practical implication: An organization's safety climate is an optimal target of intervention to prevent and ameliorate negative physical and psychological health and safety outcomes, especially in times of uncertainty and change.     

The influence of supervisor leadership practices and perceived group safety climate on employee safety performance

The current study investigates the influence of the leadership practices of first-line supervisors on the safety compliance and safety participation of the employees who work for them. Contingent reward and transformational leadership are examined under conditions of positive and non-positive group safety climate in both the manufacturing and constructions sectors. Using moderated regression models (Aguinis, 2004) results indicate that greater levels of transformational and contingent reward leadership are both associated with greater levels of safety compliance and safety participation behavior, however group safety climate moderates the leadership-safety compliance relationships. Under positive group safety climate conditions employee safety compliance behavior improves as supervisor’s leadership practices increase; under non-positive group safety compliance conditions there is no improvement in safety compliance with improvements in supervisor’s leadership practices. The results provide further support to the growing literature on the value of strong group safety climates for improving safety compliance behavior, as well as the value in improving the leadership practices of first-line supervisors.     

Effects of safety climate on safety norm violations: exploring the mediating role of attitudinal ambivalence toward personal protective equipment

Problem

Research on the role of organizational and psychosocial factors in influencing risk behaviors and the likelihood of injury at work showed that safety climate also has great impact on workers’ behavior. However, the mechanisms through which this impact operates are still partially unclear.

Method

In order to explore the role that attitudinal ambivalence toward wearing PPE might play in mediating the impact of safety climate on safety norm violations, a questionnaire was administered to 345 Italian workers.

Results

Three dimensions of safety climate (i.e., company safety concern, senior managers’ safety concern, supervisors’ attitudes towards safety) were found to be positively associated with the individual ambivalence level, whereas the fourth one (i.e., work pressure) was negatively correlated with it. In turn, low levels of ambivalence were associated with a lower tendency to break the safety norms, even though the perception of a good safety climate also maintained a direct effect on unsafe behaviors.

Impact on industry

Designers of training program for the prevention of work related injuries must pay great attention to the psycho-social factors (such as the effects of the safety climate perception by employees on their attitudes and behaviors), and include specific contents into the prevention programs in order to improve workers compliance with safety norms.     

Perceived organizational support and perceived safety climate from the perspective of safety professionals: Testing reciprocal causality using a cross-lagged panel design

Introduction: The objective of this study was to determine the reciprocal relationship between safety professionals perceived organizational support (POS) and perceived safety climate. Safety professionals are most effective when they perceive support from management and employees and they also attribute most of their success to support from the organization. Their work directly improves safety climate, and organizations with a high safety climate show a higher value for the safety professional. The causal direction of this relationship is, however, unclear. Method: Using a sample of 162 safety professionals, we conducted a cross-lagged panel study over one year to examine whether safety professionals’ POS improves their perceived safety climate and/or whether safety climate also increases POS over time. Data were collected at two points and, after testing for measurement invariance, a cross-lagged SEM was conducted to analyze the reciprocal relationship. Results: Our findings show that safety professionals’ POS was positively related to perceived safety climate over time. Perceived safety climate, however, did not contribute to safety professionals’ POS. Conclusions: This study significantly adds to the discussion about the factors influencing safety professionals’ successful inclusion in organizations, enabling them to perform their work and, thus, improve occupational safety. Practical Applications: Since safety climate increases in organizations in which safety professionals feel supported, this study points out the kind of support that contributes to improved organizational safety. Support for safety professionals may come in classical forms such as approval, pay, job enrichment, and information on or influence over organizational policies.     

Safety climate differences among job positions in a nuclear decommissioning and demolition industry: Employees’ self-reported safety attitudes and perceptions

This study examined group differences in safety climate among job positions in a nuclear decommissioning and demolition industry in the United States. Safety climate surveys were conducted at 10 locations. Survey responses totaled 1587 out of an available population of 3296 workers for an overall response rate of 48.1%. Significant differences (p < 0.05) in mean safety climate scores, factor scores, and item scores among job positions were observed. Most notably, foremen’s self-reported safety attitudes and perceptions indicate a lower safety climate and suggest the need to target safety improvements at this key organizational level.     

Organisational safety indicators: Some conceptual considerations and a supplementary qualitative approach

This article discusses the extent to which indicators can represent organisational qualities in relation to safety and how a qualitative approach called the Operational Safety Condition (OSC) method can be a supplement and help improve safety. In light of the recent Safety Science debate on safety indicators, we suggest that it is difficult to capture organisational conditions using indicators, although they are indisputably important when identifying the risk of accidents. Safety climate and risk analysis approaches are discussed as methods that can build and assess indicators in relation to organisational safety quality. OSC and similar qualitative approaches can capture the complexity of organisational conditions, aid organisational learning at a double loop level and offer a tool for risk management.     

Exploratory analysis of the safety climate and safety behavior relationship

Problem: Safety climate refers to the degree to which employees believe true priority is given to organizational safety performance, and its measurement is thought to provide an “early warning” of potential safety system failure(s). However, researchers have struggled over the last 25 years to find empirical evidence to demonstrate actual links between safety climate and safety performance.Method: A safety climate measure was distributed to manufacturing employees at the beginning of a behavioral safety initiative and redistributed one year later.Results: Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that perceptions of the importance of safety training were predictive of actual levels of safety behavior. The results also demonstrate that the magnitude of change in perceptual safety climate scores will not necessarily match actual changes (r=0.56, n.s.) in employee's safety behavior.Discussion: This study obtained empirical links between safety climate scores and actual safety behavior. Confirming and contradicting findings within the extant safety climate literature, the results strongly suggest that the hypothesized climate-behavior-accident path is not as clear cut as commonly assumed.Summary: A statistical link between safety climate perceptions and safety behavior will be obtained when sufficient behavioral data is collected.Impact on Industry: The study further supports the use of safety climate measures as useful diagnostic tools in ascertaining employee's perceptions of the way that safety is being operationalized.     

Using a psychological contract of safety to predict safety climate on construction sites

Introduction: The fact that safety climate impacts safety behavior and delivers better safety outcomes is well established in construction. However, the way workers safety perception is inclined and developed is still unclear. Method: In this research, the influence of supervisors' developing safety climate and its impact on workers' safety behavior and their conceptualization of safety is explored through the lens of the ‘Psychological Contract’ (PC). More specifically, it is argued that ‘Psychological Contract of Safety’ (PCS) is a vital factor in explaining how workers attach meaning to a supervisor behavior. Extant research suggests: (a) safety climate is based on the perception of workers regarding safety; and (b) PCS is based on perceived mutual obligations between workers and supervisors. As a result, this research argues that if PCS or mutual obligations between workers and supervisors are fulfilled, then safety climate of the workers will be positively influenced. A model is presented depicting PCS as an alternative intervention in understanding how safety climate could be influenced and predicted by the level of fulfillment of mutual safety obligations. Using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) the model of the PCS is validated with data collected from a mega-construction project in Australia. Results: The results suggest that to have a positive and strong safety climate, top-level managers must ensure that mutual safety obligations between supervisor and workers are fulfilled. This enables the PCS to be introduced as a new ‘predictor’ of safety climate. Practical applications: The novel outcome of the research could be considered as a management intervention to modify supervisors' behavior to produce better safety outcomes.     

Does company size matter? Validation of an integrative model of safety behavior across small and large construction companies

Introduction: Previous safety climate studies primarily focused on either large construction companies or the construction industry as a whole, while little is known about whether company size has significant effects on workers' understanding of safety climate measures and relationships between safety climate factors and safety behavior. Thus, this study aims to: (a) test the measurement equivalence (ME) of a safety climate measure across workers from small and large companies; (b) investigate if company size alters the causal structure of the integrative model developed by Guo, Yiu, and González (2016). Method: Data were collected from 253 construction workers in New Zealand using a safety climate measure. This study used multi-group confirmatory factor analyses (MCFA) to test the measurement equivalence of the safety climate measure and structure invariance of the integrative model. Results: Results indicate that workers from small and large companies understood the safety climate measure in a similar manner. In addition, it was suggested that company size does not change the causal structure and mediational processes of the integrative model. Conclusions: Both measurement equivalence of the safety climate measure and structural invariance of the integrative model were supported by this study. Practical applications: Findings of this study provided strong support for a meaningful use of the safety climate measure across construction companies in different sizes. Safety behavior promotion strategies designed based on the integrative model may be well suited for both large and small companies.     

Safety climate and mindful safety practices in the oil and gas industry

IntroductionThe existence of a positive association between safety climate and the safety behavior of sharp-end workers in high-risk organizations is supported by a considerable body of research. Previous research has primarily analyzed two components of safety behavior, namely safety compliance and safety participation. The present study extends previous research by looking into the relationship between safety climate and another component of safety behavior, namely mindful safety practices. Mindful safety practices are defined as the ability to be aware of critical factors in the environment and to act appropriately when dangers arise.MethodRegression analysis was used to examine whether mindful safety practices are, like compliance and participation, promoted by a positive safety climate, in a questionnaire-based study of 5712 sharp-end workers in the oil and gas industry.ResultsThe analysis revealed that a positive safety climate promotes mindful safety practices.ConclusionsThe regression model accounted for roughly 31% of the variance in mindful safety practices. The most important safety climate factor was safety leadership.Practical applicationsThe findings clearly demonstrate that mindful safety practices are highly context-dependent, hence, manageable and susceptible to change. In order to improve safety climate in a direction which is favorable for mindful safety practices, the results demonstrate that it is important to give the fundamental features of safety climate high priority and in particular that of safety leadership.